Romans 2. The class addressed in this section is that of the educated or cultured Gentile. It is personified by an educated man who is judging the barbarian in ch.1. However, he is sadly lacking in his understanding of God’s ways in judgment. He is deceived into thinking that superior knowledge absolves him from guilt. Actually, the opposite is true. Paul explains to this man the true nature of God’s judgment. This second class is not differentiated from the first class by the seriousness of the deeds they do, but by the light they are privileged to have. This brings God Himself into the picture, and that is a blessed thing! In this chapter we also get a thesis on the judgment of God. When someone is either careless of their own conduct, or very judgmental of others (the case of the educated Gentile), it is because they themselves don’t understand the judgment of God. Paul gives six facets of the judgment of God in vv.2-16. This chapter shows us that education and culture do not preserve a person from the indulgence of the flesh. Recognition of evil does not give a person power to live a righteous life, but it does make you more responsible.

Judging others. A large part of the Gentile world is quite civilized and educated, and tries to appear morally upright. This civilized class of people looks with disgust upon the lewdness of the ignorant pagan world and they try to distance themselves from it, by “judging” the others, if not in their words, then in their policies. However, this shows that they know the difference between right and wrong, and so their conscience is functioning. Therefore, this class is actually guiltier than the heathen because they have the witness “their conscience” (v.15) in addition to creation.

Western immorality. We often think of the homo-sexual community in America in the context of Rom. 1, because that is where such behavior is mentioned. However, really they are not barbarians, but educated civilized people, and qualify for a higher degree of responsibility, as in Rom. 2:1-16. They are immoral persons who conduct themselves outwardly in society in a professedly upright way.

 

v.1 Inexcusable.The educated Gentile is inexcusably under the judgment of God for two reasons – not separate reasons, but one compounds the other. First, the moralist shows that his conscience is functioning. Civilized people often try to distance themselves from baser people, yet are no different inside. By “judging” the other he unwittingly reveals that his conscience is working. Second, the moralist shows that he is guilty of the same sins (only more sophisticated). Recognition of evil does not give a person power to live better. The flesh is the flesh.

 

Should we judge? This brings up an interesting question: is it wrong to judge others for their actions? The Lord Jesus in Matthew 7 told his disciples not to judge lest they be judged. However, in numerous other places in the New Testament we are told to judge. It is important to understand the context in each case.

There are things that we are to judge, and there are also things we are not to judge. The well known “Judge not” of Matthew 7:1, which is frequently misused and often bandied about as an excuse for a sinful life, applies to judging what is concealed (1 Sam. 2:3), and is connected with being overly harsh toward our brethren. We have clear instructions to judge what is revealed. We are to judge doctrine (1 Cor. 10:15), open sin (1 Cor. 5:12), disputes among brethren (1 Cor. 6:2), and public ministry (1 Cor. 14:29). All these things are open. What are we not to judge? We are not to judge the technicalities of a person’s actions merely by the appearance (John 7:24), someone’s personal convictions (Rom. 14:3), or someone’s service for the Lord (1 Cor. 4:3).

In Romans 2:1 it is a Gentile moralist judging the uneducated Gentile in order excuse his own sin. To argue from this that we cannot make a moral judgment about revealed sin is completely illogical. It would be to contadict what Paul himself is doing in Romans 1.

 

 

v.2 According to Truth, and Because of Sins. The expression “we know” is one of common knowledge or confidence in an established fact; it is definitely going to happen. God’s judgment is “according to truth”; it is not by man’s standards, which continue to decline morally, but God’s, which are as stable as His throne. God’s perception is reality. The judgment will fall on them “which commit such things”; because actions have consequences (see Eph. 5:5-6).

 

 

v.3 Inescapable for All. The judgment of God is inescapable for all (Psa 89:14). Looking down on and judging others for their sins might make a person feel superior, but does not absolve them from guilt.

 

 

v.4 Often Delayed to Allow Space for Repentance. The mercy of God in delaying His judgment (2 Pet. 3:9) only further incriminates man. His goodness would include everything that God does as the preserver of all men (1 Tim. 4:10), e.g. “Nevertheless he left not himself without witness, in that he did good, and gave us rain from heaven, and fruitful seasons, filling our hearts with food and gladness” (Acts 14:15-17). His forbearance and longsuffering have to do with the space that God gives man for repentance. Unbelieving man rejects the goodness of God, and uses the token of his goodness as a reason to persist in his wicked ways; “Because sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil” (Ecc. 8:11). Notice that often a denial of God’s judgment is coupled with a denial of His love. This “repentance” is not just an intellectual thing; the conscience must be engaged. The results of true repentance will be evident (Matt. 3:8) by fruits in the life.

 

 

v.5 Proportional to a Man’s Cumulative Guilt. The expression “treasurest up” gives us the illustration of one putting money in the bank; accumulating guilt. Every time you reject the grace of God, the “pile” of wrath coming to you grows higher. The word “impenitent” means unthinking or unfeeling; recall that “pent” is Latin for “think”. The term “the day of wrath” refers to the day of the second resurrection when the books are opened, etc. (Rev. 20:12).

 

 

v.6 According to Man’s Works. This is a principle that runs throughout scripture, see Luke 12:47-48, Rev. 20:12, Prov. 24:12, Psa. 62:12, and Rom. 6:23. Does God make a difference, or discriminate when He judges men? In Rom. 3:22 it says “for there is no difference” but that is in regard to “all have sinned”. When it is a issue of how “bad” a person has been in their life, then “each” is different (v.6).

 

 

vv.7-10 Quid Pro Quo (“This for that”). Paul next describes two lifestyles that may be lived, and the results of each. These two lifestyles apply to everyone, but it is important to see that Paul has not brought in the gospel yet. When Paul speaks of those who continue in good works being given eternal life (v.7), he is not defining how a person gets eternal life (that is, through faith), r how he gets a nature that is capable of these things (that is, through new birth), but rather describing the lifestyle that ends there (see Acts 10:35). “The truth” (v.8) is whatever truth that the person has, not necessarily the full gospel of the grace of God. In many cases it is a lesser revelation; creation, Old Testament, etc., and witnessed by a person’s conscience. Notice that when judgment is finally mentioned (v.9) it is upon every “soul” not body. Anguish begins with death, long before the lake of fire (Luke 16:23). In v.9b and v.10b it says “to the Jew first” because the Jew was the first to receive the higher revelation from God, in both Old and New Testaments.

 

	vv.8-9	vv.7+10
Lifestyle of…	Unbelief	Faith
shown by…	Contention Disobeying the truth Obeying unrighteousness	Patient continuance of good works Seek glory, honor, incorruptibility Working good
Results in…	Indignation Wrath Tribulation Anguish	Glory Honour Peace Eternal life (in the future aspect)
Applies to…	Everyone… “to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile”

 

v.11 An Impartial Judgment. Here we have a plain statement that God is an impartial judge and will not be influenced, swayed, or bribed the way worldly judges often are:

 

v.12 God’s Judgment Accounts for the Amount of Light Given We will be judged according to the highest moral standard we have known (Luke 12:47-48). Lest someone try to abuse this principle to excuse those without the law, Paul shows in the next three verses that the Gentiles are not excused.

 

 

vv.13-15 Responsible to Act on the Light Given. Man is responsible to do that which the Word of God or his conscience commands. The privilege of having more light is a great benefit, but God holds man responsible for actions. Verse 13 is not teaching justification is by works (Rom. 3:20). This would contradict the rest of the book. Rather, it shows that “doing” the law could justify a person in this sense: if you had never sinned you could have the prospect of being justified. However, the law could never put you “in Christ”. Once we have sinned, the law can never bring us into an innocent condition. God looks at deeds, not merely ideas. It’s one thing to entertain God’s standard in our thoughts, it is another thing to live it out in our lives. Here we learn that that man has a law (conscience), even without the law (mentioned 4x). God has impressed the basic elements of the law on mankind (Roman law, Hammurabi’s code, etc.). This is what C.S. Lewis called “the law of nature”. The Jew profited because he had it all written down. The word “law” is found three times in this verse and it refers to a moral principle. When it is “the law” it specifically refers to the Mosaic law. It is not that the Law of Moses is written in the hearts of all men, but that “the work (or, moral import) of the law” is there because their consciences have given them the knowledge of good and evil. “Accusing” and “excusing” (see v.1) are two things humans do only because they have a conscience (“con” with “science” knowledge). The fact that man is capable of judging makes him responsible! This proves that God has plenty of ground to judge a person found without faith in the day of judgment even if they don’t have the written law.

Moral Standards and the Existence of God. The existence of moral sensibilities in human civilizations around the world proves the existence of God. There are numerous examples of ancient legal codes from civilizations that had no contact with the law of Moses: the Code of Ur-Nammu, king of Ur (Chaldea – 2050 B.C.), the Code of Hammurabi (Mesopotamia – 1754 B.C.), and the Twelve Tables of Roman Law (Rome – 451 B.C.). As Paul says in Romans 2:15, these civilizations “have no law” from God, but they “practise by nature” some of the very same “things of the [Mosaic] law”. Why? Because the “work of the law” is “written in their hearts”, and this is evident by the functioning of their consciences. If objective morals exist, there must be an objective moral standard. What makes something good or evil? It it a societal construct? Are morals a biological result of evolution? No. There are certain moral values and duties that span across cultures and ages. Objective morals do exist. Therefore, an objective moral standard exists. God is the best explanation for an objective moral standard! For this reason, Paul declares that conscience makes man responsible to believe and obey God.