Paulos,
I have returned from my journeys, and I am back at trying to understand this most important letter. In this section of Romans things get a bit confusing, and there is a great deal of debate regarding this section. I am hoping I have grasped a bit of what Paul is saying, and where I have fallen short, I hope you will aid me in my understanding. I will need specific help with v. 15, which I cannot make head's or tail's of at this point. So any aid you could bring would be great. I will anxiously await your assessments. Grace to you!
Romans 2:12-16
12 For as many as have sinned without the Law will be destroyed apart from the Law; and as many as have sinned in the Law will be judged by the Law. 13 For the hearers of the Law are not righteous before God, but the doers of the Law will be declared righteous. 14 For when the Gentiles, who do not have the Law by nature, do the things required by the Law, these not possessing the Law are a law unto themselves, 15 they demonstrate the work required by the Law written on their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternatively accusing and defending them 16 on the day when God will judge the secrets of men according to my gospel through King Jesus.
In vv. 12-16 Paul is explaining more fully his argument in vv. 7-11, with a special focus on explaining v. 11(‘For there is no partiality with God’). Why is there no partiality with God regarding the judgment of the Jew and the Gentile? Paul answers this in vv. 12-13, “12 For as many as have sinned without the Law will be destroyed apart from the Law; and as many as have sinned in the Law will be judged by the Law. 13For the hearers of the Law are not righteous before God, but the doers of the Law will be declared righteous.” What Paul means here is that the possession of the Law does not give one special status before God at the judgment, because those who sinned without the Law, will perish without the Law (in other words Paul here is dealing with Gentiles), while those who have the Law (i.e., Jews) will be judged by the Law. Thus God will judge both the Jew and the Gentile, but he will not judge the Gentile like the Jew, that is, as if he possessed the Law. And the Jew will be judged as well, that is as one who is ‘in the Law’. In v. 13 Paul then moves on to describe who will receive vindication on the last day. It is those who do the Law who will be declared righteous. Those who simply hear the Law and not do the Law will be condemned by God, thus simple possession of the Law does not bring about a righteous verdict.
In mentioning ‘doers of the Law’ Paul here does not mean that these ‘doers’ earn God’s righteous verdict. Rather, Paul’s point must be understood in light of v. 6, where Paul says that God will render to each in keeping with his deeds. This is not about earning righteousness, it is about God giving a just decision, a just decision that is in keeping with one’s behavior. If one is a doer, they will hear ‘righteous’. If one is a hearer, they will hear ‘condemned’.
In vv. 14-15 Paul goes on to explain what he means by doing (notice the ‘for’ in v. 14). There are three views regarding vv. 14-15. First is the idea that Paul here is offering a hypothetical case, but that we all know that there is no one who does the Law, and so it is simply hypothetical. Another is that Paul is borrowing from Stoic thought regarding natural law (Most modern translations follow this line of thought seeing that the Gentile is doing ‘by nature’ [NIV] or ‘instinctively’ [NAU] the things required by the Law). The third view is the one I find most persuasive and it is that Paul here is introducing a new type of man, that is a new covenant Gentile, who is a Gentile (and remains thus) who is a doer of the Law. This Gentile by nature does not have the Law (The placement of ‘by nature’ in the sentence could either go with ‘not having’ or ‘doing’, but I see in light of things further in Romans [e.g., 2:27] that ‘by nature should modify ‘not having’.) but he does the Law. The new covenant (the reason for new covenant is that the Law written on the heart was a promise regarding the new covenant [Jer 31:33], and the Gentile is described this way) Gentile does the things required by the Law, because the Law is written on his heart. This, of course, is a strange scenario, because the new covenant Gentile remains a Gentile, that is he does not become a convert to Israel, but he nonetheless does the Law. How is it that one can remain a Gentile and do the Law? Paul will talk about this from now until chapter 9. But at least it is worth noting that Paul has a category for an uncircumcised doer of the Law. This is startling!
12 For as many as have sinned without the Law will be destroyed apart from the Law; and as many as have sinned in the Law will be judged by the Law. 13 For the hearers of the Law are not righteous before God, but the doers of the Law will be declared righteous. 14 For when the Gentiles, who do not have the Law by nature, do the things required by the Law, these not possessing the Law are a law unto themselves, 15 they demonstrate the work required by the Law written on their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternatively accusing and defending them 16 on the day when God will judge the secrets of men according to my gospel through King Jesus.
In vv. 12-16 Paul is explaining more fully his argument in vv. 7-11, with a special focus on explaining v. 11(‘For there is no partiality with God’). Why is there no partiality with God regarding the judgment of the Jew and the Gentile? Paul answers this in vv. 12-13, “12 For as many as have sinned without the Law will be destroyed apart from the Law; and as many as have sinned in the Law will be judged by the Law. 13For the hearers of the Law are not righteous before God, but the doers of the Law will be declared righteous.” What Paul means here is that the possession of the Law does not give one special status before God at the judgment, because those who sinned without the Law, will perish without the Law (in other words Paul here is dealing with Gentiles), while those who have the Law (i.e., Jews) will be judged by the Law. Thus God will judge both the Jew and the Gentile, but he will not judge the Gentile like the Jew, that is, as if he possessed the Law. And the Jew will be judged as well, that is as one who is ‘in the Law’. In v. 13 Paul then moves on to describe who will receive vindication on the last day. It is those who do the Law who will be declared righteous. Those who simply hear the Law and not do the Law will be condemned by God, thus simple possession of the Law does not bring about a righteous verdict.
In mentioning ‘doers of the Law’ Paul here does not mean that these ‘doers’ earn God’s righteous verdict. Rather, Paul’s point must be understood in light of v. 6, where Paul says that God will render to each in keeping with his deeds. This is not about earning righteousness, it is about God giving a just decision, a just decision that is in keeping with one’s behavior. If one is a doer, they will hear ‘righteous’. If one is a hearer, they will hear ‘condemned’.
In vv. 14-15 Paul goes on to explain what he means by doing (notice the ‘for’ in v. 14). There are three views regarding vv. 14-15. First is the idea that Paul here is offering a hypothetical case, but that we all know that there is no one who does the Law, and so it is simply hypothetical. Another is that Paul is borrowing from Stoic thought regarding natural law (Most modern translations follow this line of thought seeing that the Gentile is doing ‘by nature’ [NIV] or ‘instinctively’ [NAU] the things required by the Law). The third view is the one I find most persuasive and it is that Paul here is introducing a new type of man, that is a new covenant Gentile, who is a Gentile (and remains thus) who is a doer of the Law. This Gentile by nature does not have the Law (The placement of ‘by nature’ in the sentence could either go with ‘not having’ or ‘doing’, but I see in light of things further in Romans [e.g., 2:27] that ‘by nature should modify ‘not having’.) but he does the Law. The new covenant (the reason for new covenant is that the Law written on the heart was a promise regarding the new covenant [Jer 31:33], and the Gentile is described this way) Gentile does the things required by the Law, because the Law is written on his heart. This, of course, is a strange scenario, because the new covenant Gentile remains a Gentile, that is he does not become a convert to Israel, but he nonetheless does the Law. How is it that one can remain a Gentile and do the Law? Paul will talk about this from now until chapter 9. But at least it is worth noting that Paul has a category for an uncircumcised doer of the Law. This is startling!
2 comments:
Timotheos,
I have a question regarding your translation of 2:14. In the second half of the verse, did you consider the option of taking "to themselves" with "not possessing the law" rather than "are a law"? If taken that way, it would be a reiteration of the fact that they do not have the law by nature. I'm not sure if I understand what it means for them to be a "law unto themselves," could you comment on how you understand this phrase as well? I am greatly enjoying reading your study of the parchments. Grace to you.
Andreas
P.S. Paulos, thank you for your very helpful and, to my mind, compelling answer to my previous question.
Andreas,
Thanks for your comment, and I apologize for my tardiness in responding. Let me see if I understand you. Are you proposing a translation such as the following, '...these not having the Law of themselves are Law'? Is this how you see it? If this is how you are taking it, would this then mean something similar to Paul's category, which he uses later in chapter 2 that the uncircumcision is circumcision and that the circumcised who transgress are uncircumcision? Thus, those not having the Law of themselves (i.e., Gentiles) are actually Law, becuase they do the Law, because it is written on their hearts. Are these your thoughts? If so, I think I like it.
Timotheos
Post a Comment