Big Idea: Paul makes explicit the story of Israel. Obedience to God’s law was required for Israel to remain in covenantal relationship with God. But Israel repeatedly broke the law, and consequently divine judgment fell on Jews. Moreover, God’s judgment will fall on individual Jews on the final day of reckoning if they do not repent by accepting Jesus as the Messiah.
Understanding the Text
In placing Romans 2:1–11 in its literary context, we focus in from the big picture of 1:18–3:20, which condemns all of humanity, to Paul’s condemnation of one people group, the Jews.
The theme of Romans 1:18–3:20, as noted previously, is that the wrath of God (1:18) is upon Gentiles for breaking the stipulations of the Noahic covenant (1:19–32) and upon Jews for breaking the stipulations of the Mosaic covenant (2:1–3:8). So there is no doubt that 3:9–20 indicts all of humankind because it fails to keep covenant with God.
Romans 2 fills out the details of Paul’s condemnation of Jews in his day. They disobey the Torah, the stipulation of the Mosaic covenant (2:1–16), which cancels out the very validity of their circumcision, which is the ultimate sign of the covenant with God (2:17–29).
Romans 2:1–16 focuses on the Jews’ breaking of the Torah. These verses divide into three paragraphs:
1. Israel is not exempt from the wrath of God, since it disobeys the Torah (2:1–5).
2. God is impartial and will judge both Gentile and Jew according to truth—that is, according to their works (2:6–11).
3. Gentiles are not exempt from the wrath of God, since they disobey natural law / Noahic law (2:12–16).
Romans 2:1–11 has a number of connections with the Old Testament covenant:
1. “The day of God’s wrath” (2:5; cf. 2:16) draws on the “day of the Lord” tradition so prevalent in the Old Testament, especially the idea in the prophets that because of Israel’s sin against the covenant, the purported coming day of the Lord’s might on behalf of his people would be turned against them (e.g., Isa. 2:11, 17, 20; Joel 1:15; 2:2; Amos 5:18; 8:9; Zeph. 1:15, 18 [“the day of the Lord’s wrath”]). The punishment associated with the day of the Lord’s wrath upon Israel is the actualization of the covenantal curses (see Deut. 28–30).
2. The stark contrast in 2:1–11 between divine wrath on those who disobey the Torah and eternal life for those who obey the Torah is rooted in the blessings/curses component of the covenant first articulated in Deuteronomy 27–30, with Deuteronomy 30:15–20 encapsulating those contrasting destinies.
3. The terms “kindness” (2:4) and “stubbornness” (2:5) take one back to the covenant: the first refers to God’s faithfulness to his covenant with Israel (e.g., Wis. 15:1),1while the second refers to Old Testament Israel’s repeated hardness of heart toward the stipulations of its covenant with God (beginning in Deut. 9:27).
4. “Storing up wrath against yourself” (2:5) reverses the Jewish concept that obeying the Torah stored up for oneself and other Israelites a treasury of merits (e.g., Tob. 4:9–10; Pss. Sol. 9.3–5; 4 Ezra 6.5; 7.77; 2 Bar. 14.12) by asserting quite to the contrary that attempting to attain merit before God by obeying the Torah actually reserves wrath for a person in the future. James Dunn puts this well: “The pious interlocutor assumes that by his faithfulness to the covenant he is laying up treasure in heaven; but by his failure to recognize the need for a more radical repentance he is actually storing up not ‘good,’ not ‘life,’ but wrath.”2
5. These covenant connections illumine what Paul means in 2:1, 3 when he accuses Jews of committing the “same things” as Gentiles: the same sins of idolatry (1:19–27) and social injustice (1:28–32) that the nations are guilty of are also perpetrated by the Jews. And when one remembers that the Old Testament prophets consistently thundered forth against Israel for committing the two sins of idolatry and injustice and thus breaking the stipulations of the covenant (e.g., Isaiah, Amos, Micah), one can better appreciate the nature of the sins of Israel here pointed out by Paul.
Historical and Cultural Background
The major historical and cultural background of Romans 2:1–11 is the story of Israel as reflected in the Old Testament and in Second Temple Judaism, especially the sin and judgment/exile components (though the restoration aspect is implicit in 2:4 and later explicit in 11:25–27). Three nuances in Romans 2:1–11 echo this story.
1. As noted above, the twofold sin of Israel against the covenant with God was idolatry and injustice. Micah provides a classic illustration of how the prophets railed against Israel for doing these. In Micah 1:1–7 that prophet warns that the Lord will come to judge Israel because of their transgressions, notably idolatry: “All her idols will be broken to pieces; . . . I will destroy her images” (1:7). And Micah 6:8 states that the other stipulation of Israel’s covenant with God is social justice: “He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God.” Then, in Micah 6:9–7:7, the prophet spells out the acts of social injustice on the part of Israel against fellow Jews that annulled their covenant with God.
2. In the Old Testament, many in Israel labored under the assumption that their election as God’s chosen people exempted them from divine judgment even if they sinned, a notion with which the prophets begged to disagree (e.g., Isa. 2:6–4:1; Jer. 2–35; Ezek. 1–24). Yet, even after the Assyrian and Babylonian exiles, the notion of Israel’s inviolability persisted. One of the most famous expressions of this, and one that many commentators believe is alluded to by Paul in Romans 2:4, is Wisdom of Solomon 15:1–2: “But you, our God, are kind and true, patient, and ruling all things in mercy. For even if we sin we are yours.” It is just such a notion that Paul rejects in Romans 2:1–11.
3. Romans 2:4–5 announces a “double whammy” on Jews: the wrath of God has already fallen on Israel in history through past exiles (Assyrian and Babylonian) and present exile (Roman occupation) (a view reflected in, e.g., the Dead Sea Scrolls, Baruch, Tobit, Sirach, 2 Maccabees, Psalms of Solomon),3and the wrath of God will also fall upon Jews on the final day of judgment because they do not believe in Jesus the Messiah, who provides the true restoration to God.
Interpretive Insights
2:1–3 You, therefore, have no excuse . . . you who pass judgment do the same things. Although some commentators think that Paul now addresses “moral” Gentiles in 2:1–11 in contrast to “pagan” Gentiles in 1:18–32, most believe instead that Paul is turning his attention to the Jews (cf. 2:17). There are several reasons for this position. First, the sense of entitlement to divine mercy referred to in 2:4 is more characteristic of Jews than Gentiles (recall my earlier comments on Wis. 15:1–2 relative to Rom. 2:4). Second, indeed there are notable points of contact between Romans 2 and Wisdom of Solomon 12–15 that confirm a Jewish mindset here in 2:1–11. Third, Paul’s direct appeal to “the Jew” in 2:17 does not indicate that he is there introducing a new audience.
The key to understanding Romans 2:1–5 is to see the two components of the story of Israel at play there. The first is that Israel has sinned against the stipulations of the Torah, in terms of both idolatry and injustice. These sins are the “same things” (referred to three times in 2:1–3) that the Gentiles commit. And, since Israel commits the same sins that Gentiles commit, Israel too will be held accountable before God, who judges all humankind by the same standard of truth.
2:4–5 you show contempt for the riches of his kindness . . . storing up wrath against yourself. These two verses tap into the second component of the story of Israel: God’s judgment upon and exile of Israel for not repenting of their idolatry and injustice. Verse 4 recalls the “already” aspect of that judgment, Israel’s past and present exiles (Assyrian, Babylonian, Roman), while verse 5 warns of the “not yet” aspect, Israel’s future judgment and ultimate exile at the judgment bar of God on the last day. But there is hope for Israel: if they will repent, they will experience a restored relationship with God (implied, if Israel accepts Jesus as the Messiah [see 11:25–27]).
2:6–11 God “will repay each person according to what they have done.” Romans 2:6–11 forms a chiasm:
A God will judge everyone equitably (v. 6).
B Those who do good will attain eternal life (v. 7).
C Those who do evil will suffer wrath and anger (v. 8).
C? Those who do evil will suffer trouble and distress (v. 9).
B? Those who do good will receive glory, honor, peace (v. 10).
A? God judges impartially (v. 11).4
It becomes clear from this structure that Paul’s message is simple: God is fair and will judge Jew and Gentile alike according to their works. Those who live a life of good works will enter into eternal life, but those who live a life of evil will enter into divine judgment. As noted earlier, this powerful and yet simple contrast in destinies recalls Deuteronomy 27–30, especially 30:15–20 and the “two ways” tradition specified there: if Israel obeys the stipulations of the Torah, they will experience the blessing of the covenant, which is life, but if they disregard the Torah, they will experience the curse of the covenant, which is wrath in the form of exile (cf. 30:4–5).
But does the teaching in Romans 2:6–11 contradict Paul’s gospel that justification before God at the final judgment depends solely on faith and not on works (so Rom. 1:16–17)? Not when one keeps in mind the overarching purpose of Romans 1:18–3:20, which is that Paul wants to show that acceptance before a righteous God is based on perfectly following his law, which, in fact, no one can do, not even Jews. Coming to grips with that reality, Paul hopes, will drive the sinner into the arms of God’s grace and mercy in Jesus Christ (see Rom. 3:21–4:25).
Theological Insights
A number of insights meet us in Romans 2:1–11. First, profession without practice does not impress God. Neither does it convince those who observe the lifestyles of religious people. If we profess to be believers, we must back up that profession with how we live; otherwise we rightly earn for ourselves the name “hypocrite.” Second, it is comforting to know that on the final day of reckoning, truth will win out. All inconsistency, duplicity, and hypocrisy will not dupe Almighty God. Third, God’s goodness can nevertheless overtake one’s duplicitous ways. Such grace can bring about within us true repentance and result in a consistent Christian walk.
Teaching the Text
At least two attention-getting sermon/lesson titles surface in Romans 2:1–11: first, “The Hypocrisy of Humanity and the Impartiality of God”; second, “The Goodness of God Leads Us to Repentance.” With regard to the first sermonic idea, Paul is exercised about those Jews who point out sins in Gentiles that those very Jews themselves are committing. One is reminded here of Jesus’ excoriation of the Pharisees in the Gospels who did not live up to the Mosaic code that they expected their compatriots to follow. And in modern society some well-known preachers in the recent past lambasted their congregations over sins that turned out to be the very sins those preachers themselves were committing. News reporters call such hypocrisy “preaching against one’s own demons.” The point that Paul wants to make here is that no one can live up to the perfect standards of the law, and it is duplicitous to expect others to do what the religious leaders cannot do.
Regarding the second sermonic idea, the ancient Jews misinterpreted God’s lack of immediate judgment upon them as meaning that God was not going to judge them at all because they were the people of God. But in reality the Jews in Paul’s day were experiencing the proverbial calm before the storm. Part of the reason for that calm before judgment fell stemmed from God’s mercy and grace. He was giving his Old Testament people time to repent. I had a barber in Chicago who lived a wild life despite being married and having children. He was a party-going, pill-popping hipster. But one morning he told me of an amazing experience that he recently had. He said that suddenly the sense of God’s blessings on his life overwhelmed him—a faithful wife, lovely children, financial security. The barber felt so convicted by the goodness of God to him that he fell to his knees and repented of his wild lifestyle. There and then he committed himself to God and his family. The mercy of God led him to repentance.
Illustrating the Text
Unlike humans, God judges everyone impartially in truth.
Bible: One could refer to 2 Samuel 12:1–7, where Nathan uses a parable to expose David’s sordid sins, and Amos 1–2, in which the Lord delineates the sins of the Gentile world and then turns to also censure Judah and Israel. Both of these provide famous “gotcha” stories reminiscent of Romans 2:1–11.
Television: 24. An innovative and acclaimed drama on television, starring Kiefer Sutherland, this suspenseful series has been nominated for a total of sixty-eight Emmy Awards, winning for outstanding drama series in 2006. During the seventh season, the character Allison Taylor is inaugurated as president of the United States and presides over the ensuing episodes. During this season, her daughter, who has been one of her chiefs of staff, later takes the law into her own hands against her mother’s wishes and engineers the murder of another character (Jonas) to avenge her brother’s death. Although she loves her daughter, the president will not make allowances for her and proceeds to uphold the law and have her arrested. The president’s husband, reeling from grief over the loss of both children, disagrees with her, and in the culminating episode he leaves her. Here is a moving story of a political figure who has acted without partiality.
The goodness of God leads us to repentance.
Film: The Mission. This enduring, award-winning film (1986) stars Jeremy Irons and Robert De Niro and features lush, Oscar-winning cinematography. It also includes one of the great cinematic scenes of repentance and forgiveness. The story examines the events surrounding the Treaty of Madrid in 1750, when Spain ceded part of South America to Portugal. Two European forces win the South American natives over to imperialist ways. The plunderers want to extract riches and slaves from the New World; the missionaries want to convert the indigenous peoples to Christianity and win over their souls. Mendoza (played by De Niro) is an exploiter dabbling in the slave trade. After he kills his brother in a fit of rage—a Cain and Abel story—he languishes depressed in jail until a local priest, Father Gabriel (played by Irons), reaches out to him in his cell. Eventually broken and wanting to do penance, Mendoza repeatedly climbs up the Iguazu Falls with a heavy bag on his back weighted down with symbols of his past—armor, sword, and so on. The indigenous Guarani people, watching him from above the falls where they live, at first want to kill him, but then they finally cut his burden loose and show him utter forgiveness. Mendoza, completely overcome by the goodness of God that he sees in this act, weeps and then goes to live with them. Later, he defends them, at the expense of his life, against those who would do what he had previously done. The film clip of his climb up the falls is worth showing.
The Story of the Gentiles Now and Later
Big Idea: Gentiles, like Israelites, are a part of the story. They sin against natural law and consequently are subject to judgment now in an accusing conscience and later at the great day of reckoning. More particularly, just as Gentiles occasionally obey the Torah as it overlaps with natural law but are condemned for not obeying all God’s revelation, so Jews who obey the Torah only occasionally are condemned before God.
Understanding the Text
The reader will recall that Romans 2:1–16 is divided into three paragraphs: verses 1–5, 6–11, 12–16. Verses 6–11 made the point that because God is impartial, he will judge both Jew and Gentile according to their works. But verses 1–5 made the case that Jews are guilty before God because they do not keep the Torah, and therefore judgment has set in on the nation of Israel (this is the story of Israel). Now, verses 12–16 will make a similar case against Gentiles. Because they do not keep the natural law even as it intersects with the Torah, divine judgment has set in on the Gentiles (this is the story of Gentiles).
Historical and Cultural Background
Two Greek influences are apparent in Romans 2:12–16: the usage of the diatribe and the employment of the term “conscience.”
1. Commentators have long noted the influence of the debating style known as “diatribe” on Romans 2:1–3:8. Ancient Greeks used diatribe in debating. In this style of argumentation, the proponent of a position anticipated opponents’ criticisms by raising those points before they did, either in the form of outright objections or as questions placed on the lips of an interlocutor. In anticipating and then answering the criticisms and arguments of opponents, the proponent was able to head them off at the pass, so to speak. The diatribe consisted of three parts: explicitly or implicitly addressing opponents, raising their criticisms, and then answering those criticisms.1Paul employs the diatribe technique against Jews who have rejected Jesus as Messiah in Romans 2:1–3:20 at three places: 2:1–11; 2:17–24; 3:1–8. Those occasions can be summarized in chart form, as shown in table 1.
It is interesting, by way of contrast, that Paul does not use the diatribe style when dealing with the subject of the sinful status of Gentiles in 1:19–32, here in 2:12–16, and in 2:25–29, presumably because his arguments therein would not precipitate any protest from Gentiles. That is, what Paul says about the lost condition of Gentiles in the above three passages apparently would occasion little shock on their part in contrast to the Jews’ vociferous reaction to Paul’s indictment of them in 2:1–11; 2:17–24; 3:1–8.
2. “Conscience” (syneid?sis [2:15]) was a Greek concept, especially the Stoic idea that the conscience is the moral mechanism within humans that convicts them of bad actions (e.g., Seneca, Anger 3.36.1; Mor. Ep. 28.10). Hellenistic Judaism adopted this nuance in its usage of the term (e.g., Wis. 17:11; Philo, Spec. Laws 2.49; Virtues 134; Josephus, Ant. 16.103). Paul refers to this negative aspect of conscience here in Romans 2:15 and also in 1 Corinthians 8:7, 10, 12; 1 Timothy 4:2; Titus 1:15; but note the positive role that the conscience plays elsewhere for Paul, in Romans 9:1; 2 Corinthians 1:12; 1 Timothy 1:5, 19; 3:9; 2 Timothy 1:3.
Interpretive Insights
2:12–14 All who sin apart from the law will also perish apart from the law. The theme of 2:12–16 is the story of the Gentiles, which is a mirror image of the story of Israel: sin against God’s revelation and subsequent judgment. The Gentiles’ sin is treated by Paul in 2:12–14, and their judgment is covered in 2:15–16. Paul’s point in 2:12 is that because God is impartial, both Gentiles and Jews will be judged based on the amount of revelation to which they have access: for Gentiles, natural law (though that overlaps with the Torah [see 2:14]); for Jews, the Torah. The criterion of divine judgment is obeying/doing God’s revelation, not just hearing it (2:13). We may anticipate in 2:13 Paul’s statements, made later in 3:20; 4:14–15; 7:5 and also in 3:23; 10:5, that obeying/doing the law means following it perfectly—something that no human can do, if for no other reason than that the law stirs up the individual to sin. Indeed, 1:19–32 has already placed the Gentiles under indictment for disobeying the light that they have in creation, and 2:1–11 did the same for Jews because they did not live up to the light of the law of Moses.
The majority view of 2:14–15 is that Paul is dealing with non-Christian Gentiles who, though occasionally obeying the Torah as it intersects with natural law / Noahic law as revealed in creation and in the conscience, do not obey the entirety of God’s special revelation in the Torah and, therefore, are still lost (a conclusion with which most Jews would have agreed). A vocal minority of commentators, however, maintains that the Gentiles in 2:12–16 are Christian Gentiles who by virtue of faith in Jesus and the indwelling Spirit are participants in the new covenant.2Table 2 lays out these two views, highlighting the clash between them regarding the specific issues in 2:14–15.
In my view, the reading that sees Paul having non-Christian Gentiles in mind has a much better argument than its rival view. This is confirmed by something apparently not noted in many commentaries: a chiastic arrangement governing 2:14 that distinguishes two laws, Torah and natural law.
A Gentiles do not have the law (Torah)
B they do by nature things required (natural law)
B? they are a law (natural law) unto themselves
A' they do not have the law (Torah)
2:15–16 the requirements of the law are written on their hearts. Verses 15–16 announce divine judgment on non-Christian Gentiles, who only occasionally obey the Torah as natural law intersects with it. Verse 15 declares that such judgment occurs now in history every time a Gentile is convicted by conscience of doing wrong, though the conscience will approve the Gentile’s actions when they are right, however occasionally that may happen. And verse 16 provides the foreboding announcement that non-Christian Gentiles also will face final judgment on the day of divine reckoning. In table 3, we see how the story of Gentiles mirrors the story of Israel.
The Story of Gentiles (Romans 2:12-16) and the Story of Israel (Romans 2:1-11):
1a. Verses 1-3, 6-11: Non-Christian Jews sin in that they do not fully comply with the Torah.
1b. Verses 12-14: Non-Christian Gentiles sin in that they do not fully comply with the Torah and, for that matter, not even with natural law.
2a. Verses 4-5: Non-Christian Jews are being judged now in history via Roman occupation of the land of Israel (cf. the earlier Assyrian and Babylonian exiles) and will be finally judged at the day of reckoning.
2b. Verses 15-16: Non-Christian Gentiles are judged now in history via their consciences and will be finally judged at the day of reckoning.
In light of 2:12–16a, one wonders how in 2:16b Paul could call such news “gospel.” The answer will unfold in the course of his argument in 2:17–3:31: the bad news of judgment upon sin that rests on the whole human race is designed by God to drive people to the good news of justification by faith in Christ alone.
Theological Insights
A number of theological truths emerge in Romans 2:12–16. First, all people have a witness from God: Jews in the Torah, and Gentiles in natural law (creation says that there is a God and that he is powerful, and the conscience bespeaks the holiness of God, the sense of “oughtness” in every heart). Second, the criterion for being justified before God is perfection, both in respect to natural law and even regarding the Torah. Third, the real challenge to obeying the law is the human condition—depravity of the heart, as Paul will later expound upon in 3:9–20. Fourth, judgment day is coming; it is as sure as God himself. And on that day all wrongs will be righted as all the world is silent before the judge over all of reality. Fifth, it does seem that there will be degrees of judgment and reward in heaven, because the works of every individual will be evaluated in the light of what amount of truth he or she possessed.
Teaching the Text
At least two topics of preaching/teaching surface for the reader of Romans 2:12–16. The first might be entitled “A Law unto Themselves: Common Grace as God’s Witness in the World.” The message here is that God has spoken to all people groups of the world through his natural law in creation and in the human conscience. Therefore, all are without excuse before God. The idea of common grace, on a more positive note, also accounts for the good in the world that humans do because they are created in the image of God and therefore have some knowledge of him. This came home to me as an undergraduate student in a large secular university. I was intimidated by the brilliance and graciousness of my non-Christian professors; their knowledge and kindness put me to shame even as a Christian. But one day I realized that these individuals, though not religious, were nevertheless created in the image of God and endowed with common grace. I could therefore appreciate their gifts as a service to humankind, even as God intended.
Second, an ominous topic of discussion or preaching inspired by 2:12–16 would be entitled “All or Nothing! God’s Law and Judgment Day.” The foreboding message here is that anyone who hopes to be accepted by God on judgment day based on obedience to his law had better make sure to follow it perfectly because that is the only standard that God accepts. But the eminently easier way to be justified before God is to receive by faith the perfect righteousness of Jesus Christ, who alone fulfilled the law of Moses (see Rom. 10:4). A colleague of mine in teaching tried to illustrate this principle by offering his students enrolled in a course on Romans a choice for their final exam: they could choose either to take the test (a very difficult one!) or to accept as a gift from the professor a grade of “A.” The professor was shocked that most of the students did not want the gift; rather, they wanted to do it the “old-fashioned way”—earn it! There seems to be something about us human beings that impels us to want to earn our standing before God instead of accepting it as a gift in Christ.
Illustrating the Text
God speaks to all people through natural law in creation and in their conscience.
Ethics: One could place side by side the various ethics that major religions of the world espouse to see if there is commonality among them. Those values found perhaps could serve as a common ethic to live by for a world diverse in religious perspectives.
Philosophy: Immanuel Kant. One could find in Kant’s “categorical imperative” a practical defense of the idea that there is a sense of oughtness/conscience within every human.
Apologetics: Mere Christianity, by C. S. Lewis. In book 1 of this renowned work (1952) Lewis uses vivid analogies to illustrate the principle of natural law.
Theological Book: Eternity in Their Hearts, by Don Richardson. The basic premise of this book (1981) is that God, in his mercy, has permitted every culture in the world to retain a portion of the truth.
Judgment day, on which the works of each individual will be judged, is coming.
Literature: The Inferno, by Dante Alighieri. To show the power of judgment, it might be good to find a pictorial illustration of Dante’s Inferno, such as Gustave Doré’s classic engravings illustrating the nine circles of hell. Dante’s poem begins on the night before Good Friday in the year 1300. Dante is lost in a dark wood (often interpreted as sin) and is unable to find the right way to salvation (symbolized by the sun behind the mountain). Virgil comes to his aid and guides him on a journey to the underworld. There he sees that individual sins are punished in ways symbolically appropriate to their nature. Fortune-tellers, for instance, have to walk with their heads on backwards, blind to what is ahead, because of their preoccupation in life with knowing the future.
Art: The Last Judgment, by Hieronymus Bosch. Bosch’s painting, created sometime after 1482, is a triptych whose middle panel reflects a vivid view of people suffering from the horrors of hell. Another work that exhibits a similar theme is the sculpture The Gates of Hell, by Auguste Rodin, inspired in part by Dante’s Inferno.
