Romans 2:17-24
The Failure of the Jews to properly honor God
Where this passage falls within the general outline
I. General introduction to the letter (1:1-17)
II. The revelation of universal sinfulness (1:18-3:20)
A. The moral degeneration of all humanity (1:18-32)
B. The principles of God’s righteous judgment upon sin (2:1-16)
C. The spiritual emptiness of Rabbinical Judaism (2:17-29)
1). Failure to properly understand and follow the Law (2:17-24)
NASB Text of the passage:
“But if you bear the name ‘Jew,’ and rely upon the Law, and boast in God, and know His will, and approve the things that are essential, being instructed out of the Law, and are confident that you yourself are a guide to the blind, a light to those who are in darkness, a corrector of the foolish, a teacher of the immature, having in the Law the embodiment of knowledge and of the truth, you, therefore, who teach another, do you not teach yourself? You who preach that one should not steal, do you steal? You who say that one should not commit adultery, do you commit adultery? You who abhor idols, do you rob temples? You who boast in the Law, through your breaking the Law, do you dishonor God? For ‘the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you,’
just as it is written.”
Romans 2:17-24
Interpretive Insights:
The failure of the Jews to obey God’s Law (2:17-24):
Overview of the passage:
Paul, having demonstrated that the moralist (in general), were guilty before God, knew he needed to address the Jews specifically. This is because their confidence in the flesh had slightly different underpinnings than did moralistic gentiles. Therefore at this point in his argument Paul will seek to demonstrate that his fellow Jews are also under the wrath of God and are therefore are also in need of the Gospel. In doing this Paul is going to examine the specific issues that led them to consider themselves above God’s judgment.
Paul, having been raised within first century Judaism, and having become a master of its teaching through his training to be a Pharisee knew well the mindset of his fellow Jews. They considered themselves morally and spiritually superior to the gentiles. After all they were in possession of the Law of God, they had favored status with Him due to their election, and their circumcision was a sign of being God’s covenant people. They believed that all these things distinguished them from the gentiles and would protect them from God’s judgment.
Although Paul would acknowledge that the Jews did have a favored position with God, he wanted them to understand that they were wrong to conclude that those things in themselves guaranteed their acceptance with God. The problem was that instead of seeing this relationship with God as a privilege that they should strive to maintain (through faithful adherence to the intent of God’s Law), they had come to view it as a right that was theirs unless they egregiously violated God’s Law (according to their own measure). Therefore as Paul explained the universal guilt of every person before a holy God, he needed to address and correct this assumption to ensure that the Jews would recognize that they too needed the Gospel.
Specific Interpretive Observations:
One might ask at this juncture, why and how the children of Israel became known as the “Jews”? The origin of the term “Jew”, rather than “Israelite”, has its origin in the period of the exile from Palestine-circa 600 BC). After the reign of Solomon the one nation of Israel was divided into two separate nations. The nation to the south was comprised mostly of descendants of Judah, along with some from the tribe of Benjamin (a very small tribe). Therefore this nation became known as Judah. All the other tribes comprised the northern nation, which was known as either Israel or Ephraim. In 722 B.C. in fulfillment of God’s prophetic word the ten northern tribes were conquered and exiled into captivity by the Assyrians. In 586 B.C. the same happened to Judah at the hands of the Babylonian army. In fulfillment of a prophecy given to Jeremiah (ch.25), the tribe of Judah was allowed to return to Palestine after 70 years. However the tribes of the north did not and precisely what happened to them is not known (thus the expression of the ten lost tribes of Israel). Therefore after the exile the people of the southern kingdom then began to be referred to in reference to their tribal name “Judah” (thus Jews), regardless of the actual lineage of the individual. The first historical reference in the Bible to this title is II Kings 25:25 (it refers to incidents at the end of the existence of the southern kingdom of Judah). Although this title came into use during the exile, it remained in use through the return from exile, and into the New Testament period. As far as anyone knows only the people of Judah remained an ethnically distinct people.
In addressing his fellow Jews, Paul employs the very terms that they used to describe their superiority to the gentiles. In doing this Paul demonstrated their arrogance and the inconsistency of their claims as he methodically proved that they also were in need the Gospel.
Paul opens this section of his argument with a with a word in Greek that is normally translated “if” and is frequently used to introduce conditional sentences. But the sentence does not unfold with anything being said to be in any way dependent upon the condition of these people being Jews. Further the grammatical construction of combining this word with a verb in the indicative mood would normally suggest that it would be better translated “since”. Therefore in this sentence Paul is not using this Greek word to cast doubt or suggest conditionality but instead it has the force of an affirmation.
Paul now addresses two basic things that characterized the confidence which the Jews had concerning their spiritual situation:
- their reliance was upon the Law
- their boast was in God.
The word that Paul uses in this verse for “rely” is eponomazo which means to rest upon. This word is only used one other time in the New Testament (Luke 10:6). In that passage it was used to refer to how the disciple’s peace would rest upon a home that would receive them, rather than returning to them as it would if they were refused hospitality. The word itself meant to rest upon, to lean upon or settle on something, and was used metaphorically to refer to trusting in that thing. In this context it indicates that the mere possession and knowledge of the Law was what the Jews rested their security upon. The belief was that Law provided them with a secure standing before God. They believed the Law did this by giving them the means of remaining within the covenant relationship that God had established them.
In addition their “boast” was in God. That is a translation of kauchaomai, which means to boast about something as the source of one’s confidence or assurance. It refers not to their relationship with God but to God Himself. It was a boast in the God the Jew knew but believed no one else did. Thus they believed that the Covenant they had with God through Abraham was theirs simply by virtue of being his physical descendants.
Another aspect of why the Jew would believe himself to be above God’s judgment was because of the knowledge that they possessed from the Law which God had given to them. The Jews could rightly claim that they had been “instructed” from that Law, and that because of this they knew God’s will, and were therefore able to the things that were essential. In order to discern precisely what the Jews would have meant in making this claim it is necessary to define several key words that Paul uses here:
· Know: a translation of the Greek word ginosko, meaning to recognize, understand, or realize something. Since Paul uses the word in the present tense it indicates that this is an ongoing awareness rather than a fleeting thought.
· Instructed: a translation of katecheo, that here is used in the form of a present passive participle, and means to instruct, or teach. It literally means “down the ears”, and has the idea of indoctrinating. It is the word from which the English term “catechism” derives.
· Will: a translation of thelema. This word refers to either God’s moral will (as in this context when referring to the Law), or to God’s sovereign purpose that is equivalent to the concept of a divinely ordained destiny.
· Approve: a translation of dokimazo. This word is used as a present active indicative, 2nd singular verb, which means to test, try or prove. It carries the notion of testing to see if something is worthy or not.
· Essential: a translation of diapheronta. Used in the form of a present active participle, which means to separate things in the sense of distinguishing good from bad, best from good, appropriate from inappropriate. The verb basically means to differ and indicates that which is superior or better than something else.
Therefore Paul is saying that the Jews believed they had been thoroughly indoctrinated through the Law so that they knew both God’s moral will, and how to distinguish between right and wrong. Through the Law the Jew had the information necessary to test the things around them so as to be able to distinguish between what God saw as either evil or wicked, and what He saw as excellent and praiseworthy. The word Paul uses for “instructed” occurs in the following passages:
“that you may know the certainty of those things
in which you were instructed.”
Luke 1:4
“yet in the church I would rather speak five words with my understanding, that I may teach others also, than ten thousand words in a tongue.”
I Corinthians 14:19
As these passages demonstrate this instruction refers to formal instruction rather than random things one might pick up over time. Specifically this referred to the instruction received by the public teaching of the Law and to the instruction of parents, priests and Levites. The clause “being instructed out of the law” explains causation and modifies the previous two statements tying together all that Paul wrote in them. The Law is what taught them the will of God and how to discern between good and better. In referring to God’s will, Paul does not use a pronoun, he only writes “the will”. But this absolute sense of will was adopted by the Jews to refer to God’s will. It is clear that Paul is referring to God’s moral will (i.e. what God commanded or forbid, what he required or prohibited), because of its association with the Law of God. The idea of the will of God as some unrevealed individualized life plan is foreign to the Scriptures.
The implication is that the Jew had developed the impression that they were not in danger of God’s judgment, because of their knowledge of God’s Word. This knowledge explains why the Jew would not think himself implicated before God based upon what Paul had written in 2:1-16. Because they believed that since they knew the standards of the one true God, and did their best to live up to them, that they were guiltless before Him.
Paul continues this train of thought by addressing two more reasons the Jews had for having confidence in the flesh:
· You yourself are a guide to the blind, a light to those who are in darkness (vs.19)
· You are…a corrector of the foolish, a teacher of the immature, having in the Law the embodiment of knowledge and of the truth (vs.20).
It is interesting to note that Paul uses a reflexive pronoun in referring to his Jewish readers at this point. Why would Paul include such a pronoun? What did he intend to communicate through it? The reason that one would employ such a pronoun would be to demonstrate that the subject of the verb (the one doing the action) is also its object (the one who is acted upon). Therefore it functions as an intensifier, meaning that this is how they see themselves (which is important to Paul’s point).
The Jews saw themselves as superior mentors of the community in spiritual and moral matters, particularly to the spiritually blind gentiles.
There is truth to this. The Jews were called to be a light to the rest of the world (Isa.42:6-7). They had received God’s revealed truth, which no one else possessed. The problem was that to be truly successful in this role required humility. Instead the Jews tended to take their privileged position as an indication of their moral superiority rather than as a gracious act of God. And they forgot the truth that they were no more deserving of this grace than any others were.
The word that Paul uses for “confident” is the verb that means to persuade, is in the perfect tense, and in the active voice. One would expect a word for persuasion to be in the passive voice, because normally one is persuaded by something outside of themselves. The reason for this is because the word means not only to convince others, but is also used in regard to the subject himself becoming convinced of something. In fact the perfect form of the word is used with the sense of confident trust in something that one believes to be true. Therefore it can mean not only to persuade, but to be persuaded of something. We see this same meaning of this word in another of Paul’s letters:
“being confident of this very thing, that He who has begun a good work in you will complete it until the day of Jesus Christ”
Philippians 1:6
The intent however is not to express an agreement with his fellow Jews in this assessment, but rather he will seek to demonstrate that their confidence was in fact pretentious assurance.
Their source of information for instructing others of course was in the Law of God. Paul writes that the Law contained “the form of knowledge and truth”. The word “form” means embodiment, as in the outward expression of something internal, rather than as a contrast with the internal. This meaning is a little more clearly seen in another context in which Paul uses this word: