Romans 2:1

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 (Rom 2:1): 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 3:1), 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 (Rom 2:21), 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, Rom 2:22. Therefore thou art inexcusable. If the Gentiles, who had but the light of nature, were inexcusable (Rom 1:20), 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 (Rom 2:2), 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 (Sa1 16:7), - 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 (Rom 2:3): 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 (Rom 2:4), 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, Ecc 8:11. 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 2:14); and it is goodness that leads, bands of love, Hos 11:4. Compare Jer 31:3. 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, Rom 2:5. 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 (Eze 8:17), 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 7:11. 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 (Psa 7:11), but there is the great day of wrath coming, Rev 6:17. 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 27:4): 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, Psa 50:6. 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 Rom 2:5, 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 (Rom 2:6), 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 and Rom 2:10. For he delights to show mercy. Observe,

[1.] The objects of his favour: Those who by patient continuance, etc. 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, Rom 2:10. 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 (Rom 2:10) glory, honour, and peace. Those that seek for glory and honour (Rom 2:7) 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 45:9), the most desperate contention. The Spirit of God strives with sinners (Gen 6:3), and impenitent sinners strive against the Spirit, rebel against the light (Job 24:13), 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 27:4. 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, Rom 2:11. 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 (Act 10:34), 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 3:11); 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 (Rom 2:12-16), 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 (Rom 2:12) 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 (Psa 147:20), 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, etc. 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 aheneus 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 conseia facti

Mens habet attonitos, et surdo verbere caedit -

No lash is heard, and yet the guilty heart

Is tortur'd with a self-inflicted smart

- Juv. Sat. 13.

Their thoughts the meanwhile, metaxu allēlōn - 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 (Rom 2:12): As many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law. They sinned, not only having the law, but en nomō - 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, Rom 2:9. It shall be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon. Thus Moses did accuse them (Joh 5:45), and they fell under the many stripes of him that knew his master's will, and did it not, Luk 12:47. The Jews prided themselves very much in the law; but, to confirm what he had said, the apostle shows (Rom 2:13) 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; Jam 1:22.

3. The light of the gospel: and according to this those that enjoyed the gospel shall be judge (Rom 2:16): 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, Mar 16:16. 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, Psa 37:13. (2.) The judgment of that day will be put into the hands of Jesus Christ. God shall judge by Jesus Christ, Act 17:31. 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.

Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Whole Bible (1708–1710) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

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.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

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.)

The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

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, τον ετερον, 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.”

Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

The Failure of the Jews

In Romans 1 St. Paul showed that the Gentiles were under God's judgment on account of sin. Now he is about to turn to the Jews. He asserts first, that God's judgment will fall impartially upon all sinners (Rom_2:1-11). Each man will be judged by the light which he has (Rom_2:12-16). The privileges and knowledge of the Jews only aggravated the guilt of their flagrant disobedience (Rom_2:17-24); and circumcision would not protect them, for God looks at the heart and life (Rom_2:25-29).

1-11 The Jew would agree in condemning the sins mentioned in Romans 1, yet he himself was equally guilty, and must be judged, like the Gentiles, by his deeds, whether good or bad.

Note. There is no contradiction here to the doctrine of justification by faith, for (1) St. Paul is speaking of men apart from the gospel; (2) 'faith is present in a more or less rudimentary state in every upward effort or aspiration of man' (Hort, quoted by Gore); (3) good works are the fruit and evidence of faith.

Paraphrase. '(1) Perhaps you condemn such sinners. In doing so, you condemn yourself, for you too are guilty. (2) We all know that God's judgment against evildoers is unerring and impartial. (3) Do you think you are different from others, and exempt from judgment? (4) or do you think God is too kind to punish you, not understanding that His kindness is meant to move you to repent? (5) Seeing that you do not repent, you are daily incurring a heavier judgment. (6) For God will judge every man by his deeds, (7-10) whether he be Jew or Gentile, giving eternal life to those who do good, while there will be wrath for all who persist in evil; (11) for God judges impartially.'

1. Inexcusable] RV 'without excuse': cp. Rom_1:20. Judges] cp. Gal_2:15. The same things] of the same kind, if not so glaring.

2. Are sure] RV 'know,' i.e. by reason and revelation.

5. After] i.e. in accordance with.

Against] RV 'in.'

8. Contentions] RV 'factions,' i.e. upholding their ideas and traditions against God's voice: cp. Joh_5:44.

Indignation] RV 'shall be indignation.'

9. Jew first] privilege increases responsibility.

11. Respect of persons] i.e. regard for the outward circumstances of a man instead of his real character; here of the partiality of an unjust judge: cp. Act_10:34; Gal_2:6; Eph_6:9; Col_3:25; Jam_2:1.

12-16. All men are under a law of some kind, whether revealed law or the light of nature; and by the law that they have they will be judged.

Paraphrase. '(12) I say God is impartial, for He will punish every man who sins against the light, whether, as with Gentiles, it be the light of conscience, or, as in the case of the Jews, the light of law. (13) It is not because a man has a law, but because he keeps it that he will be justified. (14) This applies to Gentiles as well as Jews. For Gentiles have an inner law of nature, as is shown by their good deeds, (15) which testify to a sense of right and wrong; their conscience shows the same thing; and so does the fact that they blame or praise one another's actions. (16) By this law they will be judged at the last.'

12. Without law] i.e. without a revealed law of right and wrong. In the law] RV 'under law.' By the law] RV 'by law.' The expression 'the law' means the Law of Moses; 'law,' without the article, means law in general, 'the will of God for man's conduct.' St. Paul regards the pre-Messianic period as essentially a period of law, both for Jew and for Gentile' (Sanday and Headlam).

13. The law] RV 'a law.' Justified] i.e. declared righteous at the Judgment.

14. Not the law] RV 'no law.' By nature] i.e. without a revelation.

15. Which] RV 'in that they.' The work of the law] i.e. the effect of the law in marking what is right from what is wrong.

Conscience] the faculty by which we reflect upon the character of our actions. It may be more or less enlightened, cp. 1Co_8:7, 1Co_8:10. it may become corrupt through sin, cp. Tit_1:15, and give no light, cp. Mat_6:23. Therefore a man's appeal to conscience is not decisive, unless he has taken pains to inform it and keep it pure.

16. My gospel] i.e. the message I am commissioned to preach: cp. Rom_16:25; 2Ti_2:8. Judgment by Christ is a distinctive doctrine of the gospel: cp. Mat_25:31.; Act_17:31; 1Co_4:5; 2Co_5:10.

17-24. Here, first, the Jew is expressly addressed. He relied upon God's favour and his knowledge of God's will. Yet his wickedness was a matter of common knowledge. (St. Paul is speaking generally; there were bright exceptions.)

Paraphrase. '(17) I turn to the Jew, proud of his religious superiority, (18) and of the knowledge of God's will and the high ideal of conduct which he derives from the Law of Moses, (19, 20) thinking that he is in the light and all other peoples in darkness. (21-23) How shameful, then, is the conduct which is so contrary to his profession, (24) and which brings such dishonour upon the name of God among the heathen!'

17. Jew] the national name. Restest in] RV 'restest upon,' i.e. feeling secure of God's favour from the mere possession of the Law.

Of God] i.e. as peculiarly bound to the Jew.

18. Approvest, etc.] i.e. able to distinguish delicately between the more and the less good.

20. Form] i.e. perfect embodiment.

21. Cp. Mat_3:7; Mar_12:40; Joh_8:7.

22. Commit sacrilege] RV 'rob temples': cp. Act_19:37.

24. Cp. Isa_52:5; Eze_36:21.

25-29. The Jew thought that because he was circumcised, i.e. a member of the covenant people, he was sure of God's favour. But circumcision implied a surrendered life, which is the only thing acceptable to God.

Paraphrase. '(25) You trust in circumcision, and it is good to be a Jew; but if you are not obedient to God's Law, you are no better than an uncircumcised heathen, (26) while a heathen who, according to his lights, does what your law requires will be accepted by God although he is uncircumcised, (27) and will be in a superior position to you, seeing that you break the Law in spite of your advantages. (28) For the true people of God are those who are so, not by race or profession only, (29) but by obedience of heart and life. They may not be called Jews, but they are praised by God.'

25. Profiteth] cp. Rom_3:1.; Rom_9:1.; Keep] i.e. as a habit, opposed to habitual transgression.

26. The uncircumcision] i.e. the uncircumcised man. Righteousness] RV 'ordinances': cp. Act_10:35.

27. Judge] cp. v.

1. By the letter] RV 'with the letter,' i.e. with written law.

28. Cp. Rom_9:6.; Php_3:3.

29. Heart] cp. Deu_10:16; Act_7:51. Letter] i.e. outward conformity to the literal command, contrasted with the spiritual change which it represented.

Praise] The word 'Jew' is derived from 'Judah,' which means 'praised': cp. Gen_29:35.

J. R. Dummelow, A Commentary on the Holy Bible (Macmillan, 1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

CRITICAL NOTES

Rom_2:1. Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man.—διό, 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. κρίμα, the result of judgment—the 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?—χρηστότης, goodness in general. ἀνοχή, its exercise in postponing punishment. μακροθυμία, again signifies continued ἀνοχή. καταφρονέω, to treat with contempt by word or deed. Leading to repentance.—Moral improvement of soul, turning from unbelief to faith. πλοῦτος 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 range—he 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 sinner’s 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 suœ vitæ is a miserable failure. The book thou hast written tells thy weakness, and pronounces thy condemnation. Self-apologetics are hideous failures. The Pharisee’s self-apologetics in the parable have made him the opprobrium of all time. The publican’s “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 men’s 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 God’s wrath, we must not forget God’s mercy,—

“The attribute of God Himself;

And earthly power doth then show likest God’s

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. But—solemn 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 creation—yea, all things continue as they have been through the past æons of geologic records. Know, O vain man, that hardened sinners cannot escape the judgments of God. What a call to reflection in the apostle’s 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 God’s 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 judges—truth;

2. The spirit in which God judges—His 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. God’s 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 God’s 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 of—whether 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

God’s 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 God’s 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 master’s 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 open—who 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-dial—ever 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 down—’tis naught; but bring a medlar that is rotten, and ’tis a fine thing; and yet I’ll 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 conclusion—“Wherefore 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 equality—he 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 verses—the 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 God’s 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 Abraham’s 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 God’s 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 men’s 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 one’s 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 himself—such as one troubled with the jaundice sees all things yellow. Those who are most religious are least censorious. Who art thou that judgest another man’s 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.” God’s sentence corresponds with the reality of the case, on man’s actual conduct. All judges aim at this; God attains it.

The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary (gen. ed. Joseph S. Exell; Funk & Wagnalls, c. 1892) — public domain (pre-1929). A full-Bible homiletical/sermon-outline anthology covering 65 of 66 books (2 John is absent from the source module). Text from a community e-Sword module.

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, τὸν ἕτερον], 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, ἀποδώσει, 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, τοῦ κατεργαζομένου τὸ κακόν], 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, τῷ ἐργαζομένῳ τὸ ἀγαθόν], 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, ἔθνη τὰ μη νόμον ἔχοντα], do8 by nature the things contained in the law [the things of the law, τὰ τοῦ νόμου, i.e., the things pertaining to, or required by, the law], these, having not the law [not having15(the) law, νόμον μὴ ἔχοντες],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, μετἁξὺ ἀλλήλων,accusing or also, ἤ καὶ, 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 διὸ, wherefore, refer? 1. To the fundamental thought of the whole section of Rom_1:18-32 (Meyer, and others). 2. διό refers back to the δικαὶωμα in 2:32 (De Wette, Philippi [Alford, Hodge]). 3. διό points proleptically to the sins of the Jews (Bengel, Tholuck). We need hardly mention Bullinger’s explanation: It is continuationis particula; prœterea. We here find a definite reference to Rom_1:32. The οἵτινες 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 ἀναπολόγητοι, inexcusable, are not merely those who contribute aid to evil-doers, but those also who pronounce sentence on them. In other words, not the διό, but 2:32 is proleptic, especially in connection with the ἀνελεήμονες 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, Rückert, 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 κρὶνειν, 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.—̓Εν ᾧ, 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 (Köllner), but in that wherein, in the matter in which (Luther [E. V., Meyer, Alford], and others). [Thou that judgest doest the same things, τὰ γὰρ αὐτὰ πρἀσσεις ὁ κρίνων. 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 ὁ κρίνων, “with reproachful expression” (Meyer).

Rom_2:2. But we are sure, Οἴδαμεν. Who? 1. The Jews, as knowers of the law (Rosenmüller, and others).12 2. Universal human knowledge (Rückert, 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. Κατὰ ἀλήθειαν, not ἀληθῶς [revera. truly] (Raphel, Köllner, 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. [Κατὰ ἀλήθειαν belongs not to κρίμα, as the predicate of the sentence, but to ἐστὶν, 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, τοῦτο. Reference to the strange supposition that God will become, by way of exception, a partisan for him. Therefore also the σύ 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 [σύ, 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 Messiah’s 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. [ἤ 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 God’s goodness in delaying the punishment as a sign that the general judgment will never come to pass at all. Paul frequently uses πλοῦτος 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 χρηστότης is, more specifically, mildness, beneficent goodness, in contrast with penal justice. It may be asked whether we should read: His goodness (χρηστότητος) and forbearance (ἀνοχῆς) and long-suffering (μακροθυμίας), or whether the χρηρτότης is here divided by καί-καί, as well, as also, into the idea of forbearance and long-suffering. We accept the latter, since the Apostle subsequently groups all again in τό χρηστόν. The Apostle Peter uses the same expression, μαχροθυμὶα, 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 ἀνοχή is about equal to the ὑπομονή, Col_1:11, and the πραότης, Col_3:12.—Compare ἀνεχόμενοι ἀλλήλων, Col_3:13; μακροθυμεῖτε πρὸς πάντας. 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.”—Ἁγνοῶν. The translation Not knowing is too weak. [Dr. Lange translates ἀγνοῶν: Indem du misskennst, wilfully ignoring; while Grotius, Tholuck, Wordsworth, al., render it: not considering.—P. S.] Meyer opposes the interpretation of ἀγνοεῖν as wishing not to know (De Wette [Alford], and others). Yet wilful and culpable ignorance is certainly meant here (comp. ἄγνοια, Eph_4:18).—Is leading thee to repentance. ἄγει 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 ἄγει, 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 prœveniens]? 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 coërcion. 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 [Κατὰ δὲ τὴν σκληπότητά σου]. 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. [Κατά 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 θησαυρίζειν 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 πλοῦτος of God’s goodness. The despising of the riches of God’s 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, ἐν] the day of wrath. The construction is not θησαυρίζεις εἰς ἡμέραν, &c. (Luther [E. V., against], Tholuck), and also not an ὀργή 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 θνσαυρίζειν still continues; comp. Jam_5:3; ἐθησαυρίσατε ἐν ἐσχάταις ἡμέραις. 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 δικαιοκρισία (in the New Testament, ἅπαξ λεγόμενον, 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 ἀποκάλυψις. 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 Klopstock’s 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.ATo those who by endurance in good work  Seek for glory, and honor, and immortality,  Eternal life:8.BBut to those who are self-seeking,  And disobey the truth, but obey unrighteousness,  Indignation [shall be] and wrath:9.BTribulation and anguish  Upon every soul of man that worketh evil,  Of the Jew first, and also of the Greek;10.ABut 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 God’s 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 δικαιοσύνη ἐκ πίστεως 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 ἔργα 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. Lange’s 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 (ἔργον). This view is undoubtedly correct; and Tholuck’s explanation, that πίστις εἰς χριστόν 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 (ἔργον ἀγαθόν), Php_1:6; viewing it, however, as the operation of God. In 1Th_1:3, he speaks of an ἔργον τῆς πίστεως; 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 Paul—as Luthardt has properly remarked—its 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, ζητοῦντες, striving souls—therefore men of longing and aspiration, poor in spirit [Mat_5:3]. Their good works constitute a unity of effort, ὐπομονὴ ἔργου; their aim is the δὸξα, τιμή, ἀφθαρσία (goodly pearls; precious pearls, Mat_13:45). The other class are, in their mental disposition, ἐξ ἐριθείας, 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, too—because he is to be judged according to his conduct—must be judged according to the law (comp. the doctrine of the tertius usus legis), and according to the πλήρωσις τοῦ νόμου 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 [καθ̓ ὑπομονὴν ἔργου ἀγαθοῦ, an adverbial qualification of the verb ζητοῦα], &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 ἔργου ἀγαθοῦ is genit. subj. (not obj.; Meyer); that is, the endurance which is peculiar to the truly good work. [Comp. ὑπομονὴ τῆς ἐλπίδος, 1Th_1:3.—P. S.]. It may be asked, whether the Apostle here uses the words δόξα, τιμή, and ἀφθαρσία, 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 δόξα, spiritual splendor of life, ideality; then τιμή, integrity, honorableness of character; then ἀφθαρσία, deliverance from corruption. The ζωὴ αἰώνιος, as the grace and gift of God, is very nearly related to this last object of ζητεῖν. The restless ζητεῖν—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. Œcumenius, Luther: ἀποδώσει [to be supplied from Rom_2:6] is connected with the accusatives δόξαν, τιμήν, ἀφθ.; and ζητοῦσι with ζωὴν αἰώνιον [i.e., “Who will give glory, honor, and immortality to those who, by patience in good works, seek eternal life]; 2. Reiche [Ewald]: τοῖς μὲν [to the one] καθ̓ ὑπομονήν ἔργου ἀγαθοῦ δόξαν και τιμὴν καὶ ἀφθαρσίαν (ἀποδώσει)—ζντοῦσιν ζωὴν αἰώνιον [ζητοῦσιν as apposition to τοῖς μέν]. 3. Bengel [Fritzsche] and others: τοῖς μὲν καθ̓ ὑπομ. ἔργου ἀγαθοῦ (οὖσιν), δόξαν, &c. ζντοῦσιν—ζωὴν αἰώνιον (ἀποδώσει) [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 quœrunt 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.—̔Υπομονή, not patience, but perseverantia (Erasmus). “Ἔργον, 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.] Λόξα, τιμή, ἀφθαρσία, are the phases of the manifestation of the ζωὴ αἰώνιος 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 Tholuck’s 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-seeking—a periphrase of the subject, indicating the origin (ἐκ, out of, as from a root) and moral character; comp. οἱ ἐκ νόμου, the legalists; οἱ ἐκ πὶστεως, the believers; οἱ ἐκ περιτομῆς, the circumcised, &c., and the cognate use of υἱοί and τέκνα.—P. S.]. On ἐριθεία, compare Tholuck and Meyer. We must not, with the elder commentators, derive it from ἐρίζω or ἔρις [from which it is distinguished, 2Co_12:20; Gal_5:20.—P. S.], and therefore not identify it with φιλονεικία, contentiousness (Vulgate: Qui sunt ex contentions, die Streitsüchtigen); but it comes from ἔριθος, a hireling; ἐριθεύω, 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 [Ränkesucht, 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 οἱ ἐξ ἐριθείας is οἱ ἐξ ἀγάπης, Php_1:16-17. Ignatius, Ad Philad. 8, opposes ἐριθεία to χριστομάθεια.—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 ἐρίζειν. 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 ἐριθεία 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 ἐριθεία out of the Old Testament religion. Nevertheless, the definite idea is obliterated, if ἐριθεία is made to mean, without qualification, ungodliness, or vileness (Köllner, Fritzsche).—Disobey the truth. Ἀπειθεῖν; 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 ὀργὴ καὶ θυμός is supplied by ἀποδώσεται, or ἔσται, as constructio variata.18 Θυμός as excandescentia enhances the idea of ὀργή. The historical form of the judgment pronounced on the self-seeking party spirit is therewith intimated; ὀργή and θυμός of the party spirit are judged by ὀργή and θυμός of an opposite kind; and therein the ὀργή and θυμός of the Lord are revealed. (See the history of the destruction of Jerusalem, Mat_18:33-34).—[The majority of philologists and commentators make ὀργή express the permanent feeling and settled disposition (comp. Joh_3:36; the wrath of God abideth on him); θυμός, the momentary impulse or actual outbreak of wrath on the day of judgment. Ammon.: θυμός πρόσκαιρος, ὀργὴ πολυχρόνιος. θυμός (Gemüth) 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 ὀργή, as its execution and outbreak; irœ excandescentia (Cicero, Tusc. iv. 9). “ὀργή is the heat of the fire; θυμός is the bursting forth of the flame.”—P. S.]

Rom_2:9. Tribulation and anguish (θλῖψις χαὶ στενοχωρία). 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.19—Every soul of man [כָּל־נֶפֶשׁ אדָם]. Ψυχή is not merely a circumlocution of ἄνθρωπος (according to Grotius, Fritzsche). [It expresses the idea that the soul, and not the body, is to suffer the penalty, according to Rückert, Meyer, Fritzsche. But ψυχή rather denotes the whole person, as in Rom_13:1.—P. S.]

That worketh out the evil. The χατεργαζομένου must be regarded as a strong form. It is the consistent consummation. [Alford: “χατερψάζομαι, to commit, is more naturally used of evil, while ἐρψάζομαι, to work, is used indifferently of both good and evil.” But χατεργάζεσθαι is also used of the good; Rom_5:3; Rom_15:18; Php_2:12. As distinct from the simple ἐργάζεσθαι, 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 ἀφθαρσία, we have here εἰρήνη [“here in its highest and most glorious sense”] as the subjective enjoyment of ἀφθαρσία, by which the expression ψυζχή 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 Jew—who thought himself under the particular favor of God—by 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, ἀνόμως; 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). [Νόμος and ἀνόμως 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 ἄνομοι, not absolutely—for they have the unwritten law of conscience—but as distinguished from the Jews, who were ὑπὸνόμον. ἀνὅμως therefore is equivalent to χωρὶςνόμου.—P. S.]—Shall also perish without law. Meyer: “ἀπολοῦςται is the opposite of the σωτηρία in Rom_1:16, of the ζήσεται in Rom_1:17, of the ζωὴαἰώνιος in Rom_2:7, of the δόξα, &c., in Rom_2:10. Comp. Joh_3:15; Rom_14:15; 1Co_1:18.” Since the ἀπολοῦνται has its degrees (comp. Mat_11:22; Luk_12:48), Meyer should not deny that (as Chrysostom, Theophylact, Œcumenius assert) there is something alleviating in the ἀνόμως. 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 χριθήσονται is accordingly a stronger expression than ἀπολοῦνται. We should all the more reject the barbarous view of Dodwell, Weisse, Billroth, and others, by which the ἀπολοῦνται 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 ἀνόμως 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 God’s general revelation in nature (Rom_1:20), and in their conscience (Rom_2:14-15); 2. that they will be judged ἀνόμως—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. Νόμος, even without the article, signifies here the Mosaic law. The ἐννόμω—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. [ἐν 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: “διχαιωθήσονται corresponds to δίκαιοι παρὰ τῶ̣ θεῶ̣ of the first member of the sentence: They shall be just before the judgment-seat of God—pronounced just by God. Διχαιοῦν, like the Hebrew הִצְדִּיק, 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. Διχαιοῦν, from δίχαιος, according to the analogy of τυφλοῦν (to make blind), and other verbs in ὀω 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 διχαιόω is, originally, to make just, on the part of the δίχη [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 διχαιόω 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 διχαίωμα 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 διχαιοῦν, because the punished one, by punishment, becomes again conformable to the δίχη. According to Meyer, the Apostle has here only set forth the fundamental law of God judging in righteousness. According to Philippi, the ποιηταὶ τοῦ νόμου are here only placed as the true rule, in opposition to the false rule of the Jews, that the ἀχροαταὶ should be just before God, apart from the question whether there are such ποιηταί; but the whole argument of the Epistle to the Romans proves, that no man is by nature such a ποιητὴς τοῦνόμου. This construction does not coincide with Rom_2:14-15. We should rather observe here the deeper idea of ποιεῖν [ἐργάζεσθαι τὸ ἀγαθόν] in Rom_2:10, and of νόμος in Rom_2:14; and, at the same time, with Tersteegen’s view of God’s different tribunals, we must acknowledge that the Apostle can also use here the διχαιοῦν 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 [ἔθνη, 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 νόμος is present; in consequence of this, Koppe regards Rom_2:13 as parenthetical. Yet not only is the ἀπολογουένων against this view, but also the τὰ τοῦ νόμου ποιῶσιν. 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 ἀχροαταὶ τοῦ νόμου.” 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: οἱποιητ. νόμ. διχαιωθήσονται.” 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 ζητοῦντες, as poor in spirit, who are penitent, shall be justified in the new economy of salvation.—For when. ὅταν “supposes a case whose frequent occurrence is possible: in case when, whenever, as often as” (Meyer [who refers to Kühner, ii. p. 535 f., and Matthiæ. 1195]).—Gentiles, ἔθνη, 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, ἔθνη is not identical with ἐθνιχοί, but indicates a species or class of Gentiles.—P. S.]

Who have no law, τὰμὴ νόμον ἔχοντα. 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 (φύσει) 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 few—in 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: Quœ lex facit (lex jubet, convincit, damnat, punit; hoc ipsum facit et ethnicus, &c.; Cappell). [Hodge: “There are two misinterpretations of the phrase τἀ τοῦ νόμου ποιεῖν. The one is, that it means, to fulfil the law; the other, to do the office of the law—i.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 ποιεῖν τὰ τοῦ νόμου 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 Paul’s writings—see Rom_10:5; Gal_3:12—and is especially out of place here, in immediate connection with the phrase ποιηταὶ τοῦ νόμου, in the sense of the doers of the law.—P. S.]

These, not having (the) law, are a law to themselves, οὗτοι is emphatic with approbation, νόμον μὴ ἔχοντες, in distinction from ἔχοντα, 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. τὸν νόμον ποιεῖν [Rom_2:13, or τὸν νόμον τελεῖν, Rom_2:27] and τὰ τοῦ νόμου ποιεῖν. 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, τὰ διχαιώματα τοῡ νόμου. Rom_2:26, τὸν νόμον τελοῦντες, that is, performing it according to its defined purpose, Rom_2:27.

Rom_2:15. Who shew, &c. Οἵτινες 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 ἔργα. “As Rom_2:7” (Tholuck). But Rom_2:7 rather means that the ἔργα are only good when they proceed from the unity of a ὑπομονὴ ἔργου ἀγαθοῦ. 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 γραπὸν (supply ὄν) is stronger than the participle γεγραμμένον. [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, ἐνδείχνυνται. 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 σύν in συμμαρτυρούσης (for the extended treatment of this question, see Tholuck, p. 105, and Meyer [p. 98, ed. iv., the note] ), but also with ἐνδείχνυνται. 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 prœveniens) , which attains its object only in Christianity.

Their conscience also hearing witness [συμμαρτυρούσης αὐτῶν τῆς συνειδήσεως]. 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: “συμμαρτυρεῖν is neither equal to μαρτυρεῖν (Grotius, Tholuck), nor una testari, with reference to the ποιεῖν τὰ τοῦ νόμ (Meyer, Fritzsche, &c.) But the σύν, like con in contestari, refers in part to the relation of the witness to him for whom he testifies; and in part, as in συνείδησις itself, to the inner relation of the consciousness.”23 But as the συνείδησις is a consciousness in man which is both objective and subjective, and hence independent of his merely subjective consciousness, so is the συμμαρτυρεῖς an independent witness of the right, which, in the case before us, corresponds with the witness of man in his deed. It is the Gentile’s 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, μεταξὺ ἀλλήλων 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 μεταξὺ ἀλλήλων: at a future time, ἐν ἡμέρᾳ of judgment (Koppe); post rem actam (Vater); between (two portions of time), at the same time, meanwhile (Köllner [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 ἔνδεξις. 2. The accusations and defences which were conducted between Gentiles and Gentiles (Storr, Meyer). Against this interpretation Tholuck raises the question: “How can τῶν λογισμῶν, without a more special indication, refer to any other subject than the one whose witness of conscience has just been mentioned?” But if the μεταξὺ ἀλλήλων 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, συνείδησις, sits in judgment, and pronounces the sentence in God’s name according to the law; the διαλογισμοί 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 χατηγορεῖν, or ἀπολογεῖσθαι, is the moral action which is brought before the tribunal of the conscience. The ἢ χαὶ indicates that the conscience finds more to accuse than to excuse. This judicial process, which takes place here in every man’s 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 ἡμέρα 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 ἐν ἡμέρᾳ as εἰς ἡμέραν, unto or until the day. [Others modify this by making ἐν to include εἰς “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 χαὶ τοῦτο μάλιστσ, 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 χριθν́σονται, Rom_2:12;25 Vatabl., Pareus, and Lachmann, with διχαιωθήσονται, 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, οὐ γάρ—ὅσοι γάρ—οὐ, γάρ—ὅταν γάρ 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 ἡμέρα 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 ἡμέρα in 1Co_3:13. Comp. 2Co_6:2, ἡμέρα σωτηρίας. 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 χρυπτά as in Rom_2:29, ὁ ἐν τῶχρυπτῶ ̓Ιουδαῖος. He says men—not merely the Gentiles—because the gospel, according to chaps. 9–11, manifests God’s 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 μου 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 χατὰ τὸ εὐαγγέλιόν μου favors Dr. Lange’s interpretation of ἐν ἡμέρα, the διὰ ̓ΙησΧρ. 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 (ἀναπολογήτους). 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 (ἀναπολόγητος) 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 μαχροθυμία, 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 God’s 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. God’s 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 God’s 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 world’s history is the world’s 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 prœveniens 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 class—whose principle of life is party spirit, and reliance upon temporal association—will 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 God’s righteousness, by virtue of which He will reward every man according to his works.

8. Glory and honor and immortality—precious pearls; eternal life—the 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 διχαιοῦν, 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 διξαιοῦν, 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 διχαιοῦν 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 מַצְדִּיקֵּי refers to this life, it no more means one who makes just, than מַשְכִּילִים means one who makes wise. The reading, διχαιωθήτω, Rev_22:11, cannot be sustained against the more strongly credited rendering, διχαιοσύνην ποιησάτω. 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 Manichæan 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 prœveniens, or fundamental forms of the development of a desire after salvation. The attempt, in Rothe’s 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

God’s 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 God’s goodness, patience, and forbearance; but rather, 2. to remember that His goodness should lead us to repentance (Rom_2:4).—God’s 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 irœ, dies illa, solvet sœcla 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).—God’s indignation! 1. Not unmerited, but deserved; 2. not temporary, but eternal (Rom_2:8).—God’s 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 one’s 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).—Würtemb. 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 God’s 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 grace—the former in His Father’s house, the latter by an awakened longing for the same—is 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: God’s 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 God’s judgment righteous and inevitable; 3. take refuge in God’s 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 God’s judgment.

Spener: The whole law was written on the heart of the first man, for his soul was an image of God’s 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 man’s knowledge of God’s 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 God’s goodness into treasures of wrath.—The great judgment-days in the world’s history, especially the destruction of Jerusalem.—Justification and God’s 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 God’s 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 asserted—a coming day of judgment; and 2. its proof and confirmation—“according 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 Shaftesbury’s 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 man’s 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 Paul’s 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 God’s 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. God’s 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 God’s 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 God’s partiality, or forgetfulness of sin; 6. to escape our guilt, we must seek the Saviour’s 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 God’s 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 man’s 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.—[ἐν ἠμέρᾳ ὀργῆς, i.e., wrath which will be revealed in the day of wrath. It belongs to ὀργἠν, not to θησαυρίζεις. The E. V. confounds ἐν with εἰς, which is inadmissible, unless we take it as a constructio pregnans, so that ἐν includes εὶς.—P. S.]

[2]Rom_2:5.—καί after ἀποκαλύψεως is nowise sustained either by the Codd. or by the connection. [Probably inserted to relieve the number of genitives. Meyer: The καί would make the sense: the appearance of God and His righteous judgment. But the term ἀποκάλυψις τοῦ θεοῦ is unusual. Paul speaks only of the ἀποκ. χριστοῦ, 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. θυμὸς καὶ ὸργή. [The reverse order is intrinsically preferable and sustained by א. A. B. D *. G. Vulg. Syr., &c., and adopted by the critical editors. The change in the construction from the accusative ζωὴν αίώνιον (ἀποδώσει), Rom_2:7, to the nominative ὸργὴ καὶ θυμός (ἀποδώσεται or ἒσται), Rom_2:8, is no doubt intentional; God gives eternal life, and wills all men to be saved; but condemnation is man’s own guilt and comes, so to speak, Deo nolente. Comp. Œcumenius, 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 προσωποληψία, several Codd. (A. D. G. and Sinaiticus) read προσωπολημψία, with an μ, and this reading has been adopted by Lachmann, Alford, and others here and elsewhere (Act_10:34; Jam_2:9). The insertion of a μ is probably Alexandrian usage, and due to a vicious pronunciation of β and π..—P. S.]

[6]Rom_2:13.—The article [before νόμου 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 οί in both cases is generic. οί ἀκροαταὶ νόμου and οί ποιηται νομου form properly one word: Gesetzeshörer, Gesetzesthäter, law-hearers, law-doers.—P. S.]

[7]Rom_2:14.—[ἒθνη, not τὰ ἒθνη. 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 ποιῶσιν, which is better attested (א. A. B.) than the indicative ποιοῦσιν, and is adopted by Lachmann, Tischendorf, Alford. Others read the singular ποιῇ with reference to the neutral plural ἒθνη (Meyer, Wordsworth).—P. S.]

[9]Rom_2:14.—[There is, as Meyer remarks, a difference of emphasis between μὴ νόμον ἒχ. and νόμον μὴ ἒχ.; 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 law—P. S.]

[10]Rom_2:15.—[The inward monitor of the heathen condemns or acquits their moral conduct. The καί after ἢ is concessive, and implies that the acquittal is the exception, the condemnation the rule. μεταξὺ ἀλλήλων must not be separated, and μεταξὐ 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 : διέκρινε μεταξὐ ὴμῶν τε καὶ αὐτῶν; Mat_18:15 : μεταξὺ σοῦ καὶ αὐτοῦ. The ἀλλήλων may refer either to the ἒθνη, as the preceding αὐτῶν (Meyer, Lange), or to the following τῶν διαλογισμῶν, 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 ἂνθρωπε instead of ̓Ιουδαἲε, 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 Christ’s 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 Jerome’s work against Pelagius in explanation of Rom_2:5.—P. S.]

[15][Tholuck makes δόξα the condition, τιμή the recognition, ἀΦθαρσία the unbroken continuance of the blessedness of the saints. Hodge: The manifested excellence or splendor of the future condition is expressed by τιμή, the honor due such excellence by δόξα, and the endless nature of blessedness by ἀΦθαρσία. Similarly Meyer.—P. S.]

[16][Lange renders οἰ ἐξ ἐριθείας, die vom Parteitreiben her sind.—P. S.]

[17][Fritzsche renders the word malitiosi fraudum machinatores. This derivation was first suggested by Rückert 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: “Ἐριθεία seems to mean selfish party intrigue conducted in a mercenary spirit, and more generally, selfish cunning … ἐριθευομένους 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 ἒρις; Robinson adopts the correct derivation from ἒριθος, ἐριθεύω, but gives it the same meaning as ἒρις, 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 sinner’s own conduct. A similar distinction is intended by the change of construction from the active προητοίμασεν to the passive κατηρτισμένα, 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: “θλῖψις signifies more the outward weight of objective infliction, στενοχωρία 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][נָשׂא פָּנִים, 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 προσωποληπτέω, προσωποληψία, προσωπολήπτης (in some Codd. written with an µ before ψ) always denote the unjust partiality, and are denied to God and forbidden to man.—P. S.]

[21][On the meaning of the terms δικαιόω, δικαίωσις, δικαιοσύνη, the reader is referred to the Exeg. Notes, chap. i. 17, and iii. 21–31. 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: “Hæc descriplio est justitiæ legis, quæ nihil impedit alia dicta de justitia fidei.” But the real difficulty consists in the apparent conflict of Paul’s 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 συν signifying the agreement of the witness with the deed, as con in contestari, confirmare; perhaps also the συν may be partly induced by the συν in συνειδήσεως—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).

Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures (Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical), ed. John Peter Lange, English translation edited by Philip Schaff (1864–1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

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 John’s 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 God’s moral government. Man in his unconverted state cannot obtain eternal life by patient continuance in well doing, for we read later that God’s 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 man’s 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 Paul’s 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 Ezekiel’s 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 Lord’s flock, as we know; and the apostle will presently remind us that Abraham himself was an example of the faith that might be in one uncircumcised. How indeed would the obedience of the uncircumcised condemn the man who, having both the letter of the law and circumcision also, yet violated the law! Plainly then, one must place what is internal and spiritual before what is external in the flesh. The true circumcision is spiritual and of the heart, and constitutes the true Jew, whose ‘praise’ (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.”

Arno C. Gaebelein, The Annotated Bible (1913–1922) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

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, {Luke 17} 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.

William Robertson Nicoll, ed., The Expositor's Bible (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1887–1910) — public domain. 65 of 66 books (1 Corinthians is not separately keyed, as that volume carries no machine-parseable verse references); section-level commentary keyed to the opening verse. Introductory and overview sections not keyed to a specific passage are excluded.

2:1-5 You is singular in the Greek. Here, the you is a hypothetical complacent Jew, who feels superior to Gentiles and in no danger of judgment. Paul adopts a popular Hellenistic style called a diatribe, in which a writer tries to win over an audience to his views by portraying a debate between himself and a hypothetical opponent. • these very same things: Paul’s point is that Jews, like Gentiles, turn from God’s revelation to go their own way.

Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Rom 2:1. Διὸ, 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.—ἀναπολόγητος, inexcusable.) Man seeks to defend himself.—ἄνθρωπε, 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.]—ὁ κρίνων, 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 κατακρίνεις follows.—Comp. ch. Rom 14:22-23; 1Co 4:3, etc., Rom 11:29, etc.; Jas 2:4.—ἓτερον, 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, κρίνεις, κατακρίνεις.—ED.

Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1860) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

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 δικαιοσύνη Θεοῦ, Paul now, ch. 23:20, 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 ἀδικία 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.

Rom_2:1. Διό] 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 ἀναπολόγητος εἶ 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 διό. 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 ἀναπολόγητος, 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.; forto exhibit now more exactly this whereforewherein 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 διό (Tholuck) is not to be thought of; not even γάρ is so used in the N. T. (see on Joh_4:44), and διό neither in the N. T. nor elsewhere.

ὦ ἄνθρωπε πᾶς ὁ κρίνων] Just as Paul, Rom_1:18, designated the Gentiles by the general term ἀνθρώπων, 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 ἄνθρωπε, 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 πᾶς ὁ κρίνων 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 κρίνειν 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 κατακρίνεις 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.

ἐν ᾧ] either instrumental: thereby, that, equivalent to ἐν τούτῳ ὅτι (Hofmann); or, still more closely corresponding to the τὰ γὰρ αὐτὰ πράσσεις: in which thing, in which point. Comp Rom_14:22. The temporal rendering: eodem tempore quo (Köllner, Reithmayr), arbitrarily obscures the moral identity, which Paul intended to bring out. The κατακρίνεις 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 ἕτερον and σεαυτόν comp Rom_2:21; 1Co_10:24; 1Co_10:29; Gal_6:4; Php_2:4.

τὰ αὐτά] 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.

ὁ κρίνων] with reproachful emphasis.

Meyer — Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament — English translation by Peter Christie, edited by Frederick Crombie (T&T Clark, 1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

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.

Rom 2:1 . διό : 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 διὸ : therefore. ἐν ᾧ = in that in which. τὰ αὐτὰ πράσσεις , 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.

The Expositor's Greek Testament, edited by W. Robertson Nicoll (1897–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

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 man’s 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 (σύ 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 Nathan’s 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 ἔχοντα)—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.

διό links this section closely to the last; it is well led up to by 1:32, but ἀναπολ. pointing back to 1:20 shows that the Apostle had more than this in his mind.

International Critical Commentary — older volumes (1896–1929), various authors — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

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:

Vv. 1. “Wherefore 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.”

Whom is the apostle addressing? Gentile magistrates, say the old Greek commentators. But a magistrate is appointed to judge crimes; he could not be reproached for filling his office. The best of the Gentiles, say the Reformers, and Hofmann in our own day. But what purpose would be served, in this vast survey of the general state of mankind, by such a slight moral warning given to the best and wisest of the Gentiles not to set themselves to judge others? Besides, this precept could not be more than a parenthesis, while it is easy to see that Rom 2:1 is exactly like Rom 1:18, the theme of all the development which immediately follows chap. 2. Evidently the person apostrophized in these terms: O man..., forms an exception among those men (ἄνθρωποι, Rom 1:18) who hurtfully and wickedly reject the truth. He does not repress, on the contrary he proclaims it; but he contents himself with applying it to others. The true name of this collective personage, whose portrait Paul proceeds to draw without yet naming him, will be pronounced in Rom 2:17: “Now if thou Jew.” The apostle knows how delicate the task is which he is approaching, that of proving to the elect people that divine wrath, now displayed against the Gentiles, is likewise suspended over them. He is about to drag to God’s tribunal the nation which thinks itself at liberty to cite all others to its bar. It is a bold enterprise. The apostle proceeds cautiously. He first expresses his thought abstractly: thou who judgest, whosoever thou art, to unveil it fully afterward. Chap. 2 is thus the parallel of the passage Rom 1:18-32; it is the trial of the Jewish after that of the Gentile world. And the first two verses are its theme.

The course followed by the apostle is this:

In the first part, Rom 2:1-16, he lays down the principle of God’s true (impartial) judgment. In the second, Rom 2:17-29, he applies it directly to the Jew.

The first part contains the development of three ideas. 1. Favors received, far from forming a ground for exemption from judgment, aggravate the responsibility of the receiver, Rom 2:1 to Rom 5:2. The divine sentence rests on the works, Rom 2:6 to Rom 12:3. Not on knowledge, Rom 2:13-16.

The διό, wherefore, which connects this passage with the preceding, presents a certain difficulty which Hofmann and Ritschl have used to justify their far from natural explanations of the preceding. Meyer takes this connecting particle as referring to the whole preceding description from Rom 2:18. For if a man is guilty, if he commits such things without judging them, it follows that he is still more guilty if he commit them while judging them. Rom 2:1 might, however, be connected more particularly with Rom 1:32. In point of fact, if sinning while applauding the sin of others is criminal, would not men be more inexcusable still if they condemned the sin of others while joining in it? In the former case there is at least agreement between thought and action—the man does what he expressly approves—while in the second there is an internal contradiction and a flagrant hypocrisy. In the act of judging, the judge condemns his own doing.

The word inexcusable, here applied to the Jews, is the counterpart of the same epithet already applied to the Gentiles, Rom 1:20.

Whosoever thou art (πᾶς): whatever name thou bearest, were it even the glorious name of Jew. Paul does not say this, but it is his meaning.

It is enough that thou judgest, that I may condemn thee in this character of judge; for thy judgment recoils on thyself. The Jews, as we know, liked to call the Gentiles ἁμαρτωλοί, sinners, Gal 2:15.—᾿Εν ᾦ, wherein, signifies: “Thou doest two things at once; thou condemnest thy neighbor, and by condemning him for things which thou doest, thou takest away all excuse for thyself.” This meaning is much more pungent than Meyer’s: in the same things which—that is to say, in the things which thou doest, and which at the same time thou condemnest. There was undoubtedly a difference between the moral state of the Jews and that of other nations, but the passage Rom 2:17-24 will show that this difference was only relative. The repetition of the words: thou who judgest, at the end of the sentence, brings out strongly the exceptional character in virtue of which this personage is brought en the scene. The apostle confronts the falsehood under which the man shelters himself with a simple luminous truth to which no conscience can refuse its assent.

Frédéric Louis Godet — Commentaries on Luke, John, Romans, and 1 Corinthians — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1870s–1890s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Chapter II

Contents

The object of this chapter is to establish the same charges against the jews, which had just been proved against the gentiles; to show that they also were exposed to the wrath of god. It consists of three parts. The first contains an exhibition of those simple principles of justice upon which all men are to be judged, vv. 1-16. The second is an application of these principles to the case of the jews, Rom_2:17-24. The third is an exhibition of the true nature and design of circumcision, intended to show that the jews could not expect exemption on the ground of that rite, Rom_2:25-29.

Romans 2:1-16

Analysis

That men so impious and immoral, as those described in the preceding chapter, deserved the divine displeasure, and could never, by their own works, secure the favor of God, the Jew was prepared readily to admit. But might there not be a set of men, who, in virtue of some promise on the part of God, or of the performance of some special duties, could claim exemption from the execution of Gods purpose to punish all sin? To determine this point, it was necessary to consider a little more fully the justice of God, in order to see whether it admitted of impunity to sinners on the ground supposed. This first section of the chapter, therefore, is employed in expanding the principle of Rom_2:18 of the first chapter. It contains a development of those principles of justice which commend themselves at once to every mans conscience. The first is, that he who condemns in others what he does himself, does thereby condemn himself, Rom_2:1. The second, that Gods judgments are according to the truth or real state of the case, Rom_2:2. The third, that the special goodness of God, manifested towards any individual or people, forms no ground of exemption from merited punishment; but being designed to lead them to repentance, when misimproved aggravates their condemnation, Rom_2:3-5. The fourth, that the ground of judgment is the works, not the external relations or professions of men: God will punish the wicked and reward the good, whether Jew or, without the least respect of persons, Rom_2:6-11. The fifth, that the standard of Judgment is the light which men have severally enjoyed. Those having a written law shall be judged by it, and those who have only the law written on their hearts, (and that the heathen have such a law is proved by the operations of the, conscience, Rom_2:13-15,) shall be judged by that law, Rom_2:12. These are the principles according to which all men are to be judged in the last day, by Jesus Christ, Rom_2:16.

Commentary

Rom_2:1

In order to appreciate the force of the apostles reasoning in this and the following verses, it should be remembered that the principal ground on which the Jews expected acceptance with God, was the covenant which he had made with their father Abraham, in which he promised to be a God to him and to his seed after him. They understood this promise to secure salvation for all who retained their connection with Abraham, by the observance of the law and the rite of circumcision. They expected, therefore, to be regarded and treated not so much as individuals, each being dealt with according to his personal character, but as a community to whom salvation was secured by the promise made to Abraham. Paul begins his argument at a distance; he states his principles in such general terms, that they could not fail to secure the assent of the Jew, before he was aware of their application to himself. That the Jews are addressed in this chapter is evident from the whole strain of the argument, and from the express application of the reasoning to the case of the Jews, from Rom_2:17 onward. This view of the passage is now generally adopted, though many of the earlier commentators supposed either that no particular class of persons is here addressed, or that the apostle has in view the better portion of the heathen, or at least those who did not seem to approve of the crimes mentioned in the preceding chapter, but rather condemned them.

The connection between this chapter and what precedes, as indicated by the particle διὸ, wherefore, is somewhat doubtful. Some suppose the inference to be drawn from the doctrine taught from Rom_2:18 of the preceding chapter. God is just, and determined to punish all unrighteousness and ungodliness of men; wherefore they are without excuse who commit the sins which they condemn in others. In this case, however, the conclusion is not exactly in the firm suited to the premises. It is not so much the inexcusableness of sinners as the exposure to punishment, that follows from the justice of God. Most commentators, therefore, consider the inference as drawn from the last verse of the preceding chapter. It is there said that all men knew that those who sin are worthy of death; and the inference is, that they which commit sin are without excuse, however censorious their self-conceit may render them towards others. Every one who judges. Though from what follows it is plain that the Jews are here intended, yet for the reasons above stated the proposition is made general. Κρίνων, judging; but by implication, condemning. For wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself. Wherein (ἐν ᾧ) either in the thing which, or thereby, i.e., in the same judgment, or whilst See Mar_2:19; Joh_5:7. The reason of this assertion is given in the following clause, for thou that judgest doest the same things. It is the thing done which is the ground of condemnation; and therefore he who condemns the act, condemns the agent, whether the agent be himself or someone else, whether he be a Jew or a Gentile.

Charles Hodge — Commentary on Romans (1835), First Corinthians (1857), and Ephesians (1856) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

He convinceth them which would seem to be exempt out of the number of other men, because they reprehend other men’s faults, and saith that they are least of all to be excused, for if they were well and narrowly searched (as God surely doth) 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.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

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] οκρινων, the judger; thou assumest the character of a judge, and in that character condemnest others who are less guilty than thyself.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

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.

John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.

(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.

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

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 Gill on Mat 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.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

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.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Therefore - Διὸ 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 apostle’s 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” (κρίνεις krineis) here is used in the sense of condemning. It is not a word of equal strength with what is rendered “condemnest” (κατακρίνεις 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.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

Wherefore thou art inexcusable, &c. He seems to give a general admonition to every one, both Jews and Gentiles, not to blame, judge, or condemn others, when perhaps he, or those of his religion, may be guilty of the like sins. Let him rather call to mind the just judgment of God, which, they that are sinners, cannot escape. Let him also reflect, that if God hath hitherto deferred to punish him, it hat been through the riches and abundance of his goodness, patience, and long-forbearance, or longanimity: that he must take care not to harden his heart any longer, lest he heap up to himself a fatal treasure at the day of judgment, when God will render to every one according to his works, and not according to his faith only, says St. John Chrysostom, hom. v. (Witham)

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

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.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

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.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Vers. 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 ver. 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, anyrwpe and pav o krinwn (vers. 1, 3), seem evidently to include all who judge others; and it is not till ver. 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 oi krinontev : 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 ask Are 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 (vers. 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 vers. 7, 10, 14, 15, 29 such, namely, as sincerely strive after good without setting themselves up as judges is 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 Ro 7, where the inner consciousness of even the best is analyzed, the missing link of the argument is supplied.

Vers. 1, 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 prasseiv , 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 pav o krinwn "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 kata alhyeian , in ver. 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.

Vers. 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 condemnation Jew 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.

HOMILIES BY C.H IRWIN. Vers. 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" (ver. 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?" (ver. 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 world his 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" (ver. 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

HOMILIES BY T.F. LOCKYER. Vers. 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 here the 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. (Ver. 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 tending an 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 conscience because we, forsooth, are "Christians," therefore we are saved! and of a hardened heart God"s very love, if we will not read its meaning, may be our death. Eternally, and without any exception, "the righteous Lord loveth righteousness". T.F.L. (Psa_11:7)

HOMILIES BY R.M. EDGAR. Vers. 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. ver. 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. (Ver. 2) The apostle declares to his self-righteous critic that he is sure the Revised Version gives it "know that God"s judgment in the cases already referred to is according to truth (kata alhyeian). 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. (Vers. 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 (metanoia); 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 (ametanohton), 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. (Vers. 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 (adikia). 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 Matthew 25 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. (Ver. 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 ( Ellhni): for there is no respect of persons (proswpolhqia) 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 severe he 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. (Vers. 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 not How has this inward law and monitor come into existence? but What 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. (Ver. 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.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Therefore - The apostle now makes a transition from the gentiles to the Jews, till, at ver. 6, he comprises both. Thou art inexcusable - Seeing knowledge without practice only increases guilt. O man - Having before spoken of the gentile in the third person, he addresses the Jew in the second person. But he calls him by a common appellation, as not acknowledging him to be a Jew. See verses 17, 28. Whosoever thou art that Judgest - Censurest, condemnest. For in that thou Judgest the other - The heathen. Thou condemnest thyself; for thou doest the same things - In effect; in many instances.

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

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.

Paul E. Kretzmann, Popular Commentary of the Bible (1921–1924) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

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.

The Sermon Bible, ed. William Robertson Nicoll (1888–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

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.

William Burkitt's Expository Notes on the New Testament (1700–1703) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

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 Paul’s day was just what it is now, and so is the counterfeit identical with itself in all ages.

William B. Godbey, Commentary on the New Testament (1896–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

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.]

J. W. McGarvey (with Philip Y. Pendleton), Commentaries on the New Testament (The Fourfold Gospel, 1914; Acts; and the epistles) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

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 God’s 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.

John Nelson Darby — Synopsis of the Books of the Bible: the New Testament (c. 1857–1862) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

1–16. Therefore thou art inexcusable. Paul has just shown that the Gentiles are great sinner, and are without excuse before God (1:32). The Jew, however, would pronounce that conclusion just, but would excuse himself. Hence Paul makes the application to them also. Whosoever thou art. Verse 17 shows that the Jews are in the apostle's mind. Besides, the Jews, filled with spiritual pride, were greatly given to judging others. Another. The Greek says “the other;” the other division of the world, the Gentiles. Thou condemnest thyself. Because he practices the very thing he condemns in others.

B. W. Johnson's The People's New Testament with Notes (1889–1891) — public domain. Electronic text from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) ThML edition.

Connecting Statement:

Paul has affirmed all men are sinners and continues to remind them that all people are wicked.

Therefore you are without excuse

The word "therefore" marks a new section of the letter. It also makes a concluding statement based on what Paul said in Romans 1:1-32. AT: "Since God will punish those who continually sin, he will certainly not excuse your sins" (See: Assumed Knowledge and Implicit Information)

you are

Paul is writing here as if he were addressing a Jewish person who is arguing with him. Paul is doing this to teach his audience that God will punish everyone who continually sins, whether Jew or Gentile. (See: Apostrophe)

you

Here the pronoun "you" is singular. (See: Forms of You)

you person, you who judge

Paul uses the word "person" here to scold anyone who might think he can act like God and judge others. AT: "You are just a human being, yet you judge others and say they deserve God's punishment" (See: Assumed Knowledge and Implicit Information)

for what you judge in another you condemn in yourself

"But you are only judging yourself because you do the same wicked deeds as they do"

But we know

Here the pronoun "we" may include Christian believers and also Jews who are not Christians. (See: Inclusive "We")

God's judgment is according to truth when it falls on those

Here Paul speaks of "God's judgment" as if it were alive and could "fall" on people. AT: "God will judge those people truly and fairly" (See: Personification)

those who practice such things

"the people who do those wicked deeds"

translationWords

judge

condemn

God

true

unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.

1–16. GOD’S wrath, thus revealed in human life through the consequences of man’s rejection of GOD, is also seen in the judgment of GOD upon man’s conduct—the only just judgment (1) because all men being implicated no man has the right to judge, and (4) a just judgment because GOD has offered man the opportunity of repentance and (5) judges wilful wrongdoing (6) by the main tendencies of a man’s life, (9) without favour to any privileged race, (12) in accordance with opportunities given even to Gentiles and (14) the use made of knowledge admittedly possessed even by Gentiles. This section is closely connected with the preceding by the διὸ and by the verbal and sense echoes (ἀναπολόγητος, πράσσεις).

1. ἀναπολόγητος κ.τ.λ. The consequence of this state of man, being universal, is that there is no excuse for men judging their neighbours. The statement is quite general; but Rom 2:9-11 show that the Apostle is thinking in particular of the Jew’s wholesale condemnation of Gentiles and justification of himself.

κρίνεις … κατακρίνεις, the mere attitude of judgment is a condemnation of thyself; cf. Mat 7:1 f.; Luk 6:37.

τὸν ἕτερον, thy neighbour or thy fellow-man; cf. Rom 13:8; 1Co 6:1; 1Co 10:24, alibi

τὰ γὰρ αὐτὰ πράσσεις, whether you realise it or not—developed, for the Jew, in Rom 2:21 f.

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge University Press, 1896; 21 vols, various authors incl. Carr, Maclear, Plummer, Farrar, Lumby, Moule, M. R. James, Simcox) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

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 τὰ γὰρ αὐτὰ πράσσεις ὁ κρίνων with vv. 21-23, where the same charge is implied in a direct address to the Jew.

διό, on account of this δικαίωμα θεοῦ decreeing death against the doers of these things—for thou doest them thyself. Therefore thy setting thyself up as a judge, is unjustifiable.

πᾶς ὁ κρίνων] The Jew is not yet named, but hinted at (see above): not in order to conciliate the Jews (Rückert), 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, vv. 17-20, where the position here declared to be unjustifiable, is asserted to be assumed by the Jew.

ἐν ᾧ …] For wherein (not ‘in that’), as E. V.—i.e. ‘in the matter in which.’

Henry Alford, The Greek Testament (1849–1861) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

O man. General, but still with a general and slightly reproachful reference to the Jew.

Judgest [κρινων] . With the sense of condemning.

Marvin R. Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament (1887–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.