Romans 2:1-5God’s Impartial Judgment

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) 1. God’s Impartial Judgment (2:1-5) a. The Guilt of those who Judge (2:1-3) b. The Guilt of the Unrepentant (2:4-5)

NASB Text of the passage:“Therefore you are without excuse, every man of you who passes judgment,

for in that you judge another, you condemn yourself; for you who judge practice the same things. And we know that the judgment of God rightly

falls upon those who practice such things. And do you suppose this, O man, when you pass judgment upon those who practice such things and do the same yourself, that you will escape the judgment of God? Or do you think

lightly of the riches of His kindness and forbearance and patience, not knowing that the kindness of God leads you to repentance? But because of

your stubbornness and unrepentant heart you are storing up wrath for yourself in the day of wrath and revelation o

f the righteous judgment of God,” Romans 2:1-5

Interpretive Insights: Condemnation for the unrepentant (2:1-5):

Overview of the passage: In this passage Paul begins to change the focus within his discussion concerning the sinfulness of mankind. He has addressed mankind in general in the first chapter. However, Paul recognizes that it is human nature to try to justify oneself by comparing oneself favorably to others. Those who would consider themselves to be moral people would tend to conclude that Paul’s comments about the general evil disposition of mankind would not be applicable to them. Their reasoning would be that the moral code, which they embraced, demonstrated that they are different from those to whom Paul was referring. However, Paul wants those who embrace a moralistic way of life to see that their sinfulness is even more profound than those who are oblivious to the concept of wickedness and morality. It is their understanding of what is right and wrong that makes them that much more accountable before God to do what is right. Therefore when they fail to do

64

so they become even more guilty than those the moralist tends to look down upon.

Interpretive observations: The epistle to the Romans is a very logical and methodical presentation of the Gospel. Each new passage builds upon the previous passage addressing some further implication or responding to some anticipated objection. The last half of chapter one verses 18 through 32 have been addressing why the Gospel is necessary. In other words the Gospel is God’s power of salvation; but from what? The answer is from the wrath of God. Paul then went on to articulate why God’s wrath has been aroused and in what way it is already being expressed. The revelation of the wrath of God around us is to awaken us to the reality of the final judgment. From Paul’s perspective then the fundamental problem that mankind faces is how our sin is resulting in the arousal of the wrath of God. The fundamental need of humanity is for the Gospel as the only means by which His wrath can be averted. Further he is demonstrating that true religion is not about finding a god that makes life work for you, but rather relating to the real God who represents the only source of all that will truly satisfy our souls.

These previous verses have also explained the true nature of man. Human beings are not born into a state of moral neutrality. Instead all have been touched by both evil and goodness. The source of human goodness is that we were originally created in God’s image. In addition to this God restrains the degenerating impact of sin in our lives so that some of that goodness continues to be a part of man’s nature by the general grace of God. The source of the evil is from the Fall. Mankind chose its own way rather than God’s, and ever since has suppressed the truth in order to pursue our own passions without guilt or concern. In this section Paul is addressing those (both Jew and Gentile) who would distance themselves morally from the sinful patterns that he has addressed in chapter one. His purpose is to demonstrate that even those who consider themselves to morally upright are also in need the Gospel. The second chapter opens with the word "therefore", which indicates a conclusion that is drawn from what was previously written in chapter one. The nature of the conclusion is that since all people in general practice wickedness, and cheer on the wickedness they see in others (all the while knowing those things are wrong), therefore anyone who does them is guilty before God despite any other considerations. This conclusion then introduces a challenge to those who would see themselves as being above this general indictment of mankind. Paul will demonstrate that even those who condemn others for their evil ways are in reality equally guilty before God. But just who is Paul addressing here? The person indentified by the pronoun “you” is a moralist. This is a person who knows enough about what

65

is right and wrong to pass judgment on others, yet demonstrates moral hypocrisy by doing the very same things that he condemns in others. When Paul uses the expression “O’ man” he is using in Greek what is known as the vocative case of the noun; but why? What does it mean? Paul is using a form of argument that he employs frequently in this epistle (2:17; 9:19; 11:17; 13:3; 14:10), which is called the diatribe. It is a type of argumentation wherein one responds to various questions or beliefs that expressed by an imaginary opponent. This is a way of taking a universal principle and making it more vivid and applicable by framing it as if it were a conversation in which one was responding to a particular individual. In verse one, we also find an adjective that is used to express that one is without defense. This same adjective (anapologetos) was used in the previous chapter (in 1:20). These are the only two places in which this word occurs in the NT. The fact that Paul repeats this same infrequently used word suggests that Paul is identifying the two groups as having precisely the same standing before God. The English phrase in which this adjective is found “you are without excuse” is a translation of the Greek phrase “anapologetos ei” which means to be without or beyond any possible excuse in a legal sense. The imagery is the same as it was in Romans 1:20; it speaks of one who is on trial and has no answer to the charges and evidence against him. This adjective is in a predicate position and is addressing the state of the moralist as being without excuse. The verb “you are” is in the present tense, which means that it is an ongoing repetitive state of affairs. The use of the present tense indicates that the lack of any reasonable justification or defense is continually made evident. Paul further clarifies whom he refers to as those who are without an excuse before God, it is “every man of you who passes judgment”. The word judgment is a translation of krino. It is in the form of a present active participle, nominative masculine singular, with a definite article. In this case the word “judgment” functions as the subject of the sentence. The word itself means to judge (by distinguishing or discriminating between good and evil – or to give an opinion after separating and considering the particulars of a dispute). It can also mean to evaluate, criticize, or find fault with. As a participle it acts like a verbal noun, and in the present tense carries the idea of a continually repeated action. It is interesting to note that the word for judge occurs six times in the first three verses of this chapter (twice in the form of a noun and four times in the form of a verb). The word for “all” in Greek is pan, and this has come into English as a prefix meaning all or everything (i.e. Pan-American, meaning that it relates to the entire American continent). The term for “another”, indicates someone who is another of a different kind. Therefore the one judging perceives the one being judged as being in some sense distinct from himself. In this case the distinction drawn is between the moralist and the one he considers to be immoral, and thus inferior to himself. Literally translated the entire sentence would read, “Therefore you are beyond any defense, O’ men, all the ones who are making judgments, for in

66

what things you are continually judging others you are condemning yourself”. Therefore the accusation is against those who critique the character and behavior of others as a consistent pattern of life. Paul is not evaluating whether it is right or wrong to judge in this way, he is simply addressing those who do this, and by it see themselves as morally superior. From there Paul goes on to write, “for in whatever you judge another you condemn yourself”. The indictment of these individuals (explaining why they are without excuse), comes in the last part of verse one, “…you condemn yourself; for you who judge practice the same things.” Again the word for “judge” is the same one. The Greek word means to pronounce a sentence against someone, or to judge someone as guilty. In divine judgment in particular it includes the verdict as well as the execution of that verdict, (cf. Mark 16:16; 1 Cor 11:32; 2 Peter 2:6). However the word that is translated as “condemn” in English is “katakrino”. This word is an intensive form of the previous word for judging. It is combined with a preposition, and with this prefix it means “to judge against, to condemn, or to pronounce sentence”. This term applies to a negative conclusion of the judgment process. There is intended irony in the word choice. The one who seeks to sit in judgment upon others for their sins, is in fact by doing so putting himself under judgment. The moralist is found guilty before God because the practice of judging others demonstrates clearly that the person in fact knows the difference between right and wrong. One word is translated as “same things”, and it is emphasized in the sentenced by being placed at the beginning of the phrase (contrary to where it would normally be found, after the verb. The idea is to draw out the hypocritical irony of the moralist’s judgment. Literally this last phrase of verse one should read, “…yourselves you are continually condemning, for the one who is continually judging is continually practicing the very same things.” The continued use of the present tense emphasizes the guilt of the moralist by demonstrating that their habitual practice, carries with it habitual evidence of guilt. The word translated as practice is in the present tense, and means doing something habitually. In this first verse of chapter two, Paul wants his readers to recognize that having a moral awareness does not justify you (or provide an excuse) before God. Apparently this is the delusion that some in Paul’s day labored under, just as many do in our day. Paul wanted the moralists to understand that the truth that simply being aware of right and wrong does not make one morally superior to others. If one in fact does the same things as those whom one condemns then it makes a person no better than those he looks down upon. So the knowledge of right and wrong does not justifying us. Actually the knowledge and outward judgments of right and wrong make a moral person much more culpable before God because it demonstrates clearly that the evil which is done does not result from ignorance. The self-righteous tend to make two crucial errors, they underestimate God’s standard of righteousness, and they underestimate their own

67

sinfulness. To exaggerate the faults of others while minimizing one’s own is a universal temptation. Of course Paul is not addressing a specific person, but rather is addressing anyone who judges so that they might understand the implications of the fact they are judging others. The choices of the Pharisees demonstrate the essence of the sin that Paul is referring to in this passage. They were scrupulous in their pursuit of Biblical morality so as to please God, and yet all they could achieve was hypocrisy:“Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you cleanse the outside of the cup and dish, but inside they are full of extortion and self-indulgence.

Blind Pharisee, first cleanse the inside of the cup and dish, that the outside of them may be clean also. Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you are like whitewashed tombs which indeed appear beautiful outwardly, but inside are full of dead men's bones and all uncleanness. Even so you

also outwardly appear righteous to men, but inside you are full of hypocrisy and lawlessness. Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! Because

you build the tombs of the prophets and adorn the monuments of the righteous, and say, 'If we had lived in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets.' Therefore you are witnesses against yourselves that you are sons of those who murdered the prophets. Fill up, then, the measure of your fathers' guilt. Serpents,

brood of vipers! How can you escape the condemnation of hell?” Matthew 23:25-34Many suggest that the sin Paul is rebuking is the act of judging itself. Those who say this believe any and all judging is wrong because it places an individual in the place of God and is therefore akin to idolatry (the main sin discussed in chapter one). However, such a conclusion is in contradiction to what Christ Himself said was the real problem when it comes to judging others. Although it is true that there are several passages which teach that we are not to sit in judgment of others (Rom.14:13; I Cor.4:5; Col.2:16; Jas.4:12); it is also true that still other passages teach that we are called to make judgments in our relationships with others (I Cor.5:12; 6:4; 10:15; 11:13; 14:29; Hebrews 5:14). Therefore the question is: when is it wrong to judge, and when is it right? The answer is we are warned about judging in non-Biblical matters and drawing conclusions about another’s heart and ultimate state before the Lord. However we are commanded to recognize objective good and distinguish it from evil in regard to those issues the Bible does speak to. In this passage Paul is saying that the one who judges others condemns himself because he is guilty of the same sorts of sins as the man he judges. Therefore the sin that Paul is confronting is hypocritical self-righteousness. It is important to understand that the faculty of moral judgment is something that God approves of and encourages us to exercise. Every believer ought to

68

be able to discern between what is right and wrong. In the OT we have a prime example of this in how Nathan the prophet confronted David in regard to his sins:

“So David's anger was greatly aroused against the man, and he said to Nathan, ‘As the Lord lives, the man who has done this shall surely die! And

he shall restore fourfold for the lamb, because he did this thing and because he had no pity.’ Then Nathan said to David, ‘You are the man! Thus says the Lord God of Israel: 'I anointed you king over Israel, and I delivered you from the hand of Saul. I gave you your master's house and your master's wives into your keeping, and gave you the house of Israel and Judah. And if that

had been too little, I also would have given you much more! Why have you despised the commandment of the Lord, to do evil in His sight? You have killed Uriah the Hittite with the sword; you have taken his wife to be your

wife, and have killed him with the sword of the people of Ammon.’” II Samuel 12:5-10In fact the point that Paul is making in this passage is exactly the same one that Christ made when He spoke about judging in the Sermon on the Mount (which is perhaps one of the most misunderstood passages in Scripture):“Judge not, that you be not judged. For with what judgment you judge, you will be judged; and with the measure you use, it will be measured back to you. And why do you look at the speck in your brother's eye, but do not consider the plank in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, 'Let me remove the speck from your eye'; and look, a plank is in your own

eye? Hypocrite! First remove the plank from your own eye, and then you will see clearly

to remove the speck from your brother's eye.” Matthew 7:1-5The problem that this sin reveals is that a person can be so taken up with the faults of others that he does not consider his own. After all nothing is as blinding as the certainty that only others are guilty of serious morals flaws. Human judgment is flawed and self-serving, but Paul reminds his readers that “we know the judgment of God is according to truth” (vs.2). The sentence begins with a conjunction that is translated as “and” (NASB), or “but” (NKJV) depending upon the translation, and only the context can determine which. It either has a sense of continuing the thought, or creating a mild contrast. In this case the context suggests that in this verse it is a continuation of the same thought as in verse one, and is therefore best translated as “and”. The word Paul employs for what his readers know is “oida”. This Greek term carries the connotation of an awareness of that which is commonly known and obvious. Paul frequently appeals to what his readers know as he advances his argument. The idea is that he is appealing to them to be reasonable and think things through what he is teaching them. The following are examples of how Paul continues this pattern in the letter:

69

“Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptizedinto Christ Jesus were baptized into His death?

Romans 6:3“Do you not know that to whom you present yourselves slaves to obey,

you are that one's slaves whom you obey, whether of sin leading to death,or of obedience leading to righteousness?” Romans 6:16

“Or do you not know, brethren (for I speak to those who know the law),that the law has dominion over a man as long as he lives?”

Romans 7:1“For we know that the whole creation groans and labors

with birth pangs together until now.” Romans 8:22“God has not cast away His people whom He foreknew. Or do you not know

what the Scripture says of Elijah, how he pleads with God against Israel, saying,”

Romans 11:2

The word Paul uses for judgment is “krima”. This term refers to a judicial verdict in an unfavorable sense. Paul is reminding the moralist that it is the judgment of God that is the real issue, which even the moralist must face. And that judgment will be “according to” truth. The expression “according to” refers to how one thing relates to another, a comparison in terms of conformity to a rule or standard, and that standard is the truth. In what sense is God’s judgment according to truth? First, it is saying that it is according to how things actually are rather than how they may appear and thus means that this judgment will not be done in a superficial hypocritical way, but rather according to the facts. Man’s view of himself tends to be a little like a fun house mirror that distorts the image reflected in it. The sinful orientations within a person can distort the way they see themselves, which results in justifying themselves for doing the same things they condemn in others. This can then delude someone into thinking that God will do the same. Then Paul writes that God’s judgment is directed “against those who practice such things”. The word against is a translation of a preposition that when used with an accusative indicates a spatial reference. Therefore a more precise translation would be that it is “upon” the sinner. In a sense it pictures judgment coming down from heaven and resting upon those who are guilty. Three times in the first three verses of this chapter Paul repeats the same expression:- “…for you…practice the same things” (vs.1)- “…those who practice such things” (vs.2)

70

- “…those who practice such things” (vs.3)But what is he referring to when he uses this phrase? The answer to what those things are is found at the end of chapter one:

“…although they know the ordinance of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death…”

(Romans 1:32, Italics mine) The reference in chapter one is clearly to the list of sinful practices that are recorded in verses 29 through 31. Therefore, Paul continuing in the same train of thought is referring back to this same list of sins here in chapter two. In light of this list Paul asks the following rhetorical question:“And do you suppose this, O man, when you pass judgment upon those who

practice such things and do the same yourself, that you will escape the judgment of God?”

Paul is not suggesting that the Jews (who are not singled out here, but are included) or those gentiles who were moralists would be guilty of homosexual and adulterous sins as the outright pagans, instead the focus of the indictment is upon the aforementioned list which consists of sins that all people tend to commit. Through this question Paul is making his point about why the moralist is just as guilty as even the worst immoral heathen. Because the crucial difference between “moral” people, and “immoral” people from a human perspective evaporates when it comes to the nature of how God judges people. The issue is not how much “relatively” better the moralists may perceive themselves to be, the issue is that in spite of their superior recognition of what they should and should not do, they still do the very things that they condemn in others. Because of that they are found guilty by their own impure sense of judgment. Therefore how much more guilty will they be found to be by God whose standard is perfect righteousness? The word “suppose” or “think” (depending upon the translation) is a translation of the Greek term “logizomai”. The basic meaning is to count in a literal arithmetic sense. It is often used in a metaphorical sense in contexts that have nothing to do with numbers. When this word is used that way it meant to take into account, to reckon, or to consider. This is a word that refers to how we reason and think, which is why it figures so prominently in this epistle (it is used 19 times by Paul in Romans), because it suits the argumentative style of the letter. In the sentence Paul uses two words that relate to what one does:

“you pass judgment on those who practice such things and do the same yourself”

A question that is fair to ask is whether or not these are translations of two different words or the same word? If two different words why did Paul use two different words which convey such similar meanings (was it for variety or

71

to clarify a distinction)? The word translated as practice is “prasso” and the word translated as do is “poieo”. “Prasso” has a more general sense, whereas “poieo” denotes a more deliberate act. In addition “prasso” tends to refer to something habitual, whereas “poieo” refers to a single act. Therefore it is safe to conclude that Paul is literally saying that these individuals were passing judgment on those who habitually sinned, and yet are caught in a specific instance of doing one of those very sins by deliberate choice. The point then seems to be that it is that one act by the moralist that makes him guilty even though he is not sinning with the frequency of those he condemns. In Greek the forms of the Greek verbs incorporates the personal pronouns that relate to the subject of the sentence. Therefore even though there are individual words that exist for personal pronouns in the subjective case they frequently are not employed in a sentence, when personal pronouns for the subject are included, as in this verse, it for the purpose of emphasis. In this verse Paul includes the subjective personal pronoun for the second person singular “you” which is in this case means that Paul wants to draw attention to that word to convey the absurdity of their thinking in assuming they would escape God’s judgment. The word “escape” is a translation of “ekpheugo”, which means “to flee away” from something. This word is used to refer to escaping prisoners (Acts 16:27), to how Paul escaping from a city where a governor was holding him captive (II Cor.11:33), or avoiding the coming of God’s wrath ( I Thess.5:3). Therefore the main idea is escaping from a threat or from being under someone’s power. The moralist did in fact expect to escape because unlike the pagans who were experiencing God’s wrath, the moral person though he was above such a judgment. In fact he believed he was experiencing God’s grace and kindness, and assumption Paul would soon address. The necessary conclusion in this verse is that those who do what they condemn in others must receive the same punishment. Almost everyone tends to justify themselves on the basis of either being better than someone else (expressed in various ways) or by suggesting that they have done their best and aren’t that bad. In doing this, the moralist person is choosing to be willfully ignorant of the fact that God judges according to the requirement of absolute sinless righteousness. God’s judgment is according to what is true about the entire person and not just the façade that is presented to others.

Condemnation for the Unrepentant (2:4-5):

Paul continues his discussion about the spiritual fate of the moralist in verse four where he writes:

“Or do you despise the riches of His goodness, forbearance, and longsuffering”

72

Paul suggests a rationale behind why the moralist might think he will escape God’s judgment. He thinks that simply embracing a relative level of righteousness will be sufficient before God, because he is misinterpreting God’s present leniency toward his sinfulness. The particle “or” is used to introduce a question which is parallel to a preceding one or which supplements it. Therefore in this case the purpose of “or” is not to propose an alternative explanation for their choices, rather this is a different way of saying the same thing, in other words to think that they are going to escape God’s judgment is to despise His goodness. The word translated as “despise”-kataphroneo means to underestimate the significance of something, and thus fail to esteem it as one should. Further it means to give little regard to something, so as to hold it in contempt, literally to look down upon something. The form of the verb indicates it is in the present tense emphasizing that this is an ongoing reality. An even clearer understanding of this word can be gained by examining how it is used in other contexts:“No one can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will hold to one and despise the other. You cannot serve God

and mammon.” Matthew 6:24“Take heed that you do not despise one of these little ones, for I say to you

that in heaven their angels always see the face of My Father who is in heaven.”

Matthew 18:10“What! Do you not have houses in which to eat and drink? Or do you

despise the church of God, and shame those who have nothing.” I Corinthians 11:22“Let no one look down on your youthfulness, but rather in speech, conduct,

love, faith and purity, show yourself an example of those who believe.” I Timothy 4:12

“…Jesus, the author and perfecter of faith, who for the joy set before Him endured the cross, despising the shame…”

Hebrews 12:2“and especially those who walk according to the flesh in the lust of

uncleanness and despise authority. They are presumptuous, self-willed. They are not afraid

to speak evil of dignitaries” II Peter 2:10 The first reference in Matthew describes the consequences of trying to maintain divided loyalties, and how eventually the one that looses out will be

73

viewed with distain. The second reference in Matthew is used for having disdain for children. In First Corinthians the word is used to describe disregard to the point of viewing something as trivial. In First Timothy the idea is of seeing something so negatively that it causes you to tend to disregard a person entirely. In Hebrews the word has the flavor of disgust or revulsion. Finally, peter uses the term for having contempt for those who are in authority. Altogether this usage helps us see that in the present context Paul uses the word to mean, that the moralists tended to regard the mercy and grace of God as so insignificant that they dismissed it as worthless and irrelevant. However Paul’s viewpoint was radically different. This is indicated by word order again. Rather than beginning with the subject or verb, Paul begins the clause with the word for riches. Why does he do this? Paul wanted to emphasize that God’s goodness is not in short supply. In fact Paul understood that the graciousness of God is incomprehensibly rich toward unworthy sinners, despite the fact that the moralists saw very little value in it. Undoubtedly this was due to the massive overestimation of their own goodness, and acceptability before God (as it is with many in our day). Paul elaborates on the riches of God’s graciousness. He describes it as goodness, forbearance, and longsuffering. The precise meaning of these terms is as follows:

Goodness (chrestotetos) This word refers to goodness of heart or kindness. It means to mellow what would otherwise be harsh. It is good for use, profitable, and benevolent. It is used to describe what God gave us in salvation in contrast to what our sins deserved (Eph.2:7). The idea is one who does or gives abundantly to othersin a generous way.

Forbearance (anoches) this word means to hold back, delay and thus to be tolerant and forbear. Particularly this is done in response to the wrongs of others. The example is used of how God refrained from punishing sins committed under the Old Covenant that were not yet truly atoned for (Rom.3:25).

Longsuffering (makrothumias) this word means patience. It pictures one who demonstrates great restrain in resisting the urge to lash out in response to a wrong (James 5:10). It is also used of enduring hardship without giving into the internal temptation to give up (Heb.6:15). Longsuffering obviously does not mean irresolution or compliance. It is not swayed by emotion but has the end in view. The delay may allow time for repentance but it also increases the wrath. The goal is not passive, for even vessels of wrath serve to bring into relief the mercy of God displayed in vessels of mercy (9:22 ff.).

Together these words paint a rich tapestry of how God demonstrates abundant goodness and patience to sinful mankind by withholding judgment. They also demonstrate the guilt of those who reject that grace and instead

74

depend upon their own flawed righteousness (the flaw of their righteousness is demonstrated by doing the very things they judge as evil in others). These three words all describe the mercy of God. The word goodness is particularly emphasized. This is evidenced by how the same word is used again in the participial phrase. “not knowing that the goodness of God leads you…”. Therefore these three words are to be taken as one. They are all modified by the word “riches” and refer to how God suspends the infliction of punishment by restraining the expression of His wrath in spite of how it is deserved by the sinner. The last two words “forbearance & Longsuffering” share in common the idea that the endurance is temporary. Paul continues his train of thought in the next phrase where he writes:

“not knowing that the goodness of God leads you to repentance?”Paul writes that to despise God’s goodness and patience indicates that one does not even understand why God chooses to exercise such restraint. God’s expression of kindness exists only to lead sinners (even those who do not see themselves as such) to repentance. The idea here is willful ignorance in that they do not want to be shaken out of their self-satisfied state. The point is that the moralist does not wish to see. Such people are willfully blind to the fact that no one deserves this constant withholding of judgment, and that even the moralist himself is guilty of sin before God. Therefore their willful ignorance clarifies the nature of how they despise God’s goodness. The word for “leads” (ago) is in the present tense and is a conative or voluntative present. It portrays the subject as desiring or attempting to do something. There is an uncertainty as to whether this end will be achieved. Therefore the idea here is that God is giving an opportunity for repentance rather than giving repentance itself. The word “repentance” refers to a change of mind which results in a transformation in our thoughts, feelings, and will so that we turn to God and away from sin. More literally it carries the connotation to experience a change of mind that is reflected in a change of attitudes and behavior. Biblical repentance is not feeling sorry for a sin, but is a true turning away from that sin. Therefore Paul is teaching that the reason God showers His goodness upon mankind (by giving mankind good things, and withholding judgment) is to give mankind an opportunity to see the goodness of God, and turn to Him and away from rebellion and sin. The tragic reality is that some conclude that the reason God withholds judgment is because it doesn’t really matter to him that we are disobeying His Laws. Nothing could be further from the truth. In addition by way of application it is helpful to note that there is in every willful sin an expression of contempt of God’s goodness. As Paul continues his thought into verse five he begins the next sentence with the short Greek word de”. This word can functions as a connecting word and depending upon the context can be translated in a number of

75

different ways. In this case it is properly translated as “but” because it is used in an adversative way and demonstrates that what follows is in contrast to what preceded it. Instead of understanding that God’s goodness was extended in order to lead them to repentance they refused to repent “in accordance with your hardness and your impenitent heart”. Paul is clearly citing a cause and effect relationship. It is because of the ongoing refusal to repent that even the moralist is storing up ever more vast amounts of God’s righteous anger against himself. The expression “in accordance with” means by the rule or pattern of their hardness, and has a causal sense and could be translated “because of”. The connection between a lack of repentance, and a stubborn heart is one that frequently shows up in Scripture:

“Therefore understand that the Lord your God is not giving you this good land to possess because of your righteousness, for you are a stiff-necked

people.” Deuteronomy 9:6“But the house of Israel will not listen to you, because they will not listen to

Me;for all the house of Israel are impudent and hard-hearted.”

Ezekiel 3:7Apparently this is due to the fact that a refusal to bend to any way but one’s own is at the heart of the sinful condition. The word “hardness” when applied to a person’s heart has the metaphorical meaning of being resistant to input, and difficult to penetrate with what one is trying to say to them. It could be translated as stubborn. From a Biblical standpoint the heart is the inner self that thinks, feels, and decides. The heart is that which is central to man. The heart may think, understand, imagine, remember, be wise, and speak to itself. Purpose, intention, and will are all activities of the heart. Paul wants his readers to understand that the consequence to the refusal of sinful men to repent is “that they are treasuring up for yourself wrath” (vs.5b). The word translated as “treasuring” is thesaurizo, and it means to gather and lay up in storage. The word is in the present tense and indicates that the one who judges is accumulating more and more wrath against himself . The idea of treasuring up almost always referred to something good so then in this context there is a touch of irony because the sinner is not storing up blessing but actually wrath. Paul uses a reflexive pronoun to demonstrate that the person himself is the active agent who is responsible for piling up wrath against them. The word for treasuring is the idea of investing for the future. Jesus used this word to indicate the way in which a person should prepare for their ultimate future:

“Do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy and where thieves break in and steal; but lay up for yourselves

76

treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust destroys and where thieves do not break in and steal. For where your treasure is, there your heart will

be also.” Matthew 6:19-21Here Paul is addressing that those who refuse to repent are doing precisely the opposite of what Christ said should be done, and are laying up for themselves increasing amounts of God’s anger which will descend upon them one day with horrifying consequences. Therefore Paul is addressing the most profound expression of foolishness. Because this word is in the present tense it means that the moralist by continually refusing to repent is constantly increasing the build up of God’s anger against himself. The consequence being that with each passing day he becomes more and more guilty before God. Jesus Himself in a later sermon cited an historical example of people who did this very thing:“And as it was in the days of Noah, so it will be also in the days of the Son of Man: They ate, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, and the flood came and destroyed

them all.” Luke 17:26-27For over 100 years these people had an opportunity to repent and did not, and in the end they were destroyed because of their refusal. Paul is saying the same is true for anyone who does not repent and who instead presumes upon the grace of God. In our world moral people tend to conclude that God owes them good things. Therefore when tragedies and hardships come it is seen as an inexplicable mystery. But the truth is that all sinners deserve is calamity and judgment. The true anomaly is that good things in this life tend to be the exception rather than the rule. This is only due to God’s grace and it is intended to lead people to repentance.An application point is to address how people tend to think that good things are to be expected and that the bad is an anomaly. When in a fallen world living before a holy God it should be just the opposite. Next, Paul goes on to explain when the time will come to receive what one has been treasuring up; it will be “in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God” (vs.5c). The expression “the Day” is used by Paul to refer to the eschatological (a word that means those things which relate to the end of human history as we know it) future when God will break into history to complete the salvation of the righteous, and consummate judgment upon the wicked. This is seen in how Paul uses the expression in the following verses:

77

“…awaiting eagerly the revelation of our Lord Jesus Christ, who shall also confirm you to the end, blameless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ.” (I Cor. 1:7-8)

“each man's work will become evident; for the day will show it, because it is to be revealed with fire…” (I Corinthians 3:13)

“And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption.” (Ephesians 4:30)

For I am confident of this very thing, that He who began a good work in you will perfect it until the day of Christ Jesus.” (Philippians 1:6)

“holding fast the word of life, so that in the day of Christ I may have cause to glory because I did not run in vain nor toil in vain.” (Philippians 2:16)

“…for I know whom I have believed and I am convinced that He is able to guard what I have entrusted to Him until that day.” (II Timothy 1:12)

References throughout the Scriptures to the “day of wrath”, are quasi-technical expression for the time of final judgment:

“The Lord is at Your right hand; He shall execute kings in the day of His wrath. He shall judge among the nations, He shall fill the places with dead

bodies,He shall execute the heads of many countries.”

Psalm 110:5-6“The great day of the Lord is near; it is near and hastens quickly. The noise of the day of the Lord is bitter; there the mighty men shall cry out. That day

is a day of wrath, a day of trouble and distress, a day of devastation and desolation, a day of darkness and gloominess, a day of clouds and thick

darkness, a day of trumpet and alarm against the fortified cities and against the high towers. I will bring distress upon men, and they shall walk like blind men, because they have sinned against the Lord; their blood shall be poured

out like dust, and their flesh like refuse. Neither their silver nor their gold shall be able to deliver them in the day of the Lord's wrath; but the whole land shall be devoured by the fire of His jealousy, for He will make speedy

riddance of all those who dwell in the land.” Zephaniah 1:14-18

“I looked when He opened the sixth seal, and behold, there was a great earthquake; and the sun became black as sackcloth of hair, and the moon became like blood. And the stars of heaven fell to the earth, as a fig tree

drops its late figs when it is shaken by a mighty wind. Then the sky receded as a scroll when it is rolled up, and every mountain and island was moved

out of its place. And the kings of the earth, the great men, the rich men, the commanders, the mighty men, every slave and every free man, hid

themselves in the caves and in the rocks of the mountains, and said to the mountains and rocks, ‘Fall on us and hide us from the face of Him who sits

78

on the throne and from the wrath of the Lamb! For the great day of His wrath has come, and who is able to stand?’”

Revelation 6:12-17A common theme of Biblical teaching is this idea of the ultimate and eventual judgment of all men at an undisclosed time in the future. Frequently the Biblical writers warn the wicked to prepare for this inescapable and terrifying reality. It is described as a day of wrath in this verse, because it is the time where God will finally express the anger that has been “stored up” during this age. The idea is not that finally God will have had enough, and simply blows His top. Instead that day is the appointed time of judgment where all evil and wrongdoing (that naturally arouses the anger of a righteous God) will be appropriately and finally punished. In fact the saints from a heavenly viewpoint express wonder why this judgment is suspended for so long (Revelation 6:10). Paul wrote previously (1:18ff) that the wrath of God is being revealed right now in the degeneration of mankind as God allows them to go their own way. However in this verse Paul is referring to the ultimate revelation of God’s wrath on the Day of Judgment. Paul once again writes that God’s wrath will be revealed. However this time he is not referring to the revelation of the ongoing expression of his wrath but to its ultimate expression. The word (apokalupsis) means an unveiling or disclosing of something previously hidden or unknown. Because God in this age does not execute immediate and predictable judgment upon those things He despises, the true nature of God’s view of right and wrong (and even of the appropriate punishment for evil) is somewhat obscured from our view. Not in the sense that it is unknowable (for Romans 1:18-32 says it is), but that it is easy to ignore because it is not on consistent display before us. Therefore many of us, as typified by the moralist in this passage, tend to greatly (and purposely) underestimate how far we come short of God’s righteous expectations, and tend to discount the reality and terms of God’s eventual judgment. However Paul is saying, on that day what God sees as right and wrong, and how God executes justice will be clearly and plainly visible. But why does Paul add that God’s judgment is righteous? Isn’t that already obvious? The word used here is not found anywhere else in the NT. However the adjective and noun form of it is found in John 7:24 & II Thess.1:5. The sense is that when God judges it is absolutely righteous, never deviating in the slightest from what is just. The reason that Paul adds this is to again underscore that the judgment of God is absolutely just and according to truth. Paul’s point that lies in the midst of all of this is that once this dramatic revelation takes place it will be too late to profit from what is learned. Moralists tend to see themselves as being too good for God to judge and therefore are complacent in anticipation of their ultimate future. Paul wants them to understand that their need for the Gospel is as acute as anyone’s.

79

For in spite of having a superior moral code (to the overtly evil) they themselves do not live up to this code and therefore are acknowledging their own guilt before God. Paul is exhorting them to prepare for the “real” judgment that is to come, which will be according to God’s standard (not the moralist’s) and will come when the time of God’s patience has come to an end. The faulty assumption of the moralist is that if God’s wrath is not in evidence upon his life as it is to the outright pagan (because he was not guilty of the truly gross sins mentioned in chapter one) it is not coming at all. In other words what has resulted is a smug self-confidence rather than humble gratitude. Truth resisted results in the hardening of one’s heart; making it that much more difficult to recognize and submit to the truth the next time one is confronted with it. Therefore the idea of resisting the truth that one is exposed to is an extremely risky choice.

Conclusion: This passage is a continuation of Paul’s explanation of who is in need of the Gospel. In these verses Paul has demonstrated that it includes those who are morally upright from a human perspective because they violate their own understanding of what is right and wrong. In addition to this they are guilty of presuming upon the grace of God by assuming that His expression of goodness means that He will not judge them. However Paul warns that the delay in judgment is merely an expression of grace allowing for an extended opportunity to repent, and the refusal to repent results in the accumulation of wrath in anticipation of the Day of Judgment.

80