Romans 2: 17 – 29
Our Jewish Roots
17 Indeed you are called a Jew, and rest on the law, and make your boast in God, 18 and know His will, and approve the things that are excellent, being instructed out of the law, 19 and are confident that you yourself are a guide to the blind, a light to those who are in darkness, 20 an instructor of the foolish, a teacher of babes, having the form of knowledge and truth in the law. 21 You, therefore, who teach another, do you not teach yourself? You who preach that a man should not steal, do you steal? 22 You who say, “Do not commit adultery,” do you commit adultery? You who abhor idols, do you rob temples? 23 You who make your boast in the law, do you dishonor God through breaking the law? 24 For “the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you,” as it is written. 25 For circumcision is indeed profitable if you keep the law; but if you are a breaker of the law, your circumcision has become uncircumcision. 26 Therefore, if an uncircumcised man keeps the righteous requirements of the law, will not his uncircumcision be counted as circumcision? 27 And will not the physically uncircumcised, if he fulfills the law, judge you who, even with your written code and circumcision, are a transgressor of the law? 28 For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh; 29 but he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the Spirit, not in the letter; whose praise is not from men but from God.
Although I look Irish, I am a mixture of a few cultures. I find it quite amazing that some of the races of people which you might think should be hidden are proudly displayed. For example a person comes from a mixed racial couple. The race which has been mostly discriminated against you would think would be hidden is actually the one in which the person displays to all. If you ever watched the History Channel you can witnessed firsthand the atrocities that the Nazi’s did to Jews. Many people tried to hide their heritage in order to survive. However, when the insanity and persecution ended the people proudly stepped forward and were not ashamed to proclaim that they were Jewish. If you travel to Israel today you will see people from other cultures that at first do not appear to be Jews. Yet they are Jews. They have come as God has promised from all parts of the world back to the ‘land’.
Today, I would like to admit my Jewish heritage and you all might be surprised that you are also Jews. Now I see I have your attention. Shall we proceed and find out more?
In our continued study of the book of Romans the next area of concern that Paul addressed was the claim of every Jew that, as a Jew he was privileged over all other people in the world. Thus the Jew saw himself as somehow superior and as special to God. He considered therefore that God would treat him on a different plane to that on which He treated others.
Some of you may be thinking, ‘well that is fine as regards the Jew, but what has it to do with us?’ So, I just want to let you know there are similarities which I will explain to you.
The Jew saw himself as one of God’s favorites. He was after all a member of God’s treasured possession. Would you agree with me that many Christians think the same thoughts? Much of this thinking came from the facts listed in God’s Holy Word was that they were;
1. God’s holy nation and kingdom of priests (Exodus 19.5-6, “‘Now therefore, if you will indeed obey My voice and keep My covenant, then you shall be a special treasure to Me above all people; for all the earth is Mine. ‘Now therefore, if you will indeed obey My voice and keep My covenant, then you shall be a special treasure to Me above all people; for all the earth is Mine.” In the book of Revelation chapter 7 we are also included in this awesome benefit, “After this I beheld, and, lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues, stood before the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands”
2. He was child of Abraham to whose descendants God had promised special favors (Matthew 3.9, “and do not think to say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham as our father.’ For I say to you that God is able to raise up children to Abraham from these stones.”. We will come to see shortly that we are also sons of Abraham because of our faith in God’s Holy Anointed One, our Lord Jesus Christ.
3. He had been given the Law. We have the entire Bible at all times
4. He had been circumcised into God’s covenant. We have been saved and given The Holy Spirit.
So Paul now addresses the Jew directly, and he commences by listing out his claims.
‘But if you bear the name of a Jew, and rest on the law, and glory (boast) in God, and know his will, and approve the things which are excellent, being instructed out of the law, and are confident that you yourself are a guide of the blind, a light of those who are in darkness, a corrector of the foolish, a teacher of babes, having in the law the form of knowledge and of the truth,’
Paul now addresses, as a Jew himself, some of these positions. The Jew claimed that:
• He bore the name of ‘a Jew’, which meant ‘praise’. He thus saw himself as praised by God, and as one of the covenant people. Are you aware that you also have a name that is special? You are a ‘Christian’. Instead of being afraid to let others know, you should boldly and gratefully let others know who you believe in.
• He rested on the Law. His confidence lay in the fact of his possession of a God-given Law which shaped his opinions and guided his thoughts. Thus he considered that whilst he might not always succeed in observing it, the very fact that he was committed to it (in theory at least) would be sufficient. People today think that because they joined a certain church they are confident that they are going to heaven. It also does not matter to them that they fail to live up to the commands written down by our Precious Holy Spirit.
• He gloried (or ‘boasted’) in God. He delighted in his knowledge of the one, true God in Whom he gloried or ‘boasted’, this in contrast with a world which worshipped idols. He not only gloried in his heart, he boasted about his God in front of others. This idea most likely came from the writings of Jeremiah chapter 9 verse 24, ‘but let him who glories glory in this, that he understands and knows Me, that I am the LORD Who exercises covenant love, judgment (justice) and righteousness in the earth, for in these things I delight.’ The Lord Jesus instructed His disciples to go into all the world and make disciples. People today could care less. If they have their ticket punched for heaven let others do the work while they have their cake and eat it also.
Sadly they missed Jeremiah’s point which was that what they should glory in was a God Who delighted in love, justice and righteousness for ‘ALL’. What they overlooked was that Jeremiah was talking about boasting in a God Who exercised ‘in the earth’, not only covenant love, but also justice and righteousness, the concerns that Paul has in mind. He treated the whole world the same.
• He knew His will. Through the Law he considered that he knew what the will of God was, in contrast with the philosophizing and feeling in the dark of the Gentiles. His knowledge of God’s will come from the Scriptures. Again he felt that this made him special. Yet he never considered that the Scriptures revealed that what God willed was for him to be wholly obedient to that will of God, and threatened curses if he was not. This list comes from the book of Deuteronomy chapter 27. Today many pick and choose which Scripture to obey.
• He approved things which were excellent, or alternately ‘the things which differ’. Thus the Jew believed that the Law gave him the right perspective on God and the world so that he approved of what was most excellent, even if he did not quite live up to it. His intentions were good, even if he did not carry them out. The bible tells us to work out our Salvation with ‘fear and trembling’. This kind of puts to rest the idea of having just good intentions doesn’t it?
• He was instructed out of the Law. He prided himself on the fact that his beliefs and his way of life rested on the God-given Law that he possessed, which was read out at the synagogue each week. This was how he knew God’s will and knew what was excellent. And he learned it from experts. When I grew up I believed in a ‘Holy Day of Obligation’. If I missed church I committed a ‘mortal sin’. I even would not eat meat on Friday thinking that it offended God. So, if I came close to doing all the ‘do’s’ and avoided the ‘don’ts’ I was in the ‘good’ with God. How stupid was that?
• He was confident that he was a guide of the blind. Everyone in the world was without Yahweh Elohe Yisrael – The Lord God of Israel. Today, it’s okay to say ‘God’ but do not say, ‘The Lord Jesus Christ.’ The world needs the Prince of Peace to rule mankind. How can they believe unless someone tells them? When is the last time that you told someone about the Lord Jesus Christ?
• He is a light to those in darkness. God’s word is a light to human’s life’s path. Without it humans wander in darkness. I like this poem which says it all that is needed to be said on this topic;
My friend,
I stand in Judgment now,
And feel that you’re to blame somehow.
You always had the words to say
Yet, never did you point the way.
You knew the Lord in truth and glory,
But never did you tell the story.
My knowledge then was very dim;
You could have led me safe to Him.
Though we lived together on the earth.
You never told me of the second birth.
And now I stand this day condemned.
Because you failed to mention Him.
You taught me many things, that’s true.
I called you ’friend’ and trusted you.
But I learn now that it’s too late.
You could have kept me from this fate.
We walked by day and talked by night,
And yet you showed me not the Light.
You let me live, and love, and die,
You knew I’d never live on high.
Yes, I called you ‘friend’ in life.
And trusted you through joy and strife.
And yet on coming to the end,
I cannot, now, call you ‘my friend’
• He is a corrector of the foolish. Without knowledge of the True and Living God. Mankind worshiped the wrong things. They worshipped idols. Now who in their right mind today would bow before stone and wood statues? [try visiting some other churches]. In addition check out this list;
. sports
. recreation
. education
. relationships
. friends
. hobbies
They Jews were teachers of babes. Their responsibility to teach their children was a prime concern of the Law in which we find out in the book of Exodus chapter 12 verses 26-27, “And it shall be, when your children say to you, ‘What do you mean by this service?’ “that you shall say, ‘It is the Passover sacrifice of the LORD, who passed over the houses of the children of Israel in Egypt when He struck the Egyptians and delivered our households.’ ” So the people bowed their heads and worshiped.’ In today’s culture parents in most cases do not share the word of God with their children. The only biblical training children are receiving if the parents attend a bible believing fellowship is about 45 minutes a week.
• He had in the Law the very form of knowledge and of the truth. Whereas others wavered and argued and debated, and had no certainty, he knew that in the Law he had ‘the very form of knowledge and of the truth’, a structured revelation from God. He had it detailed in writing. It gave him a certainty which the world lacked. The problem was that he only selected the parts that suited him. To this fact the Jew is way ahead of Christians. I would say that most Christians are ignorant of what the Bible teaches. In all honesty check out yourselves. How much time do you spend in His Word?
It will be noted from this that there is no mention of any recognition on their part of a need to be obedient. It was all about their opportunity to have knowledge. They considered that that knowledge would somehow result in their being excused in the day of Judgment. Paul will, however, point out their error. Knowledge of what was good was an excellent thing, but if it was not followed up with obedience then it became a heavy weight around the neck.
We can, however, see from this why the Jews had such false confidence in their position. Nor would Paul have denied much of this, although he clearly saw them as drawing the wrong conclusions from it. Indeed he was ready to concede the superiority of the Law to anything that the Gentiles possessed (they were after all the Christian Scriptures). But what he argued was that this put the Jews in a position of greater responsibility to actually obey the Law, rather than a lesser one, and what he was very much against was the idea that their privileges made them untouchable by judgment. He would have argued that to be enlightened was good, but only if it then resulted in living according to that enlightenment, something which the Jews did not do. Otherwise their knowledge could only condemn them for not responding to the light that they had. He will go on now to bring this out.
‘You therefore who teach another, do you not teach yourself?’
The question is sarcastic. They claim to teach others how to live, but they do not themselves live as they teach. Thus they seemingly fail to teach themselves.
‘You who preach that a man should not steal, do you steal?’
For example they taught that it was wrong to steal, something that was central to the covenant. And yet they themselves stole in all kinds of ways, by sharp business practices, and as a result of their contempt for the Gentiles, not considering theft from Gentiles as really theft. Paul no doubt had examples in mind.
‘You who say that a man should not commit adultery, do you commit adultery?’
Another sin central to the covenant was adultery. Again Paul probably knew that adultery was fairly widespread among Jews, even the most strict. The pull of the flesh is strong.
‘You who abhor idols, do you act as temple-robbers?’
The point here is that they claimed to abhor idols, and indeed in many cases did so, and yet themselves in some way benefited from heathen temples by illicitly making gains out of temple possessions. It is quite possible that Paul knew of instances where Jews, in areas where they had a strong community, had attacked heathen Temples, seeing them as a kind of sacrilege, possibly in retaliation for what was done to synagogues, and that they had then appropriated for themselves what they found there on the grounds that it was defiled, but could become undefiled in the hands of Jews. Some, however, do see the temple in mind as the Temple in Jerusalem and relate it to the first part by making it mean that they abhor false religion, seeming to be very holy, but take dishonest advantage of their own Temple, revealing that they are unholy. This could then refer to robbing God by withholding tithes (Malachi 3.8) or by dishonest practices in the Temple like the ones that aroused the anger of Jesus (Mark 11.15-17).
‘You, who are boasting in the law, are through your transgression of the law dishonoring God.’
This may in fact be a question (‘are you through your transgression dishonoring God?’) or a statement (’you are through your transgression dishonoring God’). But whichever it is, it is applying what he has said above. They boasted in the Law, and yet through breaking it they dishonored God, for God would be judged by outsiders on the basis of whether teachers of the Law followed their own teaching of which they boasted. Their very boast concerning the knowledge of the Law was thus bringing God into disrepute because of their hypocrisy.
‘For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you, even as it is written.’
Indeed he declares that as a result of their activity the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles, and claims Scriptural support, without citing it. It may be that he had in mind Isaiah 52.5, ‘those who rule over them howl, says the Lord, and my Name is continually blasphemed all the day’.
The Jew then goes on to his second argument. If the possession of the Law and the benefits described above will not ensure that the Jew is treated differently by God, what then about the fact that he is circumcised? Is that not the mark of God’s special covenant relationship with him? In reply Paul would have agreed that circumcision was the sign of a special covenant relationship. What he would have disagreed with was the idea that God would as a result soften His attitude towards sin, something for which he would find good support in the Old Testament, especially in Lamentations. Indeed, he would argue that the covenant relationship makes greater demands on the Jew because he has thereby committed himself to obeying the covenant. The Gentiles had not committed themselves to anything. The Jew therefore has a greater responsibility to observe the Law, and if he fails to do so then he is liable to be ‘cut off from Israel’.
One answer lies in the fact that to many baptism is seen as parallel to circumcision, thus in their case the same arguments can be applied to baptism. Baptism profits for someone who is truly responsive to God, but is of little value for someone who is not obedient to God. As 1 Peter 3.21 says, its purpose is not a washing away of defilement, but the answer of a good conscience towards God. So in what follows we can read ‘baptism’ for ‘circumcision’. But it is of equal importance in bringing out that the Jew has no special position before God unless he is fully living in accordance with the covenant. As he will point out, the true Jew is the person, whether Jew or Gentile, who is truly circumcised in heart.
‘For circumcision indeed profits, if you are a doer of the law, but if you are a transgressor of the law, your circumcision is become uncircumcision.’
Paul then puts circumcision in perspective. His reply is that circumcision does indeed profit those who are doers of the Law from the heart, for it marks them off as observers of the covenant. It is therefore of great value if they are FULLY observing the covenant into which circumcision has introduced them. As a consequence they would be gaining the full benefit from the covenant that God has made with them. On the other hand if they openly and deliberately transgress the Law in any way they are thereby rejecting the covenant relationship, and with the covenant broken their circumcision becomes of no value. It becomes just what circumcision was to most of Israel’s neighbors, something of no significance as far as God was concerned. For then it had ceased to be genuine covenant related circumcision, and had become the equivalent of non-circumcision. The Scriptural claim of the need to be circumcised in heart was proof of that. In other words the man who is circumcised should recognize that he has received a special privilege, membership of the covenant, and should as a consequence throw himself into obedience to the covenant, i.e. to the Law. Many Jewish teachers would have agreed with him in this, but only to a certain extent, for Paul’s thesis will then be that no one, neither Jew nor Gentile, is fully a doer of the Law, in which case circumcision is seen to be valueless.
‘If therefore the uncircumcision keep the ordinances of the law, will not his uncircumcision be reckoned for circumcision?’
This then leads on to a more startling claim by Paul, and that is that if the uncircumcision keep the ordinance of the Law, then his uncircumcision will be reckoned as circumcision. This may have had in mind the God-fearers, those Gentiles who had thrown in their lot with Judaism but did not want to be circumcised. Many of them were more dedicated to the covenant than circumcised Jews. Paul may be saying that if their hearts are right, and they are wholly committed to the covenant, it does not matter whether they are circumcised or not.
His point would then be that a theoretical Gentile might observe the whole Law (although in practice that was impossible) and thus be reckoned as circumcised even though he was uncircumcised. He is not really demonstrating how an uncircumcised man can be acceptable to God, but simply demonstrating that circumcision of itself means nothing in such a situation. This would have come as a terrible shock to many Jews who placed great reliance on circumcision.
‘And will not the uncircumcision which is by nature, if it fulfil the law, judge you, who with the letter and circumcision are a transgressor of the law?’
Then logically if someone was naturally uncircumcised because he was not a Jew, but fully fulfilled the Law, would he not be in a position to act as judge on those who had the letter of the Law and circumcision, but were transgressors of the Law? Thus the tables would be turned. It would not be the Jew who on behalf of God judged the Gentile (which was the Jewish viewpoint), but the Gentile who on behalf of a righteous God judged the Jew, in spite of the Jew having the Law and being circumcised. Paul’s whole point is that circumcision in itself does not put a person in a position of special privilege unless he ‘does what the Law says’.
It should be noted that, although he does not cite the fact here, Paul’s position is supported by the Old Testament where on a number of occasions the Scriptures emphasize that it is not outward circumcision that is important, but the circumcision of the heart which is not strictly physical circumcision. What is required is a work in the heart, wrought by God.
With regard to the uncircumcised judging the circumcised look at our Lord Jesus’ words in Matthew 12.41-42; ‘the men of Nineveh will stand up in judgment with this generation and will condemn it’, for they had truly repented, unlike Israel. They were the uncircumcised who would judge the circumcised.
‘For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is that circumcision which is outward in the flesh, but he is a Jew who is one inwardly (hidden), and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit not in the letter, whose praise is not of men, but of God.’
Paul now concludes his argument by describing ‘the true Jew’. Based on his arguments above, being a Jew is not something dependent on a man’s own outward claims or on the external evidence of circumcision. It is rather based on what he is hidden (there is no physical sign apart from behavior), when he demonstrates a genuine response to God’s law. Thus we learn now that the true Jew is one who is circumcised in heart, in the spirit (in genuine spiritual response or in the Holy Spirit or both) and not in the letter The man whose heart is right with God in the Spirit is the one who pleases Him. Here we have the clear indication that the true Jew is the believer in Christ through the Spirit.
This conclusion is of immense importance. It indicates that Paul sees all true Christians as true Jews as revealed in Philippians 3.3, “For we are the circumcision, who worship God in the Spirit, rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh,”
Conversely unbelieving Jews had ceased in God’s eyes to be Jews because they had been ‘cut off’ (11.17 onwards). and all true believers, whether Jew or Gentile, form the true ‘Praise’ [Jew] of God.
So Paul has demonstrated that neither possession of the Law nor physical circumcision put a man into a position of special privilege unless they are accompanied by full obedience to the Law, something which is impossible. Instead therefore it is necessary to be circumcised in heart ‘in the Spirit’ in order to be a true Jew.
‘Whose praise is not of men, but of God.’ There is a play on ideas here. The word Jew, signifying initially a man of Judah, contains within it the thought of ‘praise’. But Paul wants it to be clear that the only one who is a true Jew and who is really deserving of praise from God is the one who is ‘circumcised in heart’, in His Spirit. He Alone Is the one whom God will praise.
So, to all my Jewish brothers and sisters – Shalom!
