Understanding the parenthetical in Romans 2
Aug 20, 2017 5:08:31 GMT
Post by Colossians on Aug 20, 2017 5:08:31 GMT
This material is for the teaching of the Body of Christ, however the author reserves copyright over it.
Forward
The pragmatic of Romans 2:13-15 is not readily understood by the modern Western mind:
1. The Jew shall be judged by the law (v10,12).
2. The Gentile (also) ‘hears’ the law (v13-15).
The argument appears incomplete.
________________________________________________
UNDERSTANDING THE PARENTHETICAL IN ROMANS 2
[13] “(For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified. [14] For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves: [15] Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;)”
Although the Gentiles were not given the law, because the law is nevertheless written on their hearts1 – evident from the fact that they act according to conscience – it is indisputable that they (nevertheless) ‘hear’ the law.
1 The law is written on the heart of all flesh as a result of Adam’s eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil: Paul is not (yet) here speaking of the regenerate Gentile (as he does later at v26,27) – he is not speaking of the writing of the law on the heart as per Jer 31:331a – but of the (default) (pagan) Gentile in general terms as contrasted with the (ostensibly-Godly) Jew.
1a See our work: “The New Covenant: Jeremiah 31:31-34”.
And so the argument Paul is presenting is that, given that the Gentiles ‘hear’ the law and yet – with regard to their (ostensible) position in the scheme of things – are (of necessity) not justified before God – they being (ostensibly) more wicked than the (ostensibly-justified) Jews – there is (also) (of necessity) no value to the Jew in any (mere) hearing of the law: if he wishes to differentiate himself from the Gentile, he needs to not only hear the law, but do it!
Contrary to first impressions then the argument is in fact complete in that it is primarily directed toward the Jew, who would understand the challenge presented to him in the idea that his position was no better than that of the Gentile.
The argument is complete by way of implication.
Amen.
Forward
The pragmatic of Romans 2:13-15 is not readily understood by the modern Western mind:
1. The Jew shall be judged by the law (v10,12).
2. The Gentile (also) ‘hears’ the law (v13-15).
The argument appears incomplete.
________________________________________________
UNDERSTANDING THE PARENTHETICAL IN ROMANS 2
[13] “(For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified. [14] For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves: [15] Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;)”
Although the Gentiles were not given the law, because the law is nevertheless written on their hearts1 – evident from the fact that they act according to conscience – it is indisputable that they (nevertheless) ‘hear’ the law.
1 The law is written on the heart of all flesh as a result of Adam’s eating from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil: Paul is not (yet) here speaking of the regenerate Gentile (as he does later at v26,27) – he is not speaking of the writing of the law on the heart as per Jer 31:331a – but of the (default) (pagan) Gentile in general terms as contrasted with the (ostensibly-Godly) Jew.
1a See our work: “The New Covenant: Jeremiah 31:31-34”.
And so the argument Paul is presenting is that, given that the Gentiles ‘hear’ the law and yet – with regard to their (ostensible) position in the scheme of things – are (of necessity) not justified before God – they being (ostensibly) more wicked than the (ostensibly-justified) Jews – there is (also) (of necessity) no value to the Jew in any (mere) hearing of the law: if he wishes to differentiate himself from the Gentile, he needs to not only hear the law, but do it!
Contrary to first impressions then the argument is in fact complete in that it is primarily directed toward the Jew, who would understand the challenge presented to him in the idea that his position was no better than that of the Gentile.
The argument is complete by way of implication.
Amen.