Romans 1–3

In no other letter does the apostle put his apostleship on such firm and formal ground. At Rome he could point to no work of his own. He had never seen the Romans. He was still their apostle, because he was the apostle to the Gentiles.

Paul was not called to be an Apostle, but he was called an Apostle... Paul loved to call himself a slave of Jesus Christ. He knew the Lord had redeemed him. He was no longer his own. He belonged to the One who had bought him and made him one with Himself. His highest ambition was to serve the Lord Jesus Christ. His Apostleship he puts in the second place. The highest and best is to be in reality a willing, devoted servant of the Lord.

"Paul, a servant of Christ Jesus." He was not a servant of any society or party, but of Christ Jesus. Few of us can follow Paul in those few words, and yet how important it is that we do, if our service is to be acceptable to Christ! Have you thought of this as to the whole course of your life and service?

Apostleship was not passed down from father to son, like a Jewish priest's place. It was not voted on by the assembly, as the seven men chosen to look after the daily food in Jerusalem were. Still less could a man take it for himself. He was an apostle by calling as the saints were called.

Here, then, we see Paul a bond-servant of Jesus Christ, an apostle by calling, separated to the gospel of God. This word "separated" covers a great deal. Paul was separated from the world, from the law, and from Judaism, and separated to the glorious good news of God.

We may fall short of it, but we too should know what we are separated to. The name saint that we carry says we are separated, and the same grace that separated the apostle separates us.

He calls the gospel to which he was set apart, the gospel or glad tidings "of God": the Holy Spirit shows us where it comes from. It is not what man ought to be for God. It is not simply the way man can come to Him on His throne. It is the thoughts of God, and His acts, we may add, towards man... we never truly understand the gospel until it is to us the gospel of God — God at work, showing us His nature and His will in grace towards man.

Here we have God's gospel. The phrase shows that grace springs from God Himself. It rules out the common idea of an angry God whom Jesus Christ must win over. If it was necessary for our happiness that the Son of man should be lifted up on the cross, it is His own Son whom God has given.

The fullness of God's spontaneous and active love toward man may be a truth that always feels new to us, because human thoughts prevail so constantly even in the saints. Yet it was no new thing to God. This gospel went out late in the world's history. But He had promised it beforehand through His prophets in holy writings. Those prophets always appear in the past, when everything on man's part was hopeless.

The prophets had already promised this gospel beforehand in holy scripture. But now the announcement was no longer a promise. We do have precious promises for the path we must walk through this world, but the gospel is no promise. Instead, it is the fulfilment of the promises of God, so far as they relate to the Lord's incarnation, His finished work and His resurrection (1 Peter 1:11-12), and to His being glorified — though the Epistle to the Romans does not deal with that last point. Notice here that the "holy scriptures" are the promises of God, and that the prophets who gave them are God's prophets.

This Gospel was promised by God's prophets in the Old Testament Scriptures. The announcement came in many ways — in types, in the sacrifices, in direct predictions. Jewish believers looked forward to its accomplishment. You find the promises and predictions of the Gospel throughout the Old Testament, from Genesis 3 to the prophet Malachi. The Old Testament is the foundation of the Gospel. The rejection of the Old Testament as the inspired Word of God is therefore a very serious matter.

The glad tidings announced by Paul are also confirmed by Holy Scriptures. God's prophets promised them in past days. God's servants proclaim them now, in this day of grace. When they are preached, they carry the authority of the Holy Writings and confirm the promise made there. So in preaching the gospel, the apostle constantly appeals to the Scriptures.

But the Gospel, to which Paul says he was separated, had been "promised beforehand through His prophets in the holy Scriptures." So the Gospel was not a secret hidden in the heart of the Creator. The prophets witnessed to it in the Holy Scriptures, right from the beginning of the fall of man until the end of Malachi. These Scriptures make a clear distinction between the Gospel and the mystery. The prophets witnessed to the Gospel during the whole time of man's testing. The mystery stayed the secret of God while that testing lasted.

But this had been the subject of earlier promise. The prophets had spoken of these things. All prophecy had been the utterance of the Spirit of Christ; and all the promises found their object in His most blessed Person. So the "glad message of God" is simply the announcement that He has come — and in Him all the promises of God are yes and amen.

The first subject of the gospel is the person of the Lord Himself, before you have anything done for us — "concerning His Son Jesus Christ our Lord" (Rom. 1:3); not — concerning "us." Too often the claim of Christ's person gets lost behind the thought of an individual being forgiven.

"The gospel of God" is "concerning His Son Jesus Christ." If God is its source, Christ is what fills it through and through. Every single feature of it is joined to the Person of Christ by a living, vital link. The good news is the news that concerns Him. You will find it nowhere else, but you find it fully in Him.

It was the Son of God who became David's seed by becoming man. Though He was rejected as Son of David, He was declared "the Son of God with power … by the resurrection from the dead." … The idea that a Person in the Godhead, who cannot be described, became the Son of God by becoming man is a false theory, given a fresh lease of life in our day. That the Son of God became the Son of David by becoming man is the truth presented in the Gospel of God.

Scripture says He was made of the seed of David according to the flesh. What does that mean, when it speaks of our Lord being made of the seed of David? Solomon was of the seed of David. But he did not exist until he was born. He was the seed of David. He was not made of the seed of David. But here Scripture tells us of a Divine Person, who was made of the seed of David, who came of David's seed according to the flesh. Is not the Deity of our Lord implied, His Manhood stated?

The first 17 verses of Romans 1 serve as a preface. In them the person of the Lord Jesus, the Son of God, comes first as the primary subject of the gospel. He is seed of David according to the flesh, and so the fulfilment of the promise. He is proved Son of God with power according to the Spirit of holiness. His life was according to that power, and His resurrection was the proof of it.

He was the Son of David, and David called Him Lord by the Holy Spirit, so there was no mistake. The explanation is that it was the Son of God who became the Son of David according to the flesh, as Romans 1:3 states so plainly. Once we fully acknowledge the Deity of Christ, everything is clear.

The great Gospel letter, written to the believers at Rome, begins by showing that this is the foundation of all the rich blessings unfolded later for faith. Here, then, lies open before us the revealed secret of the believer's blessings now, and of Israel's blessings by and by. This also explains many passages that seem obscure. Some speak of Him as Man, others of Him as God, and sometimes one verse involves both.

First, Paul presents Christ as the Son. This speaks of His divine and eternal Personality, unchanged by anything He became. Second, he presents Christ in His incarnation, "come of David's seed according to flesh". This speaks not of His inherent Personal glory, but of what He became as a perfect Man. He was the Son before He came of the seed of David. He did not become the Son by becoming incarnate. Third, He became flesh, and the glory of His Person is guarded here: as a Man He is marked out from all others as the Son of God, in divine power. Fourth, Christ is acknowledged to be Jesus Christ, our Lord. Those who believe God's testimony about Him gladly come under His rule by owning Him as their Lord and Master.

When the blessed Lord asked them, "What do you think about the Christ? Whose son is he?" the scribes answer, "The son of David." They had no greater conception of their Messiah than this. And truly He was the son of David… But He had a greater glory than that of son of David; He was also Son of God. A mere son of David could have been no better than his father.

Power raised Him, but it was not simply power — power will raise the wicked, yet will not declare them sons of God in any sense. This raising is according to the Spirit of holiness. It is according to the nature and character of God, glorified in all Christ's ways, and sealed and marked out in resurrection.

Many take "a Spirit of holiness" (there is no article before "Spirit") to be the Lord's divine nature. That, they argue, is the proper contrast here: "according to the flesh," "according to the spirit." But Scripture uses no similar language anywhere else for the divine nature of our Lord.

The Spirit of holiness that marked Him as He passed through this defiled world was the power by which He rose from the dead, having broken the power of death.

Romans 1:4 does not limit the meaning to His own resurrection determining Him to be the Son of God with power. That is not what the verse says. It says that resurrection of the dead — the raising of dead persons — was the great proof that defined Him to be the Son of God with power. His own resurrection was the most astonishing instance of it, no doubt. But His raising of dead persons during His ministry was a witness too, and the resurrection of His saints later on will be the display of it.

If I lift up this table, I do it by power. At the same time, the act of lifting the table is what proves this power.

The resurrection justified Jesus. It declared Him "Son of God with power according to the Spirit of holiness" when the world had crucified Him as an impostor.

The cross, the death, and the blood-shedding of Jesus are now past. He was raised from among the dead, and the same Spirit of holiness now sets Him before us in risen life, with not a trace of the sin for which He suffered… This is what the letter opens out to us as the measure and pattern of our new standing and state before God.

This, then, was the glorious Person that Paul came to present. Christ was gone from the world; but Paul is sent as an apostle to represent Christ. He comes "on behalf of His name". To be a fitting representative, he had received from Christ "grace and apostleship". Not only apostleship, but the needed grace to exercise the apostleship. He did not receive his commission from man, or by any human training, or ordination.

Whatever Paul was as an apostle, it was all grace received. Did not the Lord shine across his path, in pure, free favour, at the very moment he was mad — yes, raging mad — against Christ?

Take the case of the soul's submission to the righteousness of God. Romans calls this "obedience of faith." It does not mean the practical obedience that faith produces in daily life. It means the first act of believing God's word. This is the heart's obedience. It is the person's obeying the truth, the soul's acceptance of God's testimony to His Son.

If Paul comes as the representative of Christ, "on behalf of His Name", it is to bring people to submit to Christ, to bring them under His rule — to obey Him. Only those who believe will submit, so it is called the "obedience of faith".

This is not the obedience of law, which is only outward. It is the obedience that springs from a heart purified by faith. The gospel calls for, and produces, full confidence in the name of Christ — a confidence that bows in subjection to Him.

This obedience of faith was "among all nations," not of all nations. The grace and truth must go to men as such. God, revealed in this way, could not be for Jews only. But the time had not come to bring all nations under His power. It was time to call a people out of them — "to take out of them a people for his name."

"To the obedience of faith among all nations" (Rom. 1:5), and then it is added, "for His name" — showing how His glory is bound up in this. As I have said, the brightest, dearest, most welcome honour His name could receive, it receives from the faith of a sinner.

Scripture keeps obedience and practice in the right place. Good works do not make the Christian; they show him and suit him. They cannot exist before a person is born again... To speak to such people of obedience as a means of salvation proves complete ignorance of ourselves and of God. It shows that, like Israel at Sinai, we confuse responsibility with power.

This expression is found in only two places: Rom. 1:5 and 16:26. Here the gospel is presented for obedience of faith. The other passage presents the Church — the mystery — as revealed also for obedience of faith. Paul's twofold ministry is presented in this way.

Such was his passport: what was theirs? "Among whom are you also, called of Jesus Christ." They were among the nations. His commission was toward all the nations. Was he a called apostle? So were they saints, not by birth nor by ordinance, but by the call of Jesus Christ who had called him as apostle.

God calls on man to obey Himself by receiving Jesus as the Lord. The name of Jesus is the revelation of God. But verse 6 presents Jesus as Himself acting in calling and giving life at His will. They were "the called of Jesus Christ." The Apostle knew well what this meant. Christ Himself had chosen him and called him, a vessel of divine mercy.

Just as a soldier is called to be an efficient soldier. But he must be, and is, a soldier by calling or enlistment first… Let us take the apostleship of Paul to explain this. "Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated to the gospel of God." Do you notice the words "to be" are in italics? They are not in the original. The literal translation is this: "an apostle by calling," just like the soldier, "a soldier by enlistment, or calling." The Lord did not enlist Paul to reach apostleship at some future time. He made him an apostle there and then.

The believers at Rome were among these Gentiles. They were saints — not by birth, not by ceremonial institutions, but by divine call. The Jews were born a holy nation in comparison with the Gentiles. The Roman Christians were saints by the calling of Jesus Christ, and beloved of God.

No church authority can confer the status of saint after death; still less can anyone acquire it by self-effort in life. Copying the manners of the Prince of Wales will never make you Prince of Wales. Striving after holiness will never make you a saint. People become saints by divine call. They hear the voice of God speaking to them in the gospel. It tells them of their sins and of the Saviour's atoning blood, and they bow to the message in faith… In a moment they are transformed from sinners into saints. It is God's doing; and it is a marvel of infinite grace. The robber of Calvary and the religious zealot of Tarsus, Mary Magdalene and the excellent Sarah, came from very different backgrounds. Yet all alike were saints. Each one had experienced the same gracious work of God in their souls.

Paul writes to these saints at Rome. They had believed the gospel he declared to them. He assures them that they were now "the called of Jesus Christ." As such they were attached to Him in heaven above, with His name resting on them. Not only were they blessed through Him, but they were to be His representatives in this world.

A saint is a sanctified or separated person… No doubt we ought to be holy in our ways, our walk, and our whole manner of life. But we must know our place and calling first, before we can live up to it. A person must be my child to behave as my child. Another has well said Christian duties flow from Christian relationships.

"Called to be an apostle" is just as wrong as "called to be saints" in Romans 1:7. He was an apostle at that moment, and they were saints in the same way. There is no need to add any words in either case. In both, adding "to be" weakens the sense and makes it false, instead of defining it properly. For the saints in their call, as for the apostle in his, it was a fact. It was not a birthright, and it was not something they achieved. They became what they were — apostles or saints — by God's call.

And then we are saints. We are not called to be saints, or to become saints, by living a separated life. God has made us saints in Christ, sanctified — that is, set apart for Himself. Nothing we do could ever make us the beloved of God. No effort of ours to live consistently and away from evil could make us saints of God. God has done it for us in Christ. And because we are saints, we can live holy lives.

This is not the side of God's love we find in John 3:16, where it is at work in a world of sinners and shown to everyone. This is the personal link kept for true believers alone. It is not just that the sun shines on all people. The light and warmth of that sunshine have broken into their old frozen state, and have stirred a love in return — a love that delights to find itself taken hold of and blessed according to God's love.

He does not write to them as a church, as he normally did when writing to a church he had founded. He addresses his letter to all in Rome who are loved by God, called saints. As the apostle sent to the nations, he could write to them all with the authority of Christ.

The Bible gives us no details about how the church in Rome was formed. But we do know that on the day of Pentecost there were Jews from Rome in Jerusalem for the Jewish Feast of Pentecost. Acts 2:10 speaks of visitors from Rome, both Jews and converts to the Jewish faith. If some of them came to believe in the Lord Jesus, the first Christians could have been living in Rome around the year 30 AD.

The greeting is the same as in his other letters: "Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ." Grace is the active favour of God, supplied in abundance. Peace is the calm that comes from submitting to Him and sharing close fellowship with Him.

We need grace every day. We also need peace of heart all the time, or the circumstances we pass through will overwhelm us. It is peace of heart the apostle mentions here, not peace of conscience. What a privilege to be a Christian! A slave in Rome, if he was a believer, had a portion from God the Father and from the Lord Jesus Christ that the Emperor, with all his wealth and all his power, knew nothing of.

This is the apostle's opening wish or prayer, here as in Romans 1:7 — from God in His relation as Father to us, and from Jesus Christ as Lord (compare 1 Corinthians 8:6). Joining the two names like this would be impossible in an inspired writing, and an insult anywhere, if they were not one in the unity of the divine nature. True and sovereign favour was the spring; grace was the result, proving and magnifying its source. Let us enjoy the gift and adore the Giver.

Warmth of affection was natural, so to speak, to one living like this with God — "my God" — while in this world. His joy was not in wrongdoing — wretched flesh delights in what is like itself. His joy was in what was of God, "through Jesus Christ," even though he only knew it by report. He could appeal to God for the best of all evidence of his thankfulness to Him for it, and of his love to them.

This letter reveals the ground of a sinner's standing before God. So notice the first thing the apostle thanks God for, through Jesus Christ, on behalf of them all: "your faith is proclaimed in all the world." Faith has the first place. Dear reader, is your faith well known, or is it doubtful whether you really believe God? This is the first point to settle. Everything else will follow in order after that.

His warm and steady affection kept carrying them on his heart before God. It delighted in the good report of their faith announced in the whole world. Such a report could spread easily from that seat of central authority. Rome made its will and mind felt to the far edges of its vast empire and beyond.

His thanksgiving is all the more beautiful when we remember that Paul had never seen the Roman believers. His heart holds no spirit of envy. It overflows with rejoicing at the work God had plainly done in that distant land.

Paul had a deep longing to see the saints at Rome, but until now something had hindered him. We see here proof of the wisdom and foreknowledge of God. Suppose Paul or Peter had founded the assembly at Rome. What an argument that would have been for so-called apostolic succession! There is no evidence as to whom the Holy Spirit used in forming that important assembly. There is no evidence that any apostle had been there at this time. Yet the faith of this assembly — or rather of all the called saints — was spoken of in this way and well known.

The report of their faith had reached the apostle, lifting up his heart in praise to God. What is more, he does not only praise God for their faith. He also prays to God without ceasing because of their need. As one has said, "the sincerest faith was never beyond the need of help." And those we can both praise and pray for are the ones we want to see.

Many there had clearly received the gospel as the word of God, since their faith was spoken of throughout the whole world. But something seems to have been lacking in their grounding in "the righteousness of God" — the main subject of the letter. So Paul said he was ready to preach at Rome as well as to others.

James 5:12 firmly forbids swearing by heaven or by earth. He does not mean oaths taken before a judge, which are not the swearing people do. He means being sworn in God's name. Neither our Lord nor His servant prohibited such appeals to God as in Romans 1:9, 1 Corinthians 15:31, 2 Corinthians 1:23, Galatians 1:20, or the like.

Notice the change of expression here in passing. It is the gospel of God's Son now, not simply of God, however beautiful that was in its place (v. 1). But now the apostle is not thinking of the source that gave the gospel its character. He is thinking of the way and the means by which His grace worked to deliver the lost. It was therefore the gospel of His Son as well as His own. Here too the apostle describes his own serving of God "with my spirit." That is not mere outward work, and not a bare sense of duty pressing on him. It is active and intelligent devotion from within, in the gospel of God's Son.

The apostle served God with, or in, his spirit, in the gospel of His Son. It was ministry in communion with the source from which it took its rise. Indeed there is no real power of God otherwise, though there may be much activity. But service is a poor thing when duty is its only motive.

What real heart work it was with Paul! … What deep love for those he had never seen! All of it was done to God, in the gospel of His Son. Is it so with us, or is it mere cold imitation? Was this not the secret of Paul's success? If it is lacking with us, must there not be failure?

latreuo is a word translated "worship" three times, though it is usually translated "to serve." It is linked with latron, "hire," so its original force is "serving for hire," not forced work like a slave's. But Biblical Greek lifts this word, and its noun latreia, "service," to a higher use. There it never means any service except service to God, or to false gods. So it fully answers to the present sense of "worship," and all true service shares this character.

This message is called the Gospel of God (Rom. 1:1), because it comes from Him. It is called the Gospel of the grace of God (Acts 20:24), because it tells of His grace. It is called the Gospel of His Son (Rom. 1:9), of Christ (Rom. 15:19), and of our Lord Jesus (2 Thess. 1:8), because it speaks of what He has suffered and done for us. It is also called the Gospel of our salvation (Eph. 1:13), for by it we are saved (1 Cor. 15:2).

Notice how carefully and earnestly he backs up his words: "For God is my witness, whom I serve with my spirit in the gospel of his Son." Can there be any doubt that his prayers were real? Not at all. He had wanted this visit so deeply that he would say, "if by any means." God granted it. He came as a prisoner, carried there for trial — and he still rejoiced in the Lord.

What real heart work it was with Paul! He says, "For God is my witness, whom I serve with my spirit in the gospel of His Son, that without ceasing I mention you always in my prayers." What deep love to those he had never seen! This was not outward service, but "with my spirit." All done to God in the gospel of His Son. Is it so with us, or mere cold imitation? Was not this the secret of Paul's success? If it is lacking with us, must there not be failure?

In the first chapter of Romans, Paul does more than speak of mentioning them always in his prayers. He made a definite request: that by the will of God he might become a blessing and a comfort to them, and that their faith might comfort him too (vv. 10-12). In the fifteenth chapter he begs them, for the Lord Jesus Christ's sake, to pray as well. He asks that he might come to them by the will of God, and be refreshed with them.

I take it that it was according to God's mind that Paul should go to Rome. He had often prayed for it (Romans 1:10), if it were God's will. I have no doubt that God granted the request, though not quite in the way the apostle had expected. When he prayed that he might reach the saints at Rome and give them some spiritual gift, he probably had no idea that he would go there in chains. But so it was. At the same time God answered his prayers, and more than answered them.

Presenting our requests, subject to His will, is always right. Of this we have an example even in Gethsemane; so Paul for his thorn in the flesh. And the answer will be more glorious and blessed than the request, even when it does not come in the form we asked for. Let us trust His love, and this will not come short.

They had a good report, and Paul longed and prayed that he might see them, but had so far been hindered. He wanted to settle them firmly in the faith by sharing spiritual things with them. He explains what he means in verse 12. The gifts were not great abilities, miraculous powers, and the like. They were to build one another up in the faith. It is better to be godly than gifted.

When he wrote his letter, we may be sure he little thought he was to see them as Rome's prisoner. He made request that he might have a prosperous journey to them (Rom. 1:10), and had told them to pray that he might reach them with joy (Rom. 15:32). But here is something beautiful. The Spirit of God had given his journey and his arrival among them this character. Even so, Paul treats it as nothing less than a full answer to his desires. "He thanks God," owning the answer to his request.

He had prayed for three things: to come to the saints at Rome, to be comforted in them, and to have some fruit among them. These had been his desires (Rom. 1:10-13), and God answered every one of them (Acts 28:15-24). He sees them, he takes courage, and, through preaching, gathers fruit there as well as among other Gentiles.

News of their faith had reached the Apostle and lifted up his heart in praise to God. He does not only praise God for their faith. He also prays to God without ceasing for their need. As someone has said, "the sincerest faith was never beyond the need of help". And the people we can both praise and pray for are the people we want to see.

He wanted them fully established in the faith, and he would do it by giving them things of a spiritual nature. He explains what he means in verse 12. The gifts were a matter of building each other up in the faith, not the handing over of great abilities, miraculous powers, and the like. It is better to be godly than gifted.

He wants to see them, so that he may give them some spiritual gift, which his apostleship put him in a position to pass on. What he had in his heart was this: that he might enjoy the faith he shared with them — faith strengthened by these gifts — for their comfort together.

The faithful servant of Christ seeks to give spiritual benefit to those who hear him — "some spiritual gift to strengthen you" (Romans 1:11). He wants them to share in "spiritual things" (15:27) by their own experience. Such things cannot be handed over in a merely natural way. They come "not in words taught by human wisdom, but in those taught by the Spirit, communicating spiritual things by spiritual means" (1 Cor. 2:13).

The apostle's aim was that those who came under his ministry should be established. The fact that I have peace with God does not mean I am well grounded in the faith. So whether it is Peter or Paul, both work to establish and encourage souls.

From the opening verses we learn that the great purpose of the letter is to establish believers in their personal relationship with God. As the Apostle says, "to strengthen you". To do this he shows that the gospel is God's power to save, because in it God reveals His righteousness. Nothing establishes a believer like the discovery that God not only saves the sinner who believes in Jesus, but saves him righteously — that is, in a way that agrees with His own holy nature.

One of this world's wise men has dared to accuse the holy apostle of pious cunning and holy flattery. No doubt that judgment came out of the critic's own spirit, and out of his inability to appreciate the delicate feelings that grace makes easy and natural… What we see here is the tact of tender love toward people who were saints of God in such a place, not the manoeuvring of a clever party leader.

He wanted to give them some special gift for their fuller establishment in the faith. But the thought of divine love and wisdom, faintly reflected in the apostle's heart, reached wider and wiser toward His church — and not at Rome only — than His servant could take in at the time. Paul's thwarted desires gave the Spirit of God the occasion to write and publish, by his hand, this priceless letter. It was a gift to the Church, not one of passing effect, but one that would build up, feed, and teach the saints to the end.

He longed to see them, so that he might give them some spiritual gift to establish them. But in the same breath he takes his place in love among them. He says, "That is, that we may be mutually encouraged by each other's faith, both yours and mine." He was an apostle, and he should act in love. So, as an apostle, he should come down to the weakest, to raise them up to confidence in God.

He explains what he means in verse 12. The gifts were meant to build up faith on both sides. They were not the giving of great abilities, miraculous powers, and the like. It is better to be godly than gifted.

This is a lovely thing — the very opposite of lording it over others. Only think of this blessed servant of Christ! He was the greatest teacher the church has ever had, and he longed to be comforted by the faith of the very feeblest saint in the assembly. He longed for fellowship — he was ready to help, but he did not want to monopolise. He would not put out the dying embers. He would gather them together and build them up, so that he and they might be "mutually encouraged."

If God called him, He called them too — him an apostle, them not apostles but saints. Yet for them as for him, all flowed out of the same mighty love of God... There is nothing like the grace of God for producing the truest humility.

His ministry would lead the saints to practise godly unity and fellowship with understanding. His own heart yearned for their faith and drew comfort from it, and they drew comfort from his. There is mutual comfort only when there is mutual cultivation of faith. This was not mere emotion. The apostle had often planned before to visit the saints at Rome, but he had been hindered.

One of this world's thinkers has dared to accuse the holy apostle of pious craft and holy flattery. But that judgment, no doubt, came out of the man's own spirit. He could not appreciate the delicate feelings which grace makes easy and habitual... What we see here is the tact of tender love toward people who were saints of God in such a place — not the manoeuvring of a skilful party-leader.

But how sweet and wonderful are the dealings of grace! We know on unquestionable authority what happened. The Lord used the saints he was going to help so greatly to cheer the apostle himself on the road. That is the best comment on his own words written to them beforehand.

He wrote to them, and he longed to see them. This was not only to carry out his commission as an apostle, or to use his apostolic authority. It grew out of a brother's love that longed for them. He counted on receiving comfort from them, as well as on giving them spiritual blessing.

By right he is apostle to all the Gentiles, even if he has never seen them. But in heart he is their servant. He wants to see them, with the truest and warmest brotherly love — a love flowing from the grace that had made him an apostle.

As the apostle of the Gentiles, he would not neglect any part of the field put in his care. So he had often planned to come to them, to have fruit among them as well as elsewhere. We see that the church at Rome was mainly a Gentile church, and so it counted as part of his field of work.

The letter itself, from the first chapter to the last, is the fullest proof that a large number of believers were already there — both Jews and Gentiles.

Paul wanted to share fellowship with them, and to bear some fruit among them. That fruit might be the conversion of souls. Or it might be the giving of some spiritual gift to those already brought to Christ.

The apostle would have liked to visit the Christians at Rome sooner, but Satan had hindered him. The Lord's work is always carried on in front of an enemy who tries to stop its progress. He may use persecution. He may stir up evil in the churches, which the worker then has to deal with. He may use false teaching, which eats up the worker's time, or all sorts of other tricks. The worker needs to notice this. That is how he learns dependence.

May we not see the grace and wisdom of God in allowing a hindrance that gave us a letter written for the blessing of God's people in every age? It is good for us to trace the hand of God in what He hinders as well as in what He allows. It is good to submit to His closed doors, as well as to walk through His open ones.

When he wrote his letter, we may be sure he little thought he would see them as Rome's prisoner. He asked for a good journey to them, and had told them to pray that he might reach them with joy. But here is something beautiful and blessed. The Spirit of God shaped his journey and his arrival in this way, yet Paul does not treat it as anything less than a full answer to what he asked. He thanks God, owning it as the answer to his prayer.

Paul had hoped to have fruit among the Gentiles at Rome, as he had among others (Rom. 1:13). Here we see fruit for God among the Jews. And he did have converts among the Gentiles in Rome, for he could write to Philemon, "I appeal to you for my child, Onesimus, whose father I became in my imprisonment."

In the following verses the Apostle speaks about his debt, and his readiness, to preach... he felt like a man with a debt to pay off. It is a wonderful thing that he can say, "I am a debtor" to the Gentiles; "I am ready" to preach; and "I am not ashamed" of the gospel. "I am a debtor" is the language of someone who found in the gospel the thing that met his own need. He now feels he owes it to others in need, whether among cultivated Greeks or unintelligent barbarians. "I am ready" is the language of someone in the right moral condition to preach. "I am not ashamed" is the language of someone who sees the greatness of the gospel and is bold to proclaim it.

The word means "foreigner, alien". The Romans used it for any people who did not understand Latin or Greek. In Romans 1:14 they stand in contrast to the Greeks.

He was debtor to the Greeks — the civilized, the cultured, the artistic, the intellectual. They needed it, and without it they were completely undone. He was debtor to the barbarians too, who were sunk in depravity and sin. They needed it not more than the Greeks, but just as much. So Paul preached as long as God gave him breath.

"Owe no one anything, except to love each other." This is a debt that can never be fully paid up. Paul's knowledge of the gospel and his love for men made him a debtor to Greeks and barbarians, to the wise and the foolish. This is the case, in whatever measure, of all saints.

Even the saints there would have been all the better for the gospel. It was not merely "to those at Rome," but "to you that are at Rome." So it is a mistake to think that saints gain nothing from a better understanding of the gospel, at least as Paul preached it. He now tells them why he could speak so strongly, not about the more advanced truths, but about the good news.

He felt what every sinner saved by grace should feel — that he was a debtor to all. Owning the gospel makes us debtors to all. He had constantly paid his debt by preaching the gospel to Jews and Gentiles, and now he is eager "to preach the gospel to you also who are in Rome."

We have a debt to pay, and only the power of the Spirit can enable us to pay it. Paul felt this deeply in Romans 1:14. Romans 15:19 tells how he paid it: "by the power of the Spirit of God... I have fulfilled the ministry of the gospel of Christ." ... We need souls so filled by God with the things we profess to believe that our lips must speak.

He longed to see them, that he might impart to them some spiritual gift, so that they might be established... He was under obligation to all nations to bring the grace of God to them; and so, as far as depended on him, he was ready to preach the gospel to them also that were at Rome.

He could say, "So, as much as in me is, I am ready to preach the gospel to you that are at Rome also." What entire readiness, yet the most real dependence on God alone. If he had been the servant of men, he might have needed a call from them to preach at Rome, or some human appointment. But there is no such thought here. Paul could say, "I am ready." Yes — with the world behind him: "I am ready as soon as my God shall open the way."

He was ready, as far as he was concerned, to preach the gospel to those that were at Rome also. Even the saints there would have been all the better for the gospel. It was not merely "to those at Rome," but "to you that are at Rome." So it is a mistake to think that saints cannot gain from a better understanding of the gospel, at least as Paul preached it.

The gospel had truly reached souls in that city by other means. Many there had clearly received it as the word of God, since people everywhere spoke of their faith. But something seems to have been missing in them: they were not grounded in "the righteousness of God," the main subject of the letter. So Paul said he was ready to preach to them at Rome as well as to others.

"I am a debtor" is the language of one who has found in the gospel what meets his own need. He feels he owes the good news to others who are in need, whether among cultivated Greeks or unintelligent Barbarians. "I am ready" is the language of one in right moral condition to preach. "I am not ashamed" is the language of one who, realising the greatness of the gospel, is bold to proclaim it.

He declares himself a debtor to all the Gentiles, and ready, as far as it depended on him, to preach the gospel to those of Rome also. The apostle claims the whole field of the Gentiles as his own. Yet God kept him from going to Rome until he arrived there at the end of his career — and then only as a prisoner. This is worthy of all attention.

Sinners need the gospel for their salvation. Saints need it too, often, to be established... Paul was the most gifted of teachers, yet he threw himself fully into the testimony of the gospel. So how happy, how profitable, how encouraging it would be if every servant of Christ did the same — whatever his gift or his age, showing hearty fellowship with every sincere and godly effort to spread the gospel! ... Disparagement of true gospel work is not of God. It is of Satan.

These two verses are the key verses of the letter. They hold the great words of its teaching section: righteousness and faith. It cannot mean, as people often say, that Paul was not ashamed to confess Christ. It means he had complete confidence in the gospel of Christ. He knew it would never make him ashamed. He was not ashamed of it because of what it is in itself. The world sneered at the gospel he preached... He knew the gospel holds the highest wisdom. He knew God Himself is its author, that it came from God and leads to God.

He was not at all ashamed to speak about the gospel itself, even to people living in Rome. This proud city was the centre of all worldly power, yet the gospel was God's power. Rome's power brought people into its empire by forced submission. God's power saved every believer through the gospel. It brought them into His kingdom and under His rule in grace.

See how the apostle presents everything as coming from God. It is the gospel of God, the power of God for salvation, the righteousness of God, and even the wrath of God. That wrath comes from heaven. It is not the same as punishment on earth. This is the key to everything. The apostle stresses it and puts it first, right at the start of the letter. Man always leans toward confidence in himself. He wants to boast of himself and to find some merit, some righteousness, in himself, as though he could do something. It was the apostle's joy to put his God forward.

In verse 16 the apostle began to show the character of the gospel. It is God Himself, acting with power when man is completely lost. So where the gospel comes, God no longer asks anything from man. He does not demand works to put things right between man and God. God acts; His power is working for the benefit of man. Not to help him, but to save him, for this power is for salvation.

Man came into it by faith. It was the believer who shared it. But sharing it by faith was the one way to share it without adding anything at all, and to leave it wholly the salvation of God. God be praised that it is so, whether for righteousness or for power, or for the whole result. That is what makes it perfect and divine.

Yet again and again Scripture shows that salvation does mean being spared and rescued from the wrath of God. The gospel is "the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes... for the wrath of God is revealed from heaven" (Rom. 1:16-18). A little later in the same epistle we read, "we shall be saved by Him from the wrath of God" (Rom. 5:9).

God's power was there to save. It took man up in his need and sin, not in his titles or claims, even ones God had given him. It reached a lost Gentile just as it reached a lost Jew. It was for "everyone who believes" — the way of it was faith; the order of it recognised God's ways. It was "to the Jew first, and also to the Greek." But this did not alter its character; it was salvation for a sinful Jew, who had to come in by mercy, just like a Gentile.

Those who preach should look for clear results. Those who hear should ask whether the gospel has made a great change in them. Why has it not? Because they have not believed... the way of salvation is not just hearing about Christ. It is believing on Christ. It is not simply knowing the plan of salvation, as some say. It is coming to Christ to be saved.

Thirdly, the reason it is God's power to save everyone who believes is that "in it the righteousness of God is revealed". If there is no righteous way for man to be saved, there can be no salvation for man... It is true that in the gospel we see the love, and grace, and mercy of God revealed. But the Apostle does not speak of these blessed qualities in this passage. He speaks of the righteousness of God... The sinner does not fear the love, or grace, or mercy of God; but he fears the righteousness of God must be against him... But suppose you can tell the sinner this: the very quality in God that he dreads most — God's righteousness — is the very quality that is for him, not against him. That will indeed be good news.

Next, notice that it is God's righteousness, not man's — divine righteousness revealed in the gospel, not human righteousness required in the law. There is no question here either of infusion or of imputation. Infusion is completely wrong. Imputation is a precious truth, and Romans 4 presses it: there the apostle shows from the case of Abraham that the believer's faith is counted for (or as) righteousness.

It is not righteousness of man, for he has none. How can he have any if he is guilty — under judgment? And if he had, it would be righteousness of man, not of God.

It is not human righteousness, which would have come by the law. It is God's own righteousness. It is not man being consistent with the relationships God placed him in as a creature. It is God being consistent with His own nature and character, whether He had revealed that character before or not. It is God being consistent with Himself when He takes up the place of Justifier of ungodly sinners.

On the cross Christ was made sin for us, and there bore all the believer's sins. In this position He perfectly glorified God... God has revealed His righteousness by giving Christ, who glorified Him, a place with Himself in divine glory.

The first of these phrases, "from faith," excludes the law; the second, "to faith," brings everyone who has faith within the scope of God's righteousness... God reveals His righteousness from faith. So if there is faith in any soul, He reveals it to that faith, wherever it may be. It was therefore in no way limited to one nation.

The righteousness which the law demanded from men was to be by (or, on the principle of) works. Faith reaches the righteousness of God which the Gospel reveals. Again, the Gospel reveals God's righteousness to faith, while the law revealed all it brought to sight. The first occurrence of the word, faith, stands in contrast to works, the second to sight.

Romans dwells on the truth of justification, and so emphasizes "the just." Galatians deals with living the Christian life by faith and not by works of law, and so emphasizes "shall live." Hebrews emphasizes the means — "by faith."

This is what made the gospel so sweet and precious, and, what is more, absolutely necessary, if he would escape certain and eternal ruin. There is no hope for man otherwise; for the gospel is not all that is now made known. Not only is God's righteousness revealed, but also His wrath. It is not said to be revealed in the gospel. The gospel means His glad tidings for man. The wrath of God could not possibly be glad tidings. It is not yet carried out. It is "revealed," and this too "from heaven"… So it is in view of eternal things, not of the things that touch present life on earth.

It is not governmental wrath, such as bringing the Assyrian against Israel, or leading them captive to Babylon — a thing of this world, while God was hidden still behind the veil. It tells us that God's nature cannot live with evil. God's wrath was revealed against everything that does not fit His nature — wrath from heaven against all ungodliness. And where the truth was known, so that men might seem nearer to God, as the Jews were, wrath was against them too if they held that truth in unrighteousness.

Notice, the wrath is revealed, not hidden, and the revelation is just as complete as if He were sitting on the great white throne.

It appears to me that the usual punctuation here spoils the sense. As I understand it, the force is this: "all ungodliness, and unrighteousness of men that hold the truth in unrighteousness." This is a most important distinction. It brings in the whole Gentile world as guilty, as the apostle proves later… So we have two great classes: ungodliness everywhere, and unrighteousness of men who hold the truth in unrighteousness.

If one can find a person who has no truth to hold, he cannot come under this revealed wrath. "Impiety" is what men are condemned for: a heart away from God, and so it misuses whatever truth it has. That is the charge; and it is broad enough to cover the whole race of fallen man. There are not two classes in this statement, as some have thought.

Firm orthodoxy may go together with a life that disregards righteousness. Holding truth down hardly makes sense. Hindering it adds no worthwhile idea to the phrase. Holding the truth is a solemn warning for professing Christians now, as it once was for Jews.

To hold the truth in unrighteousness would be no security… A man may know God's revealed mind exactly. But if that knowledge brings no renewal of the heart, if it leaves him without life towards God, it must all be worthless. A man is only so much the worse for knowing the truth, if he holds it ever so firmly along with unrighteousness.

About the Gentiles, the apostle gives two reasons for this wrath. First, the testimony of creation (vv. 19, 20). Second, that they knew God and did not wish to keep Him in their knowledge, but preferred idolatry (vv. 21-24)… This does not mean that they knew God as He is in His nature. It means they should have known Him as Creator. Unless a person is blind, a Creator is seen in the creation.

The Spirit of God brings this unrighteousness and ungodliness fully into the open from Romans 1:19 to 3:20. This is the part where God's "light" comes in and shows all that we are by nature. It is like carrying a light into a dark room full of every kind of filth and corruption. While the room is dark you see nothing of what is inside. Bring the light in, and it shows all the filth and dirt that are there. From verse 19 to the end of chapter 1 we find the dreadful state of the pagan world described. It shows that they should have known God's eternal power and divine nature from the things He made.

"What can be known" of Him means the knowable rather than the known. The evidence was full and clear, but their eyes were dull… If the verse appealed to self-knowledge, as many think, it seems to me it would have used the word for inward knowledge, and the reflexive pronoun as well. This was knowledge of an outward kind, lying open in the middle of them all. The words that follow confirm it — "for God has shown it to them," not the work of conscience, which has its proper place in Romans 2.

People have perceived His invisible things — not all of them, of course, but His eternal power and divinity — ever since the creation of the world. The mind grasps them through His works. The things He made stood before every eye, and they did produce convictions far above the ordinary run of human thought… Even the famous ancient thinker who allowed only what he could observe could not write his book on the world without stating that "God, though He is invisible to every mortal being, is seen from the works themselves."

Creation lies open for everyone to see, and it is full of signs of God… Notice that what we must charge man with is not merely a misreading of the evidence, but a wholesale rejection of it. You would think there was little room for mistake — unless the hearts of men really wanted some other meaning. Yet that is exactly where the fault lies. They would gladly credit anyone or anything but Him with the glory of such work.

Those peoples that are now heathen once knew God. Man's course has not been from many gods up to one God, as some dreamers would have us imagine, but the other way round. They have sunk out of light into the darkness.

Nothing here suggests that creation bore witness to the gospel, or that it revealed God as He is in His nature. It witnessed to the Creator. Yet man, instead of turning to the Creator through this witness, turned away from Him… Rejecting the witness of creation leaves man without excuse, even if he has never heard the gospel.

The testimony of creation leaves man without excuse, but it does not bring him the knowledge of God. Creation shows God's power, but God Himself is known only in the Person of the Son. Man is a sinner, held at a distance from God by sin. To claim to worship God and share His company in the works of His hands ignores man's sinful condition, his guilt, and his need of salvation.

The ground here is not what could be known but what was actually known… A knowledge of God handed down from the past is in question. This knowledge of God belonged to man even after the flood; in fact, not until after that great event do we hear of idolatry. But man was not equal to the task of guarding what God had entrusted to him, and this was because of his moral state. When they did know God, they did not glorify Him as God, and they were not thankful. That left room for empty reasonings, which darkened the heart instead of leading it into light. It was the self-sufficiency, and so the folly, of the creature. Light is only seen in God's light, and man must sink into darkness when he is not lifted up morally by looking to One above him.

Those peoples who are pagan today once knew God. Man's course has not been from many gods to one God, as some dreamers would have us imagine, but the other way round. They have sunk out of light into the darkness. Once "they knew God" (v. 21), but the fact is, "they did not see fit to acknowledge God" (v. 28).

It is a great favour to the creature to be given a little light about the blessed God. That is what lifts man above the level of the beast. And how thankful the creature should be for that light! Where a man values the light, he thanks God for it. Where he gives God no thanks, it is a sure sign that he despises the light, and he will soon lose it.

They did not glorify God in His works, and they did not thank Him for His mercies in this life. So they lost the knowledge of God they had. They refused the witness of Creation and fell back, as men are doing today, on their own imaginations. In this way their foolish heart was darkened — that is, they lost the knowledge of God. In Scripture, moral darkness is always ignorance of God, just as light is the knowledge of God. The more foolish they became, the more they claimed to be wise; and the more they claimed to be wise, the bigger fools they became.

For instance, people often speak of pagan peoples as groping after the light and unable to find it. They treat it as their misfortune, not their sin, because circumstances too hard for them hold them down. Now that is not so… That was the beginning of paganism. This is man, not seeking God, but trying to escape from God — and he has escaped, so to speak, into the darkness. The darkness is the darkness of resisted light, not the absence of light.

The apostle gives it as a special mark of the corruption of the nations that "although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him." Then comes the practical result of this unthankful spirit… The heart that stops keeping a thankful sense of God's goodness will soon become "dark."… This is the line a soul out of fellowship with God will travel. It first loses the sense of being in God's hands for good, and in the end begins to think itself in His hands for evil.

They did not glorify God in His works. They did not thank God for the good things He gave them in this life. So they lost the knowledge of God they once had. They refused the witness of creation and fell back on their own imaginations, as men are doing today. So their foolish heart grew dark — that is, they lost the knowledge of God. In Scripture, moral darkness is always ignorance of God, just as light is the knowledge of God. The more foolish they became, the more they claimed to be wise. And the more they claimed to be wise, the bigger fools they became.

The inward reasonings of their minds, because bent on following their own wills, dragged them into folly; and their hearts, wilfully without understanding, were coloured by the darkness they chose. What is more, the very reasonings that led them into that darkness they claimed as wisdom! — a claim which all the more thoroughly declared them fools. This was their development — or evolution, if you will — "they became fools."

The root cause of their fall was that they did not want to give God the glory that was His due, because they wanted to pose as wise themselves — as we see in verses 21 and 22. In short, pride was the root, and God has allowed them to make fools of themselves.

A traditional knowledge of God is in question… the outward knowledge of God spoken of here still belonged to man after the flood. In fact we do not hear of idolatry until after that great event. But man was not equal to the task of keeping this holy trust, and the reason lay in his moral state. When they did know God, they neither glorified Him as such, nor were they thankful. That left room for empty reasonings, which then darkened the heart instead of leading it into light. It was the self-sufficiency, and so the folly, of the creature. Light is only seen in God's light. Unless a man looks up to One above him and is lifted, he must sink into darkness.

They knew God and did not glorify Him. They turned away from the light. Here is the true law of evolution. It is not an evolution upward, as so many teach today, but an evolution downward. The ascent of man is a delusion; the descent of man is the truth. Man has fallen so low, yes, below the beast. The only thing that can lift him is the gospel of Jesus Christ… The next step down is that they claimed to be wise and became fools. They rejected the light and turned away from God. So they became philosophers and tried to find things out by searching.

Their descent has been gradual. First came empty thinking. Then came darkened understanding and gross idolatry. Then came outrageous sins, in which they fell below the level of the beasts. Each generation went beyond the follies of those before them, and so approved for themselves the turning away that had gone before. All this happened under the government of God… If men object to thinking of God and give Him up, they have no ground of complaint when He gives them up. There is an ironic justice about God's government.

The intellect of our own day leads many astray who claim to be wise. It is only one of the many forms of human perverseness that set themselves up against God. It may be more refined, but its opposition is no less determined than in those who attack God's declared will because He has not written it across the sky… So philosophical explanations of Christianity have arisen. They are all only attempts of man to reach the mysterious doctrine of the cross by human reasoning. That doctrine is either never reached, or, if it is seen, it stays what it has always been — "foolishness."

They did not glorify God in His works. They did not thank Him for the mercies of this life. So they lost the knowledge of God that they had. Refusing the witness of creation, they fell back, as men are doing today, on their own imaginations. So their foolish heart grew dark — that is, they lost the knowledge of God. In Scripture, moral darkness is always ignorance of God, just as light is the knowledge of God. The more foolish they became, the more they claimed to be wise. And the more they claimed to be wise, the bigger fools they became.

They knew God and did not glorify Him. They turned away from the light. Here is the true law of evolution — not an evolution upward, as is taught so much today, but an evolution downward. The ascent of man is a delusion; the descent of man is the truth. The only possible way of lifting man, who has fallen so low, yes, beneath the beast, is the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Deep down, man knows he is not enough on his own. That awareness leaves him unable to stand independent of some power mightier than himself. A god of some kind is a natural necessity for man. His natural desire, in his first turning away from truth, is a god after his own heart. The image of himself is the outward expression of this.

Notice the order here. Idolatry makes progress, but it is progress in degradation. First they make a god out of man, who was himself made in the image of God. Then come birds of the air, and four-footed beasts, and down to the grovelling, creeping insects. Each step shows the progress of degradation. Look at the magnificent temples of Egypt, where architecture reached its peak. Grand avenues lead up to great temples with their outer court and inner sanctuary. But enthroned in the innermost room of all this magnificence sits a hideous beetle, a creeping thing — as though Satan delighted to insult God by such a likeness.

Birds fly through the air, so they were thought to be nearer heaven, and they are put above the four-footed beasts, which walk on the earth. The creeping things, which cannot rise out of the dust and mud of the earth, are the lowest form of all.

Their ideas of deity, under the deceptive influence of Satan, sank lower and lower... It was not naked savages who plunged deeper and deeper into this pit of folly. The ancient kingdoms of Babylon, Assyria and Egypt, among others, had much learning. Men cannot rise morally above the level of the gods they worship. So beast-worshippers soon became beastly themselves in practice.

How blessed it is when the Holy Spirit reminds us that the One whom we worship is "the incorruptible God" (Rom. 1:23)... His word, His promise, His glory — yes, He Himself — remain incorruptible.

The theme of the gospel is "the Man Christ Jesus," the One whom Psalm 16 describes as not seeing corruption... His conception was holy. His life was sinless through and through. He was not only without blemish; He picked up no stain along His path.

Their plight has been reached under the government of God. Three times over we get the phrase, with slight variations: "God gave them up to…". If men object to thinking of God and give Him up, they have no ground of complaint when He gives them up. And if they give up God, and so give up good, they find themselves given up to everything evil and degrading. There is an ironic justice about God's government.

So God gave them up to reap as they had sown. It is not that He made them sin (God forbid the thought!). He simply dropped the reins on man's neck, so that what was in sinful man's heart might come out — in my heart, reader, and yours. So we find that sin ruined men's bodies (v. 24), their affections (v. 26), and their minds (v. 28).

"Therefore God gave them up" — not that He was indifferent. His appeals through their intelligence and conscience had no effect on their determined course of evil… Man will reap the bitter fruits of refusing the place of dependence on God. His evil shows itself more and more in ways he once would have found horrible and detestable. Then he will say, "I can't help myself." In this he speaks the truth. But why does he not also confess the truth about how this shameful state began?… For only God can protect a soul against evil. If a man ignores Him, there is no predicting the depths of man's wickedness.

Their lusts had turned them away from the true God; now the false gods they had set up to suit their own tastes approved and encouraged their lusts. God gave them up to their lusts, and they at once went on to dishonour their own bodies, just as they had already dishonoured God.

If the soul abandons the truth of God, everything is wrong, whatever appearances may say for the moment. This was the great falsehood. Not to be in dependence and obedience is to be false to the relationship of a creature. Yet there is a step still further down in evil — giving to the creature the honour that belongs to God alone.

Verses 24 and 25 display the punishment, even now, of God the Holy One on His debased image. Filth and dishonour are the unchecked and ripened fruit of the lusts of nature. Man had chosen those lusts as his guide, in preference to the will of God… The creature is utterly debased, and that through the working out of its own will. This is the sentence of divine wisdom on the self-dishonoured work of His hands.

It is true that God has given men over to the vices they love. In His governmental dealings He does this because they have turned away from Him and have chosen to indulge their lusts. But despite this, they still have by nature a sense of the justice of God in sentencing them to death… So no one can excuse himself or his sins in the court of God by pleading that God has given him over to judicial blindness.

Savagery was the result of man's departure from God. God did not create man in that condition… So man's condition is degraded, whether as a savage or as an idolater. Nothing can bring him out of it but the converting power of the grace of God.

If the soul abandons the truth of God, all is wrong, whatever appearances may say for the present. This was the great falsehood. Not to be in dependence and obedience is to be false to the relationship of a creature. Yet there is a step still further down in evil — giving to the creature the honour that belongs to God only. This is exactly what Satan did, and in this same order. He was a liar from the beginning. He did not stand in the truth, for there was no truth in him. Fallen man does his own will and so is the slave of Satan. It may be in lusts, or in a religion of his own imagining. The one plainly degrades him; the other promises to lift him up.

Man may dare to think he is neutral, with no interest in God either way. But that very attitude accuses God of lying. If God's testimony is true, neutrality is impossible. It is a deliberate rejection of the truth of God, even when it is silent — treating that truth as a lie. A man may speak of his neutrality with great pride and self-satisfaction. But if he does not worship the Creator, he worships the creature in some way — even if that creature is himself.

However, man is not enough for himself. He must have someone to lean on, someone to look to in his misery and weakness. So having rejected the true God, and become a fool, he goes on to fashion false gods according to his own tastes. First they thought of God as like corruptible men. Then their thoughts of God sank lower, and they imagined Him to be like birds or four-footed beasts. At last they reached the lowest depth of degradation, when they thought of God as like the creeping things — the serpents. So the worship of the serpent proved how thoroughly man had fallen from God to the devil.

Three times we get the phrase, with slight variations: "God gave them up to…" If men refuse to think about God and give Him up, they have no ground of complaint when He gives them up. And if they give up God, and so give up good, they find themselves given up to everything that is evil and degrading. There is an ironic justice about God's government.

They changed the truth of God into a lie. In place of the Creator they set up the creature as an object of worship. So God lets them fall beneath the creatures they worshipped. Men sank below the beasts. A beast is not a moral creature. But a man degraded to the level of a beast becomes immoral. His affections become corrupted and turned from their natural course into what is contrary to nature.

It is very blessed to know that heaven will acknowledge and worship God as the Creator of the universe, however much men blaspheme and deny Him on earth. The day is not far away when men will do more than worship and serve the creature above the Creator. They will openly deny the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.

The world we are passing through is marked more and more by uncleanness and materialism. The hideous features named in Romans 1 are showing themselves everywhere. Men are busy turning "the truth of God into a lie." The principle of worshipping and serving "the creature more than the Creator" shows itself in the materialistic cult that is gaining such headway.

Under the moral judgment of God, idolatry always ends in complete uncleanness among its followers. It shows itself in every variety. Perhaps it is clearest, as a divine retribution, among those who set up the human form — "corruptible man." But it was certainly not absent where they worshipped what is beneath man: birds, four-footed animals, and reptiles, alone or in combination.

So God gave them up to reap what they had sown. He did not make them sin (God forbid the thought!). He threw the reins on man's neck, so that what was in sinful man's heart might come out — in my heart, reader, and in yours. So we find that sin ruined men's bodies (v. 24), their affections (v. 26), and their minds (v. 28). Three times it says that God gave them up, and three times the solemn result is stated.

Their condition has been reached under the government of God. Three times over we get the phrase, with slight variations: "God gave them up to…" Do men object to thinking about God and give Him up? Then they have no ground for complaint when He gives them up. And if they give up God, they give up good along with Him. Naturally they find themselves given up to everything evil and degrading. There is an ironic justice about God's government.

They changed the truth of God into a lie. In place of the Creator they set up the creature as an object of worship. So they are allowed to fall beneath the very creatures they worshipped. Men sank below the beasts. It has been truly said that a beast is not a moral creature. But a man degraded to the level of a beast becomes immoral. His affections grow corrupt and turn from their natural course into what is contrary to nature.

This is a vivid but very grave sketch of a humiliating picture. The classical writers fill in that picture in a very different tone, for "the unjust knows no shame." The women come first, since the shamelessness was most apparent there, and human depravity proved most complete and hopeless. The apostle does not even dignify them with the names men and women. He calls them "females" and "males" — though they were the greatest and highest: the sages of the earth, monarchs, conquerors, poets, philosophers and the rest. Their ways were below the animals. God gave them up, and even now they bear the fitting reward of their deeds.

Man is made up of body, soul and spirit. The first giving up concerns the body; this is found in verses 24-25. Then He gave them up to vile passions. This concerns the soul, and the horrible things in verses 26-27 are the results. People practised them openly in the Greek and Roman world in the days of the Apostle Paul. Ancient literature bears plenty of witness to that. These vile things are still going on in heathen India, China, Africa and elsewhere. They appear within Christendom too. Whenever and wherever people abandon the truth of God, degradation of every kind follows. Only the truth of God can restrain evil.

Their descent has been gradual. First came empty thinking. Then darkened understanding. Then gross idolatry. Then outrageous sins, in which they fell below the level of the beasts. Each generation went beyond the follies of the one before it, and so confirmed for themselves the earlier departure.

Man had given up God; now we have the statement, repeated three times, "God gave them up". In the government of God He lets men reap what they sow. Their lusts had turned them away from the true God. Now the false gods they had set up to suit their own tastes approved and encouraged those lusts. God gave them up to their lusts. At once they went on to dishonour their own bodies, just as they had already dishonoured God.

God gave them up to reap as they had sown. He did not make them sin — God forbid the thought! He dropped the reins on man's neck, just so that what was in sinful man's heart might come out — in my heart, reader, and in yours.

They had exchanged the truth of God for a lie. They had set up the creature in place of the Creator as an object of worship. So God let them fall beneath the creatures they worshipped. Men sank below the beasts. People have rightly said that a beast is not a moral creature. But a man dragged down to the level of a beast becomes immoral. His affections are corrupted and turned aside from their natural course into what is contrary to nature.

The apostle will not call them men and women — though they were the greatest and highest, the wise men of the earth, monarchs, conquerors, poets and philosophers. He calls them "females" and "males", marked by ways below the brute, given up by God, and even now bearing the fitting reward of their deeds.

The things spoken of here are plainly the "recompense", even now, of the creature's error in departing from the Creator. So the world lies under a judicial bondage of sin and dishonour. Men eat the fruit of their own ways. That fruit sometimes pleases the depraved taste of a corrupted nature, but divine and eternal judgment waits at the end. The very lusts that govern and torment the slaves of sin are the first instalment and token of the wrath of God. That wrath is revealed from heaven now, and after death it will deal with the ungodliness and unrighteousness of unrepentant sinners.

Man is made up of body, soul and spirit. The first giving up concerns the body, in verses 24-25. Then He gave them up to vile passions. This concerns the soul, and the horrible things stated in verses 26-27 are the results. People practised these things in the open in the Greek and Roman world in the days of the apostle Paul... These vile things are still going on. They are found in the middle of the Christian world too. Whenever and wherever men abandon the truth of God, degradation of every kind follows, for the truth of God alone can restrain evil.

Having given this terrible list of the corruptions of the flesh, he says, "Such were some of you". Wonderful grace, that can take us up from the lowest place of degradation in the far country and join us with Christ in the highest place of glory in the Father's house!

Another translation renders verse 28: "And according as they did not think good to have God in their knowledge, God gave them up." They would give no approval to having God in their knowledge. That is as much a matter of the mind as of the heart, and both of these were corrupted. So "God gave them up to a reprobate mind," a mind that rejects the good and is therefore rejected by the good It is left to its own worthlessness and its wilful failure to see straight.

The word adokimos is translated "reprobate" here, as it is elsewhere. That word suits the phrase well. It sets their refusal to approve of keeping God in their knowledge against His giving them over to a "disapproved" mind. But the word may also bear an active sense. It would then mean an "undiscerning" mind — the sentence passed on their presumption in rejecting God after pretending to test and try the matter.

When summing up the sins of the Gentiles the apostle says, "God gave them up to a debased mind." Why? Because "they did not see fit to acknowledge God." (Rom. 1:28.) This was the root, and all the other sins were but the fruits. God does not ask for your goodness. He wants the heart, and this is what man does not like to give.

If men lose the knowledge of God, if they depart from Him, if they corrupt God, they will corrupt themselves. God gave them up to a debased mind because they had corrupted Him and did not want to keep Him in their knowledge. That is why all the unspeakable vices of the pagan world flourish.

Men chose to give up the light that God had given of Himself. The result is that man is given up to a debased mind, abandoned to his depraved thoughts. The terrible effect of sin is to leave men with defiled bodies (v. 24), degraded affections (v. 26), and deformed minds (v. 28). Man is fallen body, soul, and spirit.

Three times over we get the phrase, with slight variations: "God gave them up to ...". If men object to thinking of God and give Him up, they have no ground of complaint when He gives them up. And if they give up God, and so give up good as well, they find themselves given up to everything that is evil and degrading. There is an ironic justice about God's government.

So God gave them up to reap what they had sown. He did not make them sin — God forbid the thought! He dropped the reins on man's neck, so that what was in sinful man's heart would come out — in my heart, reader, and yours.

But there is more: they did not want to keep God in their knowledge. So God gave them up to a debased mind, to do what ought not to be done. That is where the lawlessness, selfishness, and injustice so common on earth come from. A state of savagery, then, is the fruit of man's will. It is not the original condition of the human race.

It is only Scripture that throws real light on the subject, and to refuse or neglect what the word of God teaches, is only to go far astray... There is a solemn warning in Scripture, which tells us of men not liking to retain God in their knowledge, being given over by God to "a debased mind" (Rom. 1:28).

Men chose to give up the light God had given of Himself. The result is that man is given over to a mind God has rejected, abandoned to his own corrupt thoughts. The dreadful effect of sin is to leave men with defiled bodies (verse 24), degraded affections (verse 26), and deformed minds (verse 28). Man is fallen body, soul, and spirit.

What follows is a list of the evils man has filled himself with. It might well make the heart recoil in horror. But having refused God the right of possession, then evil has taken possession of him. He is not the neutral, self-controlled man he would like to boast of being. He is the abject slave of sin. Notice how this list strikes at the thoughts and passions of the heart. The evil does show itself openly in time. But God here uncovers and exposes man's inner being — what he is "full" of — the thoughts and lusts of his mind and heart. Who can escape the conclusion that we have been found out?

Both pleonexia and philarguria refer to covetousness, but there appears to be a clear difference between them. Pleonexia (from words meaning "to have more") is not limited to money, and often goes together with open wickedness. The force of the word is "desiring more than is necessary", and so "an over-reaching to get". It is used this way of the lusts of the flesh in Romans 1:29 and Ephesians 4:19, where English Bibles translate it "greediness", and Ephesians 5:3, and so on. Scripture declares it to be idolatry in Colossians 3:5.

In verse 29 I have left out "fornication". Good manuscript evidence supports leaving it out, and the wording itself seems to me to tip the scale against it… As I see it, the first group is personal evil. The second is evil done to other people. The third does not give roots of moral corruption in the abstract, personal or relative, but fully formed wicked characters — and it does this in an order that is not random and not hard to see.

You have there a list of crimes that brings the flush of shame to the cheek even to read it. It stands there not as some exceptional result of man's sin, but as the natural fruit of his departure from God. And it covers every unsaved person: "they did not like to retain God in their knowledge." … It is as though the Spirit of God set the root and the fruit side by side and said to men: cut loose from God, and you give free rein to every kind of evil the flesh is capable of.

Timothy was to turn away from those who had the outward form of godliness but denied its power. Compare that with Romans 1:29-31, and you will see that the evil he had to turn away from was as bad as that among the pagan nations. Being in the place of light, and under the pretence of light, only made it worse.

You have there a catalogue of crime that brings shame to the cheek even to read it. It is given, not as some exceptional result of man's sin, but as the natural fruit of his departure from God. It is given in a way that includes every unsaved person: "Since they did not see fit to acknowledge God." … It is as though the Spirit of God put the root and the fruit side by side. He said to men: cut loose from God, and you give rein to every form of evil the flesh is capable of.

The awful effect of sin is to leave men with defiled bodies (24), degraded affections (26), and deformed minds (28). Man is fallen body, soul, and spirit.

I think the first group is personal evil. The second is evil that involves other people. The third brings out, not roots of moral corruption taken on their own, whether personal or relative, but fully formed wicked characters. The order is systematic and easy to see.

Only think of anyone being a hater of such a One as God. And we know that all who are not lovers must be haters. People may not see this; very few would be willing to admit they are outright haters of God. But there is no neutral ground in this great question. We must either be for or against… It often happens that the heart's deep-seated hostility to God comes out in hatred of His people, His word, His worship, His service.

Pride. There are several words translated this way in the Greek New Testament. The one used here conveys the sense of a spirit of self-exaltation in a man, combined with the belittling of others. The Pharisees are glaring examples. They trusted in themselves that they were righteous and treated others with contempt (Luke 18:9). But the Gentiles are no more free of guilt here than the Jews (Rom. 1:30). This arrogance shows itself in boastful words and self-glorifying deeds, but it starts inside the heart.

Some people are by nature incapable of finding out the way of peace, yet they hit upon ingenious devices. The Spirit recognises them as "inventors of evil" (Rom. 1:30). Their devices vary the miseries of those who openly confess God in Satan's world. Turning away from evil makes a man a target. Some tolerate no departure from the established habits of sin.

You can see the value God places on a child's obedience from His estimate of disobedience… The apostle also marks disobedience to parents as a characteristic sign of the perilous times of the last days (2 Tim. 3:1-2). It is a mark of great moral corruption (Rom. 1:30). Even a little knowledge of life shows that the first step down has often started with disobedience to parents.

Romans 1:29-31 describes the moral condition of the heathen world in Paul's day. But 2 Timothy 3:1-5 describes the moral condition of the professing Christian masses of the last times. These are church members who have the form of godliness and deny its power.

How deserving of hatred — as in Romans 1:30, "haters of God," or perhaps more correctly, "hateful to God." … Yet notice the glorious, surprising contrast: "But when the goodness and loving kindness of God our Savior appeared." Divine love goes beyond human depravity. Weigh the two statements in your mind. Balance one against the other, and see the astounding weight of God's love over man's guilt.

This catalogue of crimes describes a condition that goes back to one root. When men had some knowledge of God, "They did not think good to have God in their knowledge." Men chose to give up the light that God had given of Himself. So God gave man over to a reprobate mind, abandoned to his depraved thoughts. The awful effect of sin is to leave men with defiled bodies (24), degraded affections (26), and deformed minds (28). Man is fallen body, soul, and spirit.

There the apostle starts with the more outward "covenant-breakers", or more generally "faithless". He moves next to the lack of family affection, and then to the more personal "unmerciful", or pitiless. In 2 Timothy, where he predicts how the Christian world will fall away, he goes from within outwards. There, in place of "covenant-breakers", he puts "implacable", that is, defiant of every bond.

"Implacable" lacks authority, since the best and most ancient manuscripts leave it out. So it is dropped from verse 31. It probably came in here through its link with "without natural affection" in 2 Timothy 3:3.

There is natural affection; but if it gets hold of us it may become idolatry. A child or a husband may take our heart from God, but being without affection is one of the signs of the last times. In the last days men are not only not spiritual, but they are not natural. The Lord puts His seal on every relationship. It is an awful thing to see a child failing in affection to its parent, even if that child is not converted. The nearer the relationship, the more dreadful it is.

They prove, beyond all question, that the notion of an improved world is false. In some places it has changed its dress, but not its real spirit. It has taken off the robes of paganism and put on the cloak of Christianity. But under that cloak you can still see every hideous feature of paganism's spirit. Compare Romans 1:29-31 with 2 Timothy 3. There you will find the very traits of human nature at its most pagan, reappearing alongside an outward form of godliness.

Divine love goes far beyond human depravity. Despite all the well-deserved judgment, despite the hateful condition, despite the whole tide of sin, the kindness and love of God appear, and by His grace He justifies! Weigh the two statements against each other, and see how astonishingly the love of God outweighs the guilt of man.

In some passages this compound word, especially as a verb, means "certain personal knowledge, and the recognition of the truth of a thing that follows from it." It is "recognising because we know." See Matthew 7:16, 20 … Romans 1:32.

They are not ignorant of God's righteous judgment against such things, or of the truth that those who do them are worthy of death. They know this. The testimony of intelligence and conscience leaves them no escape. But it makes no difference to their evil course. They know that they will reap as they sow, yet go on sowing the abominations to which they have yielded themselves. Not only this, but they enjoy the evil of others, finding pleasure in the very thought of sin, and encouraging it by friendly company with those bent on it. How bold, how arrogant, how debased, how enslaved is the creature who was once "made in the image of God"!

Natural conscience knew that God judged such things to be worthy of death according to the just requirements of His nature. Still, they not only did them. They took pleasure in those who did them, even when their own lusts were not carrying them away.

It is true that in His governmental dealings God has given men over to the vices they love. He has done so because they have turned away from Him and have chosen to indulge their lusts. But despite this, they have in them by nature (such is the make-up of their being) a sense that God is just in sentencing them to death. They know they deserve to die. They know the sentence that condemns them to die is entirely just. This is true of the lowest, of the most degraded and abandoned. None, then, can excuse themselves, or their sins, in God's court on the ground that He gave them over to judicial blindness.

Someone may ask: were there not rulers, kings, and magistrates who made laws against wickedness and punished crime? "Though they know God's righteous decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them." So then, as now, the rulers or chiefs are the most wicked of all. For proof we have only to read any of the ancient historians. Leave man to himself, and the more power he has, the greater his wickedness … Crowds rushed together into amphitheatres to feast their eyes on cruel wickedness.

Scripture reveals that "in the last days there will come times of difficulty" (2 Timothy 3:1). Then follows, almost word for word, the same description of the professing church that Scripture gives of the pagan world under the sentence of a debased mind (compare 2 Timothy 3:2-5 with Romans 1:28-32). … At the same time there is a form of godliness. It may be something very beautiful to attract the eye, but there is rottenness and dead men's bones inside.

It is almost as if at this point he saw a refined and polished Greek standing nearby, quite approving of his condemnation of the terrible sins of the poor barbarians. So he swung round and charged him with doing in a refined way the very same things he condemned in the barbarian in their cruder forms. Because of this he too stands before God without excuse, for in judging others he condemned himself.

Look now at a class of people who differ from the ones before: they judge those evils. Philosophers, moralists and the like saw such a state of things well enough. Were they themselves changed? Not at all. If they judged evil, it was not to avoid it; they judged it only in others.

Despite the terrible corruption of the pagan world, man keeps the ability to judge and condemn the evil in his fellow men. This ability, in itself, is proof that we are fallen creatures. The knowledge of good and evil came to us only by the fall... Already he has shown that the witness of creation leaves men without excuse. Now he will show that the ability to condemn evil also leaves men without excuse. The plain reason is that the ability to condemn evil gives no power to resist it. So while men condemn evil, they commit the very evils they condemn.

Natural conscience may detect evil. But it never leads a person to possess and enjoy what is good, and it never brings the soul to God. So in chapter 2 the Holy Spirit shows us man content with saying what is right and wrong — moralising for others, but nothing more. Now God must have reality in the man himself.

Man already stands charged as a sinner himself, so he is not competent to judge his fellow man. In doing so he would be passing sentence upon himself... Only someone free from the stain of sin can pass a valid judgment on human sin. So man is shut out of the seat of judgment altogether. But the heart is deceitful as well as evil. So men judge their neighbour while they themselves continue in sin, and constantly bring themselves under a double condemnation — of sin and of hypocrisy.

It was the ruined heart of man exposing itself. And because this was so — because it was the common nature showing itself — the Lord takes the judgment of it away from man... All are in the same condemnation. No one can pick up the stone and throw it at another.

Men judge others and yet do the same things, and so condemn themselves. How can this in any way stop or even soften the sentence of God? It was and is common among thinkers, moralists and the like. In truth it makes the case far worse... Instead of openly sympathising with those who sin, they may condemn it as wrong. But if they do the same, how can such trifling with morality, or those guilty of it, stand before God?

Is it so with my reader? Do you have a stern measure for denouncing the evils of others, and a lesser one for yourself? Do you plead extenuating circumstances for yourself? Or do you persuade yourself that your refined, respectable ways of self-indulgence cancel or lessen that guilt? Does your practised skill at covering guilt with a fine veneer cancel or lessen it in the eyes of a holy and discerning God?

At the start of Romans 2 we have man putting on a show of righteousness. It is still "man" — not yet exactly the Jew, but man. He may have profited by whatever the Jew had, or at least by the workings of natural conscience. Natural conscience can detect evil, but it never leads anyone into owning and enjoying what is good. It never brings the soul to God. So in chapter 2 the Holy Spirit shows us man satisfying himself with pronouncing on right and wrong — moralising for others, but nothing more. Now God must have reality in the man himself. God will no doubt use such moral judgments to leave man without excuse; they can never suit or satisfy Him.

In the heathen world there were those who spoke out against the immoral conditions and the various vices. There were moralists, reformers and philosophers like Socrates, Seneca and others. They judged and condemned certain evils. But God declares that they were not one bit better than the rest. The very things they condemned they were guilty of themselves. They practised evil because the same evil heart was in them. And this is not limited to the moralists of the past. The same is true of others in this age, who judged the evils around them and condemned them, and were later found doing the very things they condemned.

Men judge others and yet do the same things, and so condemn themselves. How can this in any way stop or even soften God's sentence? In truth it is no small aggravation. To say "we see" exposes us, who nonetheless practise wrongdoing, to hear from the just Judge of all that "our sin remains."

The standard by which God measures evil is not the standard of philosophy, but the "truth" as to God made known in Christianity. All that God is has been made known in Christ. "Grace and truth came through Jesus Christ." God has now revealed the full truth of all that He is, in His holy nature. That truth is the standard by which He judges all evil. Men measure evil by standards they set up themselves.

Doing these things and judging others was not the way to escape God's judgment. Or were they despising God's mercy, which leads them to repentance? Were they heaping up wrath for the day of judgment, the day when God reveals His righteous judgment? God always judges evil morally. But there is a day when He will reveal that judgment. Then He will deal with evil openly, according to His own nature. Judgment will be executed.

This fault-finding spirit is doubly offensive to God. First, it pushes a poor sinful creature into the place of God. That creature is himself under the sentence of death, and God is ready to call him to account. Second, it is a flat denial of God's truth, which concludes that all are under sin. Meanwhile, man thinks that he will escape the judgment of God. It is the lurking presence of this thought at the bottom of his heart that supports and sustains him in his evil way. But, sadly for self-deceiving man, the thought is empty. By trusting his own heart this way, he becomes a fool in the end.

The consciences of all men everywhere admit that wrongdoing must be punished, and they act on this in their dealings with each other. They make laws, and they inflict penalties when those laws are broken. Yet some would deny to God the right they feel they must exercise themselves.

If God passes judgment according to the truth of His holy nature, one thing is certain. Those who practise what they condemn in others will not escape the execution of His judgment — unless they repent.

In verse 3 his thoughts tell him he is safe from the judgment of God. In verse 4 his thoughts despise the goodness of God. How contemptible the pride of man!

The truth is that philosophy does not know God. So it easily forgets His judgment, and it can never grasp His love. It is self-satisfied and has man for its object, not God. So it despises His lavish goodness and His patience, and it never learns the lesson of His purpose in it all.

God's judgment will most surely come, though in His goodness it may be long delayed. In His goodness God holds back from judging and bears with evil for a long time. It was so in the days of Noah, when God waited one hundred and twenty years before He sent the judgment of the flood... Because He holds back, men think God will never judge. Because He bears with them so long, men think God does not care about evil. So men despise the goodness of God. They do not see why He holds back and bears with them: it is to give men space to repent.

With Pharaoh, what hardened his heart was simply God's patient mercy (Ex. 8:15; Ex. 9:34); so what should have done good turns to evil again and again, because man's will rebels against his Maker. Treasures of mercy are stored up for the future as treasures of wrath.

Many preach repentance as works for salvation, as something that comes before faith in the riches of God's goodness. But it is when we know and believe the goodness of God in sending His beloved Son to die for our sins that this leads us to repentance and produces it in us. Indeed, we can only know how deep our sin and guilt go when we know the depths He had to go down into to save us... it is not our repentance that leads to, or causes, God's goodness to us. It is God's goodness that leads to, and causes, repentance in us.

But repentance is far from the natural heart. There may well be fear of punishment. But being broken and sorry for sin is foreign to the proud will of man. Nothing will, or can lead him to it but the goodness of God — goodness that has melted and subdued many a proud, stubborn heart.

Different schools of doctrine have drawn a wrong conclusion, one from Romans 2:4, the other from 2 Corinthians 7:10. One side thinks that seeing God's goodness is repentance. The other side thinks it is godly sorrow for sin. Scripture says nothing of the sort in either case. It shows that repentance always involves a change of mind, but goes much further. It is a matter of conscience in the light of God, not just a work of the mind.

But this very chapter says that if men will not let the goodness of God take them by the hand and lead them to repentance, the severity of God will seize them and drag them to judgment.

When judgment against an evil deed is not carried out quickly, people become fully set on doing evil (Ecclesiastes 8:11). With Pharaoh, what hardened his heart was exactly God's forbearing mercy (Exodus 8:15; 9:34). So what should be for good is turned again and again into evil through the revolt of man's will against his Maker. Treasures of mercy stored up for the future become treasures of wrath. A day of wrath must come for those on whom all His goodness has had no good effect.

There is, then, no way of escape for the refined sinner or the mere moralist. Indeed, it seems he will come in for a more severe condemnation. His very knowledge increases his guilt. God's goodness would lead him to repentance, but he despises that goodness in the hardness of his heart. So he treasures up wrath for himself.

The very fact of speaking about wrath beforehand is grace. It has not come, but it is plainly "revealed" that it will come. Are you then despising the warning of what is coming? Do you not know that you are treasuring up wrath against the day of wrath? You do it not only by committing sins, but by rejecting the testimony of God's Son.

Refusing to repent, man treasures up wrath for the day of wrath. Man calls down wrath by his evil. He also calls it down by despising the goodness of God that would deal with that evil. All this will become clear to the unrepentant in the day of wrath. In the goodness of God that day may be long delayed. Still, it is surely coming. It is an actual day when God's judgment, not man's, will be revealed and carried out.

God always judges evil morally. But there is a day when that judgment will be revealed. Then He will deal with evil openly, according to His own nature. Judgment will be carried out.

A wretched criminal may have the truth of his crime dragged into the light. Yet if the judge is incompetent or unrighteous, he may still escape. The divine judgments are righteous as well as according to truth.

A child of God who sins must come under God's governmental chastening in this life. But he cannot come into God's penal judgment when the world is condemned. 1 Corinthians 11:32 makes the difference clear: "But when we are judged by the Lord, we are disciplined so that we may not be condemned along with the world." But John 5:24, Romans 2:5 and Revelation 20:11-15 refer to God's eternal judgment of wicked unbelievers.

Now that God is revealed, He deals with man according to his actions. In the day of judgment He will render to everyone according to his works, whether he is Jew or Greek, for God shows no partiality. He had indeed chosen a people, and brought them near to Himself, to put man to the test... but at root there was no difference among men. All were sinners by nature, and all had sinned... In His righteousness God counts only the measure of light each person has.

In the day of judgment, therefore, God will give the award not according to the nature, in which they are alike, but according to their works, in which they are not alike. God "will render to each one according to his works" (Rom. 2:6). And this, and this alone, will be the exact measure of guilt and responsibility.

The third great principle of God's judgment is that in judgment "God will render to each one according to his works". The verse does not say here when God will do this for well doing. But for evil doing it plainly names the time: the "day of wrath". Yet the Apostle does not say that God will judge each one, for only the evil doer comes into judgment in the "day of wrath". God will "render" to each one according to his works.

This is the unchanging principle of God's righteous dealings, and grace does not weaken it at all. Grace, it is true, lays our sins on another as our substitute. It credits us with the good deeds God's own power works in us. But this confirms the principle instead of contradicting it. If an upright man winds up his affairs, he collects what is due to him, and pays what he owes. And it is no less just if he has cancelled some debts, or taken on some obligations, out of kindness.

Judgment takes account of everything, including greater advantages. Each person gives account according to his light and receives according to his deeds. Salvation is according to grace; reward or judgment is according to works.

Verses 6 to 11 trouble some minds, because they never mention faith in Christ. Some read verse 7, for instance, and say, "There! So after all you have only got to keep on doing good and seeking good, and eternal life will be yours at the end." But read on a little further, and you discover this: no one does good or seeks good unless he believes in Christ.

Well, a man says, "There may then be good people, and if they do good, they will get glory, honour, and peace." But I say to him, "You are completely wrong; no one is good but God." Plenty of Scripture meets such a case. But we do not need to weaken this sentence in Romans to do it. God's nature requires a certain life and character in a man for him to be with God... You must have that life and walk in that life, or you will not be in heaven. So this is broad dealing with conscience, and that is what we must not weaken.

This is the unchanging principle of God's righteous dealings, and grace does not weaken it in any way. Grace, it is true, lays our sins on another as our substitute. It also credits us with the good deeds worked in us by God's own power. But this confirms the principle instead of contradicting it. If an upright man settles his affairs, he collects what is owed to him and pays what he owes. Kindness may have cancelled some debts, or taken on some obligations. That does not make what he does any less just.

In Romans 2:7 and 2 Timothy 1:10 the word is aphtharsia — not "immortality," but "incorruption."

God will render eternal life "to them who by patient continuance in well-doing seek for glory and honour and incorruption." That is not at all the same as seeking immortality. It is the blessed, incorruptible state into which resurrection, or the "change," will bring the saints at the coming of Christ.

It is of course not a matter of absolute holiness or perfection here; but the heart clearly shows itself. Does the heart set itself on what is good? Does it patiently continue to follow what is pure and true? Does it bear the unmistakable stamp of eternity — the weighing of everlasting realities?

"To them who, by patient continuance in well doing, seek for glory, and honour, and immortality" — this marks out their object — "eternal life." Set against these are "them who are contentious." Contention is the opposite of enduring and suffering, and it marks the way of the world. They "do not obey the truth": they have not God's object, and they do not submit to His righteousness.

But without the gospel men never heard of these things. The law set men to seek life on earth by fulfilling their obligations. It is the gospel that sets these great objects before the soul. So no one can meet the conditions for eternal life without hearing and believing the gospel.

God always holds to His own principle: those who "by patient continuance in well-doing seek for glory, and honour, and incorruptibility" have eternal life, and none others. What produces this patient continuance in well-doing is another matter, and what awakens souls to seek after it. It is not from themselves, but from God.

There is another way of viewing eternal life — its full completion in glory, according to the whole purpose of God. Seen this way, we are of course not said to have it, but to follow after it… Romans 2 puts this as a great general principle. It throws no cloud over that great truth. It is simply what is everywhere found in the New Testament: the energy of faith on the wilderness journey, moving on through grace toward the full result for which God has redeemed us. We have to go the road to arrive, but we have sure grace and the keeping of God to go it.

Paul here looks at eternal life more in its future aspect — that is, when it is separated from the very presence of sin, in its own proper sphere, heaven itself. But this does not deny the truth found in John's writings, that "whoever believes in the Son has eternal life." Every believer possesses eternal life at present, but that life is out of its own home… so its full display must await heaven's glory.

Verse 8 describes their character: they do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness. They are contentious! Man's natural life is a contest with God — the mind set on the flesh is hostile to Him. The desires of the natural mind stand in constant opposition to the will of God. The test of this hostility is the word of truth. By nature man refuses to obey that word. It is the declared expression of a will that the whole course of fallen nature stands against.

But on the other hand, is the heart rebellious against the truth? Is there contention instead of submission? Do you yield yourself to unrighteousness instead of to the truth of God? For there is always yielding of some sort: there must be obedience either to what is true or to what is unrighteous. The very word "obedience" is offensive to the hardened heart. Yet he has still yielded himself to obey unrighteousness.

The truth is whatever testimony may be set before men. In chapter 1 we see the descendants of Noah turn the truth of God into a lie. They went so far that righteousness required God to give them up to their own uncleanness. They ignored the testimony of creation and went on in their godless ways. So they stored up wrath for the day of wrath, when God reveals His righteous judgment. These people did not have the law. God will judge them by the light they had, not by the law.

On the other hand there are those who are contentious. They do not obey the truth of Christianity, but obey unrighteousness, and their works are evil. They will come under the indignation and wrath of God. They will also suffer "tribulation and anguish." "Indignation and wrath" describe God's attitude towards evildoers; "tribulation and anguish" describe their portion. In contrast, the portion of those who work good will be "glory, honour, and peace". God will show His attitude toward them in "eternal life".

Those who sin without law perish without it too. Those who sin under law will be judged by it. This happens on the day when God judges the secrets of men through Jesus Christ, according to the apostle's gospel. Here he names the "Jew first" and the "Greek" in judgment, just as he did earlier in the ministry of the gospel. Judgment takes account of everything, including greater advantages. Each person gives account according to his light and receives according to his deeds. For salvation is according to grace, reward or judgment according to works.

These are general principles. The passage does not take up the question of how a person can do good, or can show "patience in well-doing." But we know from the Scriptures that a man must be born again to do good, for "no one does good, not even one." (Rom. 3:12.)

On the other hand there are those who are contentious. They do not obey the truth of Christianity. They obey unrighteousness, and their works are evil. They will come under the indignation and wrath of God. And not only this: they will also suffer "tribulation and anguish." "Indignation and wrath" describe God's attitude towards evil doers; "tribulation and anguish" describe their portion.

'Tribulation' here is thlipsis, and 'anguish' here is stenochoria, the very words we have just seen that mark the path of the Christian through this world! The Christian starts with the 'narrow gate' and the 'narrow way' that tell of tribulation and anguish. But they are 'but for a moment.' He ends in the 'broad street' and the many mansions, for eternity. The unbeliever starts with the 'wide gate' and the 'broad way' that perhaps tell of ease and luxury. But they end in thlipsis and stenochoria — tribulation and anguish — for eternity!

One of the principles of God's moral government is that He will render "indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that does evil" (Rom. 2:8-9). The word "punishment," so often used in Scripture here, "needs (as another has said) a conscious subject to endure it." It could have no meaning at all if applied to people who have ceased to exist.

In Romans 2 the apostle is not handling the gospel that saves the lost. He is handling the unchanging principles of God's righteous government. So he brings out the alternative: tribulation and distress for the one who works evil, glory and honour and peace for the one who works good, both Jew first and Greek, "for God shows no partiality." Such are His ways. Time, place and people make no deep difference with Him. The one exception is that having privileges brings a prior responsibility, and that is plainly just. If a man enjoys religious light and works out evil despite it, is he less guilty than his less favoured fellow-sinner?

This is only in line with divine principles of action. Whatever claims to be near to God, God always takes in hand first for judgment. The direction for the judgment of Ezekiel 9:6 was "Begin at my sanctuary." So the Lord said to Israel, "You only have I known of all the families of the earth; therefore I will punish you for all your iniquities" (Amos 3:2)… "It is time for judgment to begin at the household of God" (1 Peter 4:17).

Keep this in mind. Grace may be displayed in great power. Even so, the principles of righteousness are in no way set aside. Grace upholds them… Note the two-fold truth. "Each of us will give an account of himself to God." Yet the believer will not come into judgment (John 5:24) — not merely into condemnation, but judgment.

These are general principles. It does not enter into the question of how a person can "work good," or can "patiently continue in well doing." But we know now from the Scriptures that a man must be born again to "work good." For "no one does good, not even one." (Rom. 3:12.)

But God takes no delight in the punishment of unbelievers, though it is an absolute necessity. But His delight in those who bow to Him is deeper than words can tell, as verses 7 to 10 show. He announces His terrible judgment, yet promise comes before it and promise follows it — pure blessing for those who have chosen the good.

"Indignation and wrath" describe God's attitude towards evildoers. "Tribulation and anguish" describe their portion. In contrast, the portion of those who work good will be "glory, honour, and peace", just as God will show His attitude toward them in the sphere of "eternal life".

These verses do not ask how a man enters the path of "well doing", or by what power he keeps walking in it. What God takes account of is the reality of the walk. He does not count mere profession or privileges, the kind a Jew or an educated philosopher might boast in… Remember that in judgment God will deal with men not only for their evil deeds, but also for the way they have despised the truth.

In Romans 1 Paul began with the bright side. He affirmed the gospel to be God's power for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. Now, in Romans 2, he is not handling the gospel that saves the lost. He is handling the unchanging principles of God's righteous government, and he brings out the alternative… Time, place and people make no real difference with Him. The one exception is that having privileges brings a prior responsibility, and that is plainly just. If a man who enjoys religious light works out evil despite it, is he less guilty than his less favoured fellow-sinner? If he heeds the warning and testimony of God, working out what is good, God will not withhold "glory, honour, and peace."

In all this the Jew comes in along with the Greek (or Gentile); and his special privileges may even give him a first place; but the same exact award will be to each. There can be no favouritism with the righteous Judge.

The reader will note that the apostle is not here proposing terms on which eternal life is to be obtained, but is showing the righteous rule according to which God acts. On that ground all were lost.

But I say to him, "You are wrong entirely; there is none good but God." There is plenty of scripture to meet such a case, but we need not weaken this sentence in Romans to do it. God's own nature makes it necessary: a man must have a certain life and character in him to be with God… You must have that life and walk in that life, or you will not be in heaven.

The believer is the only one who works good, and so the only one who possesses glory, honour, and peace… It is the fruit of His own grace. It is not in man to direct his steps, and there is no good in him, except when faith enables him to do God's good pleasure. Without faith it is impossible to please Him.

This leads to the fourth great principle of God's judgment: in judgment "There is no respect of persons with God". God still keeps the place He has given the Jew. Yet God shows no partiality. So the Jew will not escape because he is a privileged Jew. And the Gentile will not be able to plead that he is only a poor ignorant Gentile.

In some countries today respect of persons provides an escape route for the undoubted criminal. Favouritism does its work, or other influences behind the scenes, or bribery comes into play. So the offender escapes the penalty he deserves. It will never be like this with God.

Who can influence God on his behalf? Who can plead his personal prominence, importance, earthly position or advantage before the only true God? None of it matters to Him: "God accepts no man's person." Personalities may count for a great deal in the proud, empty judgment of man. But let no one think he can pass God's scrutiny wearing such a cloak.

Such are His ways. Time, place and people make no basic difference with Him. There is one exception: having privileges brings a prior responsibility with it, and this is plainly just. If a man who enjoys religious light works out evil despite it, is he less guilty than his less favoured fellow-sinner?

This brings out the important principle, that, in rendering to every man his deeds, God takes into account the measure of light a man has had. We have already seen that when it is a question of the sin, God measures it by the truth of what He is. But when it is a question of measuring out punishment to the sinner, God takes into account the privileges he may have had under the law, or in some other way.

Suppose His judgment sometimes went by mere outward appearances. Suppose it now and then fell short of strict righteousness, or bent because of favouritism or other personal considerations. Then there might be some chance of escape. It is however "according to truth," and so it will drag the exact reality of things into the light of day. It is "righteous," and so absolute and inflexible justice will prevail. There is "no respect of persons." So nothing will turn God from a judgment of absolute righteousness in the light of absolute truth.

On the one hand sin is a great leveller in the presence of His eternal judgment. On the other hand grace levels just as much, but in the opposite direction. There it is a question of the value of Christ and His work, which brings souls into His presence in favour and in peace. Alike lost in sins, we are alike saved from them by the faith of Jesus.

Masters are urged to remember that their Master is in heaven, and that "neither is there respect of persons with Him." He notes threats and oppression. The cry of the poor and needy comes up in His ears, and He will repay it in the coming day. I believe this verse should read, "their Master and yours is in the heavens." That adds an important point. Both master and servant answer to the one Lord, and will stand together at the same judgment seat.

If first in privilege, he will be first in judgment too. Can he face the responsibility that comes with the wonderful things God has done for him? God will judge him by the very law it is his privilege to have. But the Gentile without law will be judged apart from law: God will not hold him responsible for knowledge he never had.

All breaking of the law is sin, but sin is far from being only the breaking of law. So Scripture calls the Jews "transgressors," because they in particular were under law. It calls the Gentiles "sinners," not "transgressors" — which they would have to be if all men were alike under law. But Rom. 2:12 clearly disproves that, because it separates Gentiles from Jews on that very ground… If Gentiles had no law, they had conscience, which made them feel guilty when they abandoned a natural duty, as the same passage shows.

The Gentiles did not have the law, and so they sinned without law. They cannot escape the righteous judgment of God. They had the witness in creation, as seen from the first chapter. Besides this there is conscience, and it testifies of what sin is. They have the knowledge of good and evil, and so they are morally responsible. They turned from God, and they will be judged apart from the law. But it is more than that: they "will also perish without the law." That answers the teaching that the mercy of God somehow covers the heathen world and that the heathen are not lost.

The Gentiles sinned "without law"; they never received the law. God will judge them by the light He gave in creation, in natural conscience, and in His goodness shown through His providence. They shall perish, for they have been utterly unfaithful to the light granted to them. The Jews received the law, and the law will judge them. Christians are not expected to come into judgment. If they were truly what they profess to be, they would not come into judgment, for in Christ the believer is already justified from all things.

In every case God will judge righteously. But greater privilege brings deeper obligation, and judgment that is strict in the same measure… So the Jew has no built-in claim of exemption in the day of judgment, as he liked to hope. Unlike the Gentiles, that people stood as God's witness on earth. That very standing makes them liable to closer scrutiny. For God is not dealing here by outward blows on the nations. He is dealing with the heart and its ways in His sight, however hidden from man.

If Gentiles (to whom the law was never given) have sinned, they will be judged without the law. If Jews, who received the law, sinned against God, they will be judged by the law. Judgment follows in both cases. The mere hearing of the law in the case of the Jew was no advantage to him if he did not keep it. If he was to be justified before God on the ground of his own doings, he must keep the whole law — not just hear it. Thousands hear it but do not do it. They cannot be justified before God.

The apostle's purpose in all this is the opposite: it is to bring all men in guilty before God. The law does not justify hearers — if it did, a Jew might well congratulate himself. It justifies doers: "the doers of the law ... will be justified." Later we will hear the law's sweeping sentence on everyone: "by works of the law no human being will be justified in his sight, since through the law comes knowledge of sin." Paul does not say this yet. Here he appeals to the conscience of the Jew, who prides himself on knowing and owning a law he took no care to keep.

Law does not bring in justification in the Christian faith. We are justified by faith, not by works of law, which bring a curse. But is a man who keeps the Law justified? Of course he is. A man who only hears it and breaks it is not. Nothing could be simpler. Whether anyone ever kept it — except the Lord — is another question.

"The doers of the law ... will be justified," Rom. 2:13. But if, on the other hand, salvation is "by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works; otherwise grace would no longer be grace," Rom. 11:6. The conclusion is that "by works of the law no human being will be justified in his sight." No one can be saved on that principle.

He stated that those who have sinned under the law will be judged by the law, on the day when God judges by Jesus Christ. Those who have sinned without the light of the law will not answer for that light. Still, they will perish. Verses 13 to 15 are a side note, you notice. To get the sense, read on from verse 12 to verse 16.

The Bible is completely clear. One nation was said to be under law. The rest of mankind had no such position, though they were responsible on their own basis. In the day of judgment God will, by Jesus Christ, deal with the Jew according to the law, and with the Gentiles who do not have the law according to conscience. By the same principle, He will deal with professing Christians according to gospel light. There is no hint that all are judged by the measure given to Israel.

The law does convict of sin, for "through the law comes knowledge of sin". But it cannot remove the sins, or free us from the power of sin. The law is only a plumb-line that shows how crooked the wall is. Holding a plumb-line against a crooked wall will never make it straight. In the same way, the law can never justify a guilty sinner. So the law shows us that we are not only sinners before God, but helpless sinners.

There is one true God who gave His law. He made all men and He will judge them all. So many people assume that all alike are under that law and will be judged by it. They think no other way is possible without staining God's truth, righteousness, authority, and honour. But the apostle shows at length, as an undeniable truth here and elsewhere, that there were men without law, as surely as others were under law. Who they were is just as clear: Gentiles had no law, Jews had. This was a main part of the different ground on which each group would be tried.

I know it is urged that they were a law to themselves where they had none, because they had a conscience; but this only proves that actual righteousness by conscience is better than having a law and breaking it. Scripture contrasts being under law and being without law, and knows nothing of these speculations. Scripture uses the word law as absolutely as words can, and it declares that the Gentiles are without it — they have no law at all. It does say that everyone has a conscience which tells him of right and wrong.

It would be useless for the Gentile moralists to plead that they do not have the law. In fact the Gentile needs no law to tell him not to murder, not to steal, not to bear false witness. His own nature tells him these things are wrong, and therefore he is a law to himself.

The apostle points to particular cases where the Gentiles did the things contained in the law. In those cases they show the work of the law written in their hearts. Paul does not say the law is written there. He says instead that the particular act the law required was shown to be on their conscience... The expression "law written on the heart by nature" should startle anyone who knows the truth of God... The force of the sentence is that there was something written, proved by the deed done.

The apostle speaks of the Gentiles who "do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires" and so "are a law to themselves." He is reasoning in the first place like this: if you have the law and do not keep it, the Gentiles who have not the law but keep it are better than you. But as Gentiles they are also without excuse. The testimony of creation condemns them, and so does this: when they had the knowledge of God, they would not hold on to it. I will tell you the result of a pagan living up to his conscience, if you will first show me one who has.

The parenthesis shows us that many of the things the law demanded were of such a kind that men knew in their hearts they were wrong. No law had to be given for that. Go where you will, and you find that even the most degraded men have some natural light or instinct about what is right and wrong. They also have conscience, and thoughts that either accuse or excuse. So there is a ground of judgment against them apart from the law.

It would be strange indeed, and would say little for Christianity, if the heathen had what the Epistle to the Hebrews (Heb. 10:15-16) calls one of the great and distinctive blessings of the New Covenant... What Paul really teaches is this. Such doing was scanty and rare, but whenever Gentiles do by nature the things of the law, they show the law's work written in their hearts. For instance, suppose a heathen somehow works out that he must honour his parents. He may never have heard of the law, yet this is a law to him.

The work of the law is conviction. Conscience does this work in the person who does not have the law, though far less fully. "Through the law comes knowledge of sin," and conscience gives every person a measure of that knowledge. In that respect those who do not have the law are "a law to themselves." If they had a law, they would not be a law to themselves.

God has revealed a standard in His word, and man's conscience tells him how utterly evil he is. Once a person has heard the word of God, we cannot separate God from conscience. Our moral instinct and our sense of right and wrong bear witness to the unseen God. Within us there is something that knows together with God.

Conscience is a useful monitor, but it is too open to influence and pressure to be a reliable guide. Conscience may become "seared" (1 Tim. 4:2). What is it worth then? Saul of Tarsus shed the blood of Christians with a perfectly good conscience, convinced that he ought to oppose the name of Jesus of Nazareth (Acts 23:1; Acts 24:9). The unenlightened heathen have consciences that bear witness to them (Rom. 2:15), yet they debase themselves with idolatry.

Eve admitted she had eaten from the tree, but she blamed the serpent. What she said was true, for the serpent did deceive her. Yet she was clearly trying to shift the blame off herself. Romans 2:15 throws much light on this. We have to add one thing, though. Apart from the working of the Spirit of God in the conscience, sinful men always tend to indulge in "accusing" others and "excusing" themselves.

Even those without law have a conscience that bears witness to their sin, while their ability to judge others and their attempts to cover their own sin by excuses only expose them more fully. Their thoughts accuse or else excuse one another. Either they take a hard, legal spirit over the sins of others, or a lightness that glosses it over with excuses. But accusation will not atone for sin, and excuses will not put it away... For God can put sin away, while all my accusing or excusing is shallow, wretched vanity.

The Gentiles, though they never received the law, still had consciences. Sin was sinful even before the law came. Natural conscience accuses a man of sin if he kills another, even if he never heard of the ten commandments. This shows that the work of the law — its moral demand — is in every man's conscience. Sin is everywhere sinful to God, law or no law. And men will be judged according to God's thoughts of sin when the day arrives. He will judge the secrets of men. How solemn!

In judgment the question is not privilege but faithfulness to what we know or may know. It is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the law who will be justified.

In Romans 2:17 the apostle begins definitely with a Jew, insisting on the same truth, but the opposite of what he had said of the Gentile. A Jew who boasted of the law and broke it was as bad as the man who had none; the Gentiles blasphemed the name of God because of them. He alone was a Jew who was one inwardly; whose heart was circumcised in spirit, not in letter; whose praise came not from men, but from God.

Then come the proofs of what man is. First the Gentiles, and then from Romans 2:17 the Jew, with his privileges: the law, circumcision, yes, the very words of God given to him. So we see "None is righteous, no, not one." The very law, which was the boast of the Jew, is that which condemned him.

God will judge the Gentile by conscience, the Jew by law, in the day when God judges the secrets of the heart, according to Paul's gospel. God will show no favour to the circumcised... He will have realities. The judgment spoken of here reaches the secrets of the heart. It is not outward and earthly. "But if" — for that is the true reading, and not "behold" in Romans 2:17.

He made, however, one great mistake. He treated the law as something in which he could boast, and so it fed his pride. Says the Apostle, "you... rest in the law and boast in God." He did not realise that the law was not given to him as something to rest in, but as something to act as a test.

True, he had the form of knowledge and truth in the law, but it all worked like a two-edged sword. He was so busy turning its sharp edge against other people that he missed how it applied to himself. For others he treated it as a standard — a plumb-line or spirit level. For himself he thought it a personal ornament, a feather to stick in his cap. Do not be surprised that he did this, because it is just what we all do naturally. We take pride in our privileges and forget the responsibilities that come with them.

The Jew — the favoured, privileged Jew — sinned grievously in this way. Romans 2 convicted him on this ground. His separation from the nations came from God. He should have used it to witness to God's holiness in a corrupt world that had turned against Him. Instead he used it as a chance to exalt himself. He boasted in God and in the law; but he dishonoured God by breaking the law.

One view of the first five chapters of the Epistle to the Romans sees them as the leading of a soul from a false joy in God in 2:17 to a true joy in God in 5:11. The false joy is all brought to nothing. In its place comes justification by faith and the love of God, so that "we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ" (Romans 5:11).

We have only to read these verses to see how exactly they describe the religious man, whether Jew or professing Christian. Change the name Jew to Christian, and law to Bible, and we have an exact description of the Christian profession. The professing Christian boasts that he is called a Christian and not a pagan. He boasts that he has the Bible and knows the true God. He boasts that the Bible teaches him what is right.

The apostle now takes another step in his appeal to conscience. He speaks next to the Jew, and no longer groups him with the Gentile only. Did the Jew value himself on his unique place among men? Did he value himself on holding a revelation from God, on the true God as his God, on the knowledge of His will, and on his resulting ability to test the things that differ and so decide for the more excellent? Grant that it was all true. How did the Jew then stand? The greater the privilege, the less excusable he was, if he proved unfaithful to the light he had and as bad as the heathen he despised.

To show what the religious Jew is responsible for, the Apostle lists the advantages the Jew has and boasts in. The Jew takes his stand on being a privileged Jew, set apart from the Gentiles. Next he rests on having a divinely given law. Then he boasts that he has the knowledge of the true God. Further, he boasts that he knows the will of God, and that he can approve the things that are excellent, because the law has taught him… He also has the form of knowledge and of the truth, embodied in the law. For the light he has, he does not depend on tradition passed by word of mouth.

The Jew with his knowledge of the will of God did no better than the moralist among the Gentiles. He was very far from being an open rebel. Yet he completely misunderstood his own condition, and so he misunderstood the character of that law on which he "rested" — where no true rest was possible. He owned God and His law, but not with a heart subject enough to give Him the obedience due. He held them instead as things that raised his position above all other men… In fact, he had the form of knowledge and of the truth as the law gave it; but the breath of life was absent from the form.

If he had a conscience, he had to admit that he was more guilty than the Gentile. If he had none, his lack of feeling would not make his sin and folly any less obvious to all who fear God and judge people rightly. On his own showing, his boasted knowledge of the law brought him no saving power. Whatever fuel it gave to his arrogant misuse of it in contempt of others, it saved nothing in himself.

These verses describe the religious man exactly, whether Jew or professing Christian. Change the name Jew to Christian, and law to Bible, and we have an exact description of the Christian profession. The professing Christian boasts that people call him a Christian and not a heathen. He boasts that he has the Bible and the knowledge of the true God. The Bible teaches him what is right, so he can send out missionaries to teach the heathen.

We see, then, how important it is to prove what the will of God is, what is good and acceptable and perfect. Then, being "filled with the knowledge of His will in all spiritual wisdom and understanding," we may "walk in a manner worthy of the Lord, fully pleasing to Him" (Col. 1:9). Setting this aside is what brought condemnation on the religious boaster of Romans 2:18… He belonged to Israel and to law; we belong to Christ and to grace… "If anyone's will is to do God's will, he will know whether the teaching is from God," said the Lord (John 7:17).

Did the Jew value himself on his unique place among men, on his possession of a divine revelation, on the true God as his God, and on the knowledge of His will? Did he assume a conscious superiority to his Gentile neighbours? He was confident that he stood on ground that let him look down on the wisest of other nations as merely blind, and in the dark, and foolish, and babies. They lacked that embodiment of knowledge and truth which the law gave him. Suppose all this was so. How was it with the Jew in fact? The greater the privilege, the less excusable if he was unfaithful to the light he had and as bad as the heathen he despised.

So too he gloried in God, as the One who had made the Jew the storehouse of all the light and knowledge in the world. He owned God and His law, but not with a heart in subjection to render Him the obedience due. He owned them as things that added to the loftiness of his position compared with all other men. For him the Gentiles were just the blind, walking in darkness, foolish as undeveloped babies. The Jew was the full treasury of all that the Gentile lacked.

The nation and its people should truly have been what they prided themselves on being — a light to those who were in darkness (Rom. 2:19). But it was otherwise. The light within them was darkness. And where that was so, how great was that darkness!

They were not only in darkness — they loved it. They were not only blind, but angry with the One who would have healed them. The Lord had come so that those who do not see might see. But the Jews refused to admit any such thing and gloried in themselves... they were so infatuated, so under the power of the enemy who blinds the minds of the unbelieving (2 Cor. 4:4), that they did more than claim to see for themselves. They claimed to be guides to the blind and lights to those in darkness (Rom. 2:19).

The law was like a schoolmaster who hands the same code of rules to every pupil — very firm, very clear and well printed. Yet he offers them no help at all in putting those rules into effect. Grace teaches in a far more effective way. Grace is just as clear about everything it commands, and it sets an even higher standard than the law demanded. But it adds one thing: it works IN us.

You have been boasting of teaching others — do you teach yourself? What about your practice? You preach to others that they should not steal: do you steal? ... What about God? You boast in the knowledge of God; do you honour God?

Change the name Jew to Christian, and law to Bible, and we have an exact description of the christian profession. The professing Christian boasts that people call him a Christian and not a heathen. He boasts that he has the Bible and the knowledge of the true God. The Bible teaches him what is right, so he is able to send out missionaries to instruct the heathen.

How presumptuous man can be! He takes the advantages and privileges God kindly gave him and turns them into occasions of self-exaltation and of belittling others — like those "who trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and treated others with contempt" (Luke 18:9).

To show the responsibilities of the religious Jew, the Apostle describes the advantages which belong to the Jew, and in which he boasts. Being a Jew, and having the law, he assumes to guide the blind, to give light to those in darkness, to instruct the foolish and teach the ignorant. Moreover, he has the form of knowledge, and of the truth, embodied in the law. He is not dependent, for the light that he has, upon mere tradition handed down from mouth to mouth.

The Gentiles were for him only the blind, walking in darkness, foolish as undeveloped babes. The Jew was the full treasury of everything the Gentile lacked. In fact, he had the form of knowledge and of the truth as the law gave it. But the breath of life was absent from the form. In his morals he contradicted his own teaching, glorying in law and breaking it. So the light he held only showed his misdeeds more plainly. It dishonoured the name of his God among the Gentiles, as He Himself had declared through His prophets (Isa. 52:5).

There was of course teaching of a sort under the law, for the Jew had "the form of knowledge and of the truth in the law" (Rom. 2:20). It consisted in the clear laying down of what was right and what was wrong. The law was like a schoolmaster who hands the same code of rules to every pupil. The rules are very strict, very clear and well printed. Yet he offers his pupils no help at all in putting those rules into effect. Grace teaches in a far more effective way. Grace is just as clear about everything it commands. The standard it sets is even higher than the law demanded. But there is this in addition: it works IN us.

True, he had the form of knowledge and truth in the law, but it all acted as a two-edged sword. He had been so busy turning its keen edge against other people that he entirely overlooked its application to himself. He viewed it for others as a standard — as a plumb-line or spirit level — but for himself he thought it a personal adornment, a feather to be stuck in his cap.

Was he not one of those who, by profession, rested in the law, and found in it a form of knowledge and truth? But coming to Jesus by night is not the fruit of resting in the law, nor in anything else. It had not brought him out of nature's darkness. Could the form of truth and knowledge in the law satisfy a soul when it thought of God, or found itself in spirit before Him? … Jesus pierces the layers of profession, and finds at the bottom only a man.

We have only to read these verses to see how exactly they describe the religious man, whether Jew or professing Christian. Change the name Jew to Christian, and law to Bible, and we have an exact description of the Christian profession. The professing Christian boasts that people call him a Christian, and that he is not a heathen. He boasts that he has the Bible and the knowledge of the true God. The Bible instructs him as to what is right, so he is able to send out missionaries to instruct the heathen.

The test is applied to him from verse 21 to the end of the chapter. He comes out of it with his reputation utterly shattered. True, he had the form of knowledge and truth in the law, but it all acted as a two-edged sword. He was so busy turning its sharp edge against other people that he overlooked how it applied to himself. For others he treated the law as a standard, a measuring line. For himself he treated it as an ornament, a feather to stick in his cap.

By his own account, the law he boasted of knowing brought him no saving power. It gave him fuel only for misusing it arrogantly, in contempt of others. Who, then, dishonoured God more openly?

Each question in verses 21, 22 and 23 is like a sword-thrust. To each implied accusation the Jew had to plead guilty. He had the law truly, but by breaking it he dishonoured God, whose law it was. Their guilt was so open that Gentiles looked at the Jews and blasphemed God, the very God they represented.

Addressing the religious man, the Apostle asks, as it were, What about yourself? You have been boasting of teaching others, do you teach yourself? What about your practice? You preach to others that they should not steal: Do you steal? … What about God? You boast in the knowledge of God; Do you honour God?

Like the Gentiles, he had a conscience that condemned evil in others. But he also had the Word of God, and he taught others about good and evil. Yet he did not keep what he gloried in teaching. This is the most plainly manifested guilt of all. For to teach the truth is more than to know it; so that the responsibility of the teacher is a grave one indeed.

God is not mocked. He remembers words said lightly — words we might press on others, with little or no thought of our own need. "You then who teach others, do you not teach yourself?" Judgment grows heavier in every way if teaching does not flow from love and in the fear of God.

What is the first thing any man ought to do before he speaks to another? Speak to himself. Do not speak to another and carry a careless heart yourself. "While you preach against stealing, do you steal?" … Now, before the Lord goes to attack Satan, He must withstand Satan. He lets him see that he has nothing in Him. If I take part in evil, I cannot rebuke it.

We may try to apply it to other people. We sit in judgment on others — on our fellow Christians, or perhaps on the men of the world. But "you who teach others, do you not teach yourself?" The sword of the Spirit does not cut only those whose faults we can see. It cuts us as well.

Change the name Jew to Christian, and law to Bible, and we have an exact description of the Christian profession. The professing Christian boasts that he is called a Christian and is not a pagan. He has the Bible and the knowledge of the true God. The Bible teaches him what is right, so he can send out missionaries to instruct those who do not know God.

Each question in verses 21, 22 and 23 is like a sword-thrust. To each implied accusation the Jew had to plead guilty. He had the law truly, but by breaking it he dishonoured God, whose law it was.

(3) What about the world? You claim to approve the things that are better: do you form unholy alliances with the world? Do you commit adultery? (4) What about the idol-worshipping nations? You claim to hate idols; do you commit sacrilege?

Here the Jew stands accused before God of three things: 1. evil work (v. 21); 2. evil walk, or the company he keeps; and 3. evil worship (v. 22). On every one of them he gives the finest teaching. And this brings the most serious issue right to the front: of all people, it was the Jew who had brought direct dishonour on the Name of God.

It is true that he had the form of knowledge and truth in the law, but it all worked like a two-edged sword. He was so busy turning its sharp edge against other people that he missed how it applied to himself. For others he treated the law as a measuring tool — a plumb line or a spirit level. For himself he treated it as a decoration, a feather to stick in his cap.

To teach the truth is more than to know it, so the teacher carries a serious responsibility. James has good reason to tell us: "Not many of you should become teachers, my brothers, for you know that we who teach will be judged with greater strictness" (James 3:1).

If he had a conscience, he had to admit he was more guilty than the Gentile. If he had none, his deadness to it did not make his sin and folly any less obvious to everyone who fears God and judges people rightly. By his own account, his boasted knowledge of the law brought him no saving power. It only gave him fuel for using the law arrogantly to look down on others.

The man who preaches morals, whether Jew or Gentile, may in his proud and corrupt heart condemn all this in his neighbour. But God does not let him off for that, if he does the same things he condemns in others… So whether it was the Jew teaching the law or the Gentile teaching morals, God proves both guilty of doing the very things they condemn in others. And He knows the heart.

We pride ourselves on our privileges and forget the responsibilities that go with them.

An outward religious form cannot cover a life that contradicts the very spirit of that form. On the other side, where that spirit is really there, God will approve it even though the outward form is missing — and it may be missing through no fault of the person. He will have, and must have, what is real in everything that concerns people's relationship with Himself.

He made one great mistake. He treated the law as something in which he could boast, and so it fed his pride. The apostle says, "you… rest in the law and boast in God." He did not realise this. The law was not given to him as something to rest in, but as something to test him.

True, he had the outward form of knowledge and truth in the law, but it all worked like a two-edged sword. He kept turning its sharp edge against other people, and overlooked how it applied to himself. For others he treated it as a standard — a plumb-line or a spirit level. For himself he thought it a personal ornament, a feather to stick in his cap. We should not be surprised at this, because it is just what we all do naturally. We take pride in our privileges and forget the responsibilities that come with them.

The apostle tests the claims of the religious man with searching questions. (1) Speaking to the religious man, the apostle asks, in effect, What about yourself? You have been boasting of teaching others — do you teach yourself? (2) What about your practice? You preach to others that they should not steal — do you steal? (3) What about the world? You claim to approve the things that are more excellent — do you form unholy alliances with the world? Do you commit adultery? (4) What about the heathen? You claim to hate idols — do you rob temples? (5) What about the law and the Bible? You boast in the law — do you obey it? (6) What about God? You boast in the knowledge of God — do you honour God?

Transgression of the law does occur in Scripture — for instance, in Romans 2:23, translated "breaking the law" in the English Bible. "Transgression" in the same sense, without "the law," appears in Romans 4:15, Galatians 3:19, Hebrews 2:2 and Hebrews 9:15.

Transgression is therefore a grave and serious offence. It is the sin of the servant who knows his master's will and yet disobeys, and for that reason deserves many blows. The sin of Israel was transgression, in contrast to the sin of the Gentiles, which is lawlessness.

Of all people, it was the Jew who had brought direct dishonour on the name of God. His high claims were nothing more or less than hypocrisy. They gave the Gentiles reason to ridicule and despise the God such people claimed to worship. The Gentiles took their impression of the God of Israel from the conduct of Israel.

The separation of the Jew from the nations came from God. But he did not use it as a witness to the holiness of God in a world full of corruption. Instead, he took the opportunity to exalt himself by it. He boasted in God and in the law, but he dishonoured God by breaking the law.

A religious form cannot cover a life that contradicts its own spirit. On the other hand, where that spirit is truly present, God will approve it even when the form is missing, which may be unavoidable. He will and must have reality in everything that concerns people in their relation to Himself.

The apostle is speaking of the Jew, but what he says is equally true of the professing Christian. What has mainly stirred unbelievers to blaspheme is the corruption and the degraded practice of those who profess to be Christians. Consistent Christian living would not by itself have made people Christians. But if Christians lived up to what they profess, people would have no reason to blaspheme God.

The Jew was more favoured than the Gentile. No other nation had the light in which he boasted, but he was the most unfaithful to it. He was quite able to lay down the law, but he did not keep the law; this was his condemnation. He was no better practically than the Gentile. He had many privileges, but he was unfaithful to them all. He had broken the law in which he boasted, and by doing so he had dishonoured God; and through him the name of God had been blasphemed among the Gentiles.

Each question in verses 21, 22 and 23 is like a sword-thrust. To each implied accusation the Jew had to plead guilty. He had the law truly, but by breaking it he dishonoured God, whose law it was. Indeed, their guilt was so flagrant that the Gentiles looked at the Jews and blasphemed God, whose representatives they were.

By his own account, his boasted knowledge of the law brought him no saving power, whatever fuel it gave for his arrogant use of it to look down on others. Who, then, more clearly dishonoured God? Was it not written even more strongly in their own prophets? What did Isaiah say (Isa. 52:5)? And what did Ezekiel say (Ezek. 36:20-23)?

But there is more. Jewish Scripture itself has already answered the Jew's plea and thrown out his claim: "For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you, as it is written" (Ezek. 36:20-23). So the Gentiles are already God's witnesses, to the shame of the Jew who is under Law. To claim anything on the ground of legal obedience is therefore useless. It is also a lie against God, whose own word records their sin.

Israel does not appear to have been meant as a missionary people, eagerly spreading what they knew of the one true God. But they were meant to be a model people. Their laws were perfect, and they had received them straight from Heaven. So all their ways should have pleased God and rebuked the nations around them. But they were untrue to their privileged place of separation to God, the one thing that could have made them a blessing to the world. They copied the evil ways of their neighbours instead.

The Apostle is speaking of the Jew; but what he says is equally true of the professing Christian. The corruptions and degraded practices of professing Christendom have provoked most of the blasphemies of unbelievers. Men would not have become Christians just because Christians lived consistently. But if Christians lived up to what they profess, men would have no reason to blaspheme God.

When a Christian is careless, sloppy, or unprincipled in the way he acts, he does serious damage to the cause of Christ and dishonours His holy name. On the other hand, being diligent, earnest, punctual and faithful brings glory to that Name.

The very law they trusted was their righteous accuser. It had already said of them, "None is righteous, no, not one." And the apostle says, "We know that whatever the law says it speaks to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be stopped, and the whole world may be held accountable to God."

Israel had defiled the land and profaned the name of Jehovah, and Jehovah had scattered them among the nations. Even in this His name would be profaned by their vileness, because the nations would say, "These are the people of Jehovah, and they have gone out of His land." But Jehovah would step in and sanctify His great name before the nations. He would bring His people back from among them and cleanse them from all their filthiness, taking away the hardness of their hearts and giving them His Spirit.

To the Jew, circumcision was the sign that he belonged to the system of Judaism, and it was a real advantage. But its profit was completely lost if he broke the law, because the law was the very basis of Judaism. For a man to boast in what he throws away in practice is the most contemptible form of vanity. Breaking the law was an outward denial of circumcision. Circumcision — the cutting off of the flesh — was the clear sign that a man gave up self in order to submit to the law. Even so, circumcision had brought the Jew into a place of real privilege, because it involved professing God's Name — though unfaithfulness to such a profession called for stern judgment.

The rite of circumcision marked the Jews off from other nations outwardly. But it counted for nothing before God if a man did not keep the whole law (compare Galatians 5:3). Suppose, on the other hand, that a man could be found who kept the law but had never been circumcised. God would count him righteous. Circumcision neither helped nor hindered justification, if any man at all — Jew or Gentile — had kept the whole law.

The failure has one root: people claim outward privileges without an inward work of grace in the heart. The outward place of privilege, which circumcision marks, really is of profit — if the man keeps the law. An outward place among the people of God has its advantages. But if the practice does not match the place, it has no spiritual value.

Still, circumcision profits if a man keeps the law. But when the law is wholly broken, circumcision becomes the mark of rejection instead of favour and privilege. It becomes uncircumcision. That is, the Jew sinks back to the same natural distance from God as everyone else. He carries one more condemnation as well: he was specially tested, and found rejected.

Was circumcision of no use because of the dishonour put on it? No — but a circumcision joined to the breaking of what it pledged the man to keep could not be counted as circumcision at all.

A religious form cannot cover a life that morally contradicts its own spirit. On the other hand, where that spirit is really there, God will approve of it even though the form is missing — and the lack of it may be unavoidable. He will and must have reality in what concerns men in their relation to Himself... Outward circumstances cannot override His character and ways and judgment.

But we can easily transfer the principle to the Christian world today. Baptism is the outward sign or badge of Christianity, and people often boast in it and trust in it while the soul is far from God... We are not belittling baptism, any more than verses 25-26 belittle circumcision in connection with Judaism. But let it be known: baptism is no substitute for the reality of faith, and no addition to it.

A Jew might answer, while admitting all this, that circumcision protected him from judgment by God. The apostle exposes the utter insecurity of such a retreat. No Jew would be willing to have an uncircumcised man who kept the righteousness of the law counted as a circumcised man. He, then, must accept being counted as an uncircumcised man if he breaks the law. The formal ceremony of circumcision is not what makes a man truly circumcised; to be real, circumcision must be of the heart.

A parallel passage (Rom. 2:26) gives the same sense — the uncircumcision is counted for circumcision. That is, the man is accounted circumcised when he is not. So a person can be reckoned to be in a state he is not really in. But imputed righteousness does not mean a quantity of righteousness, ready outside himself, reckoned to him. It means the state in God's sight of the person so accounted righteous. Righteousness imputed to a man is the same as the man's being accounted righteous.

The Jews were outwardly separated from other nations by the rite of circumcision. But this was made null and void before God if a man did not keep the whole law. On the other hand, suppose a man could have been found who kept the law but had never been circumcised. He would have been reckoned righteous. With God, it was no question of mere ceremonies applying to a man outwardly, but of real heart-work.

A religious form cannot cover a life that contradicts the very spirit of that form. On the other hand, where that spirit really is found, God will approve it even though the form is missing — and its absence may be unavoidable. He will and must have reality in everything that concerns men in relation to Himself… As the principle is clear, so are the persons who alone are acceptable with God. External circumstances cannot override His character and ways and judgment.

Sin is shown to be the great leveller, as righteousness does not fail to exalt. A transgressing Jew was as bad as, indeed worse than, a Gentile; a Gentile who did righteousness was no less acceptable than a Jew. God will have moral reality; and this, wherever found, alone secures His praise.

Notice that this argument strictly concerns Judaism. But we may easily transfer the principle to Christendom today, where people often boast in baptism and trust in it, the outward sign or badge of Christianity, while the soul is far from God. And shall not the godly faith of an unbaptised person be counted for baptism? And shall not the baptism of the corrupter be counted as no baptism? We do not belittle baptism, any more than verses 25-26 belittle circumcision… But know this: baptism is no substitute for, and no supplement to, the reality of faith.

The root of the failure lies in claiming outward privileges without an inward work of grace in the heart… An outward place among the people of God has its advantages. But if the practice does not match the place, that place has no spiritual value.

The failure has its root in claiming outward privileges without an inward work of grace in the heart. The outward place of privilege, which circumcision marks, does bring profit — if a person keeps the law. An outward place among the people of God has its advantages. But if the practice does not match the place, it has no spiritual value.

But sinners will themselves become witnesses to their own condemnation. The Jew's professed subjection to the Law will prove that he disobeyed it, on the day when the secret of his heart comes out. And the Gentile has kept clear of the moral evil the Jew may be guilty of. His conduct will stand as a separate verdict of judgment against the outward Jew.

If the Gentile, who does not have the position, keeps the righteousness of the law, he would get the blessing of the privileged class, even without their position.

Think how the obedience of the uncircumcised man would condemn the one who had both the letter of the law and circumcision, and yet broke that law! Clearly then, we must put what is inward and spiritual before what is outward in the flesh.

But the preposition can, and when needed does, express the surrounding condition, as in Romans 2:27, and elsewhere.

In every case God will judge righteously. But greater privilege brings deeper obligations, and God judges the privileged more strictly… That people stood as God's witness in the earth, unlike the Gentiles. That very standing leaves them open to closer scrutiny. For God is not dealing here in outward blows on the nations. He is dealing with the heart and its ways as He sees them, however hidden from man.

Circumcision does nothing to shield them from their own base inconsistency; instead it turns into uncircumcision. In the same way, uncircumcision that keeps the law's requirements should count as circumcision. Sin is shown to be the great leveller, as righteousness does not fail to exalt. A transgressing Jew was as bad as, indeed worse than, a Gentile… God will have moral reality; and this, wherever found, alone secures His praise.

An outward religious form cannot cover a spirit that morally contradicts it. And where the true spirit is found, God will approve it even when the form is missing — and that absence may be unavoidable. He will and must have reality in everything that concerns how men stand before Him.

So it was useless for them to fall back on being God's circumcised people. The argument of verses 25 to 29 is very important. It is not official position, which is an outward thing, that counts before God and puts right what is wrong. It is the inward thing that God values. God would have respect to the one who obeys, even if he were an uncircumcised Gentile. He would reject the disobedient, even if he were the circumcised Jew.

The persistent tendency was to observe the outward ceremony and overlook its significance. Israel was to be a people completely cut off for God and to God. If there had been circumcision of the "heart," self-love would have been cut off through knowing the love of God.

Refusing the flesh does not mean merely neglecting the body in a way the world can see. It means refusing the flesh in all its inward workings in the heart — its self-confidence, self-righteousness, vanity and lusts — as something the cross has condemned.

Here "the letter" does not mean the actual words of the law, for God Himself inspired those words. It means a man's exact outward keeping of the law's forms. Without a purified heart, that is nothing but barren desolation — even in Judaism, where ceremony had its place.

What is now to be sought after is reality of heart before God, and not a distinguishing mark on one's body. And only those who have this are now true Jews in spirit, according to the meaning of the word Jew — that is, praise.

The true Jew is not the one who lives and acts for the eyes of men, but for God's eye. Jewish parentage rightly calls for such a character. If it is missing, a claim based on Jewish descent is worthless.

Above all, the Jew boasted of his circumcision as a way of having favour with God, just as Christians in name only trust in the sacraments as the means of salvation. But circumcision or religious rites cannot save a man and make him right before God.

This passage, however, is not written about Christians at all. It is about Gentiles who kept the law compared with Jews who broke it.

A religious form cannot cover the moral contradiction of its own spirit. On the other hand, where the spirit is truly found, God will approve of it even when the form is absent — an absence that may be unavoidable. He will and must have reality in what concerns men in their relation to Himself... External circumstances cannot override His character and ways and judgment.

The root of the failure lies in the profession of outward privileges without an inward work of grace in the heart... An outward place among the people of God has its advantages; but if the practice is not in accord with the place, it has no spiritual value... The true Jew is one in whom there is an inward work of the heart. He serves God in spirit and not in the letter. He lives before God, and not just before men.

The letter here does not mean the actual words of the law, for those words are inspired by God. It means a man's exact outward keeping of the law's forms. And such a thing without a purified heart — even in Judaism, where ceremony was in order — is nothing but barren desolation... The true Jew is not the one who lives and acts for the eyes of men, but for God's eye. He lives not "in the presence of his brothers," but in the presence of God.

They were to "circumcise" their hearts, as the answer to the love shown to them. We again find the Apostle Paul referring to this in Romans 2:28-29... The persistent tendency was to keep the outward ceremony and overlook its significance. Israel was to be a people completely cut off for and to God. Had there been circumcision of "heart," there would have been the cutting off of self-love, in the knowledge of the love of God.

The refusal of the flesh is not to be just an outward neglect of the body, which the world can see. It is the refusal of the flesh in all its inward workings in the heart — its self-confidence, self-righteousness, vanity and lusts — as that which has been condemned in the cross.

Turning next to Romans, we are taught there that what is now to be sought after is reality of heart before God, and not a distinguishing mark on one's body. And only these are now true Jews in spirit, according to the meaning of the word Jew — that is, praise... Paul could boast of being circumcised on the eighth day, as the law required. Yet he teaches that what is now to be valued is circumcision of the heart, and not of the letter.

To profess the truth is not always to be of the truth. For this we must be born of God by the word of truth (James 1:18). It is an effective and lasting work of the Spirit. Religious ceremonies have their place, but have nothing to do with the giving of life. What is true of the Jew and of circumcision is true of Christianity and of baptism. Outward rites have nothing whatever to do with the giving or the sustaining of life; to think so is to mistake their object and use.

At the end of Romans 2 the apostle pressed home on the conscience, with force no one can answer, that God wants reality and not form. So let the Jew beware. This raises objections, and he answers them in the first part of Romans 3:1-8.

First, the question may be raised: is there no advantage in an outward position? What advantage is there in outward religious privileges, such as the Jew enjoyed? Or what profit is there in circumcision — the rite that brought a person into this outward position?

This is how we should weigh the Jews and their real state, whatever great privileges God had given them as a nation. When it is a question of sin, Christian teaching brings the Jew down to the level of the Gentile. Even so, it never despises the special advantages of the Jew. It owns them, and above all the advantage of holding the oracles of God in trust. It owns them even though many in Israel proved faithless. For God is faithful. He will judge the faithless, and He will keep His people faithfully.

Elsewhere he lists the various high distinctions of Israel. Here he singles out one as first of all: their constant and most precious privilege, the possession of God's written word. He names it all the more because it was best suited to show their moral failure. For what use had they made of it? Where was the fruit of so great a favour?

Paul answers with his whole soul that there was "much in every way". But he presses one chief advantage that the Jews had: a trust committed to them, and not for their own sake only — "the oracles of God," His own words spoken through a human mouthpiece. Most people had wandered off into the many forms of idolatry that kept tempting Israel too. Nothing but God's power and goodness kept Israel from them. So the divine Word, if it was to last for the blessing of men, had to be kept away from these destructive influences. It had to sit in a place from which its power could flow out all around, while it stayed safe from the corruption everywhere else.

The apostle allows the advantage in every way, and first of all in this: God entrusted them with His oracles. But man's unfaithfulness in no way stops God from judging the world, and judging it justly. Outward privileges do not imply a better condition, and they do not secure one. They do increase responsibility.

To have the Scriptures was then, as it is now, a great gain. Some people do not accept the gospel. Even so, it is an immense advantage to live in a land where the light of God's word presses on people, even if it only touches their outward lives.

"Then what advantage has the Jew? Or what is the value of circumcision?" This would be the natural question of a Jew after reading the argument that the Jew is on the same level with the Gentile. This objection appears here for the first time. It matters, because the Jews are God's chosen people... If God puts Jews and Gentiles on the same footing, what then becomes of all these special blessings promised to the Jews?

In the New Testament the word translated this way is logion. It is applied to the law given to Moses and entrusted to Israel, and also to truths revealed in New Testament times (Acts 7:38; Rom. 3:2; Heb. 5:12; 1 Peter 4:11). It means "a message or answer given by God," and also the place from which such messages were given.

"Oracles," says Dr. Johnson, "are something delivered by supernatural wisdom." That is the meaning of this important phrase. The utterances of God — is this not another word for inspiration? And Scripture says the Jews were privileged: God appointed them the keepers of His oracles. "The utterances of God!" Who dare question them? And they form the Old Testament.

In its proper place he lists the various high distinctions of Israel. But here he singles out one as foremost: their constant and most precious privilege, the possession of God's written word. He names it all the more because it was best suited to show their moral failure. For what use had they made of it? Where was the fruit of so great a favour?

Nothing here says that this clear fact guarantees God's acceptance of them personally, because it does not. But it put them in a unique position. They were the only nation to whom God made His will known, the only nation to whom He showed His counsel and ways in those days.

This is not a question, in this respect, of their all being converted one by one. They enjoyed privileges as the people of God that were found nowhere else. And if they did not believe, their unbelief could not set aside the faithfulness of God. The promises of God will be fulfilled through His faithfulness to His people Israel, even though they have lost every right to them.

Privilege and responsibility go together... As a people they were blessed; as a people they were responsible. They were Jehovah's chosen people, and in a world where every other nation worshipped idols, they were His only witness there. He had also given them His law and His truth, and He appointed them trustees to use and guard that holy trust. Their failure, then, in both matters, was nothing short of disaster.

Scripture tells us that the Jews were entrusted with the oracles of God (Rom. 3:2). As is well known, they guarded the Old Testament Scriptures with great care for centuries before there was any Christian church... God could surely give a revelation that needs no group of men to stamp it with their seal, however holy those men might be.

To have the Scriptures was then, as it is now, a great gain. Even if some do not accept the gospel, it is an immense advantage to be in a land where the light of God's word is brought to bear upon men, even if it only affects their outward lives.

There is a clear advantage in being born and raised in a "Christian" land, but tremendous responsibilities come with it... A person who claims the Christian religion without being converted will be judged by the high standard he has claimed, and so will deserve a heavier judgment.

Was God to go back on His own character so that the disobedient Jew could escape punishment? The apostle asks: "What if some did not believe? Will their unbelief cancel the faith (or faithfulness) of God?" He must be, and will be, true to His word, whatever man may do… God had been faithful to His word in the wilderness, when the people were unfaithful. Otherwise, where would the nation have been?

The chief advantage was that the Jew had the oracles of God. To have the Scriptures was then, as it is now, a great gain. Even if some do not accept the gospel, it is a huge advantage to live where God's word shines on people — even if it only changes their outward lives.

The apostle fully recognises their privileges, above all in having the scriptures, "the oracles of God." If some did not believe, their unbelief would not cancel the faith — that is, the faithfulness — of God. He would fulfil His word.

He makes it perfectly plain that no amount of human unbelief can nullify or alter what God has said. "The faith of God" is, of course, all that which God has revealed, in order that men may receive it in faith.

Will their unbelief shut the door of faith completely? Can they cancel the truth by refusing it? Does the faith of God stop working because some despise it or oppose it? "By no means! Let God be true though every one were a liar." Whether a man receives the truth or rejects it makes no difference to the truth itself. It stands alone, solemn and majestic, unchangeable, unbeatable, final. The fiercest opposition a man can raise only destroys himself against an immovable rock.

True, but any who did believe Him got blessing, even though the rest were in unbelief. God is always faithful even if all others play false. Those who believed Him received blessing through His word. God counted them righteous, though in themselves they were unrighteous.

They enjoyed the privileges of the people of God, found nowhere else. If they did not believe, their unbelief could not set aside the faithfulness of God. (It is just the same now with those who profess Christianity.) God will fulfil His promises to His people Israel through His faithfulness, although they have lost every right to them.

God holds to His truth without fail. Men fail in faithfulness because they lack faith. That lack of faith is blind to sin, trusts self, and has no confidence in God… the apostle insists that God at least be proved right, to man's shame and to his confession of his own evil. David did the same. His only resource was to admit his sin to God, clearing God whatever it cost himself. Indeed this is the secret of blessing for the sinner.

A non-Jew who professes Christianity may be baptized, but if that is all, he is no less a leper in God's sight than the Jew. Carrying the Lord's name on the outside cannot bring anyone to God without living faith. No — holding privileges only on the outside was and is a great danger for the flesh, which falls asleep under them now, just as Israel did long ago.

This is an unfortunate expression, bringing in the name of God where it does not occur. In the Old Testament it is chalilah, "far be it." In the New Testament it is mē genoito, "let it not be." Romans 3:4, 6, 31, and so on.

Alēthēs means what is according to truth. So "Let God be true!" in Romans 3:4 stands in contrast to the falsehood of man.

He makes it perfectly plain that no amount of human unbelief can nullify or alter what God has said. "The faith of God" is, of course, all that which God has revealed, in order that men may receive it in faith.

Whether a man receives the truth or rejects it makes no difference to the truth itself. It stands alone in solemn majesty — unchangeable, unbeatable, impossible to overturn. Man's most violent opposition only destroys himself against an immovable rock.

In this psalm of repentance, David admits that judgment came upon him because of his great sin. In that judgment God proved true everything He had said about judgment overtaking the sinner. God justified His own words in His dealings with David.

God holds fast to His truth and never fails. Men fail in faithfulness because they lack faith. Such unbelief feels nothing about sin, trusts self, and has no confidence in God… David found his only way out in admitting his sin to God, clearing Him whatever it cost him. Indeed this is the secret of blessing for the sinner… Our sins justify His words.

It is of the greatest moral importance to see this. Whenever we justify ourselves, we condemn God. And when we condemn ourselves, we justify God… The greatest folly anyone can be guilty of is to justify himself, because God must then count his sin against him. But the truest wisdom is to condemn yourself completely, for then God becomes the Justifier.

To silence this objection the apostle appeals to Psalm 51:4. God took account of David's sins, and David himself declared Him right in doing so. In the same way, on the day of judgment God's right to take account of sins will be fully proved. He will overcome every one who thinks to call it in question. It will be better to make every man a liar rather than challenge God's right to judge sin.

Sometimes God and His truth lose their moral hold on people's consciences. The one sure way to restore it, even in yourself, is to declare firmly: "Let God be true though every one were a liar!" I turn away from men to bear witness to the truth. After all, no conscience can be truly blessed when God is not presented to it according to truth.

In speaking like this the Apostle is careful to say that he is only voicing the thoughts of man. For himself he knows the argument is false, for at once he replies, "Far be the thought". Such an argument, if true, would make it impossible for God to judge the world.

This is an unhappy expression, bringing in the name of God where it does not occur. In the Old Testament it is chalilah, 'far be it.' Genesis 44:7, 17, etc. In the New Testament it is mē genoito, 'let it not be.' Romans 3:4, 6, 31, etc.

This word is used for 'world' in its various meanings. It can mean the material earth, Romans 1:20. It can mean the inhabitants of the world whom God will judge, Romans 3:6. And in a moral sense it means the condition and spirit that opposes God. 1 Corinthians 2:12; James 4:4; 1 John 2:16.

This last was an axiom with the Jew. He was willing enough to allow justice in dealing with the earth at large. Abraham, for example, had taken his stand on it when he asked that Lot be spared from the destruction then hanging over the cities of the plain. It is impossible that there can be unrighteousness in God. But this very consideration was fatal to the foolish delusion of self-security that an unrighteous Jew clung to. God brings Himself glory even in the face of man's iniquity. But iniquity is still iniquity, and God will judge it just as surely.

Suppose a man takes refuge in the plea that the unrighteousness of the Jew will commend the righteousness of God. The answer is, "That destroys God's right to judge at all. Every Jew is expecting the judgment of God upon the world; but on this principle it never could be."

No one who suffers wrong, or who is hurting under cruel injustice, would think that the evil done to him deserves no punishment. It cannot be unjust for God to give sinners what they deserve... Who now would charge Him with injustice for dealing in judgment with the world before the flood? Who would plead that Sodom and Gomorrah should have been left unpunished?

But this is only man's question. The answer is decisive — "By no means! For then how could God judge the world?" And the Jew would surely approve of His judging the Gentile world. But the Jew's case was morally the same — in fact worse, when you consider his privileges. What is more, carrying out judgment is part of the display of God's glory and righteousness. It cannot be set aside.

Paul is quoting the words of a rebellious, reasoning sinner. This man tries to prove that God is unrighteous in bringing him into judgment. Such people seem to say, "Granted that every man is a liar (v. 4). My lie only confirms the truth of what God said, and so glorifies God. Since my sinful condition glorifies God by proving His word true, why should He bring me into judgment?"

In speaking this way the Apostle is careful to say that he is only voicing the thoughts of man. For himself he knows the argument is false. He replies at once, "Far be the thought." If such an argument were true, God could not judge the world.

The fallacy in verse 7 is just this: man's lie does not hide God's truth; it illustrates it. God is therefore glorified by means of my lie. But is God in debt to my wickedness for His glory? Far from it. So the objection no longer blocks God's judgment on the evildoer. God will judge him according to his deeds.

If that were so, God could execute no judgment on the world at all. For He makes all sins glorify Him, restraining those that will not. And if this were so, one principle would be right. Because Christians magnified grace, people falsely charged them with holding it: that they might do evil so that good might come. But God's just judgment would in fact fall on those who could adopt so terrible a lie as truth.

It will be better to make every man a liar than to challenge God's right to judge sin. Someone may take shelter in this plea: the unrighteousness of the Jew will commend the righteousness of God. The answer is that this destroys God's right to judge at all. Every Jew expects God's judgment on the world; but on this principle it could never happen.

The apostle does not stoop to reply to the wicked insinuation of some — "Let us do evil that good may come" — but simply says, "Their condemnation is just." Christians were in fact accused by the world of speaking this way. As long as the soul is not convinced of sin, grace always draws accusation. But as soon as the conscience knows sin, grace draws heartfelt gratitude.

God does triumph over sin. He shows His power and brings out greater blessing for man than ever before. But that is no credit to sin. Sin does not secure God's glory or man's blessing. The absolute condemnation of sin does. If we dare to defend sin, we take our place beside it under the condemnation of God. He is greater than sin, and greater than we are.

Paul has a short answer for those who argue this way. He simply says their judgment is just. Man's sin may turn to God's glory. Even so, it does not relieve man of his responsibility or save him from God's judgment.

He has established the great truth that God required real moral goodness. Now he looks at the position of the Jews. Could they not claim special favour from God? Was there no advantage in Judaism? There certainly was, above all in this, that they had God's own words… So if the Jew had advantages, was he therefore better? Not at all: all were shut up under sin, whether Jew or Gentile, as God had already declared.

The position is this: though the Jew had certain great advantages over the Gentile, he was no better than the Gentile. The Apostle had proved this before, especially in chapter 2. Both Jew and Gentile are "under sin." But with the Jew he was not going to be content with proving it by reasoning. He goes on to quote the Jew's own Scriptures directly against him.

This was not just the conclusion of the apostle's argument. The Scriptures had already spoken in these terms, and the summing up of man's guilt comes in direct quotations from David's Psalms and from Isaiah 59.

The expression "under sin" (Rom. 3:9) is unusual, but we have kept it so as not to weaken the moral force of the term. In the text it points out the sinful condition, as God views it, which presses upon us — a weight, a power, and on every side. The meaning would be lost if we translated it "in sin" or "subjected to sin."

God has not only said that all have sinned. He has said that all are under sin (Rom. 3:9). The proof of this is that both Jew and Gentile serve sin with every part of their bodies. Sin reigns in the body, and every part serves it with all its might.

Measuring ourselves by anyone else is a deadly mistake, and we have all done it. "God, I thank you that I am not like other men, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even like this tax collector," shows the utter blindness of the religious Pharisee in the parable. It is also the cause that breeds blindness everywhere. Who does not know somebody to compare himself with, coming off better or worse? It is all false ground to take, and the surest way to be deceived by the enemy of God and of our souls.

So the beginning of the argument proved the Gentiles ruined, and the end proves the Jews ruined too. The result is that every mouth is stopped and the whole world stands under judgment to God. What is His sentence? Is there no mercy? There is His righteousness by Christ Jesus, righteousness which justifies the believer.

The grace of God meets us just as and where we are. It meets everyone alike, whether Jew or Gentile, philosopher or simple… All are alike in the ruin — all are alike the objects of the remedy.

Paul sums up the whole human race. He reviews first the pagan nations, then the civilized pagan, and last the religious Jew with all his God-given advantages — and with each he is just as sweeping. "None is righteous, no, not one." "No one understands; no one seeks for God." That is how the summing up of Romans 3 runs. It is largely made up of carefully chosen quotations from the Old Testament Scriptures, which the Jewish people received and revered outwardly. Paul testified to nothing new. How could a Jew stand up and deny his own Scriptures?

The first quotation (vv. 10-12) is a passage found twice in the Psalms (Ps. 14 and Ps. 53). The repetition seems to show that its statements are very important and that we must not miss them — though they are the kind of statements we would be very glad to miss if we had our way.

The first count is this: none righteous — not even one. That includes us all. The statement is like a net — so wide that it takes everyone in, so sound that not the smallest fish can find a tear to escape through. Not one of us is right in our relationship with God.

First God strips us of our self-righteousness. It is written, "None is righteous, no, not one". It is hard for us to believe that all our righteous acts are like filthy rags, and that there is not one righteous person in God's sight. We might plead that surely there are a few; but God says, "Not one". This does not mean there are no honest people; it means that not one of us has given God His rights. It would only be right for us to love God with all our heart, with all our soul, and with all our mind. But no one has done so, and so no one is righteous before God.

Man is a completely lost creature, with no point of recovery in himself. In Romans 3:10-11 the denial comes three times over. We all readily agree with the first: "None is righteous." Even so, there is hope for an unrighteous man if only he sees his condition. But then — "no one understands." That being so, the only faint hope left is that a man might somehow be drawn toward God and begin to understand. And once more — "no one seeks for God." Then hope is dead as far as man is concerned!

If you apply the law, "None is righteous, no, not one." God does not say this in the day of judgment; He warns us in the day of grace. In mercy He tells us beforehand what His verdict on us is. If He were sitting on the great white throne, could it be any plainer than we get it in Romans 3? Can a man stand up after that and say, I am righteous? Is that the way to meet God? Is He a liar?

Now the question becomes one of a completely different righteousness. Man is all wrong; there is no righteousness in him. That has already been proved. So the only righteousness left is God's. The first great truth stated is this: man as a whole, man of every rank and kind, is written off as having no righteousness by God's standard. So it becomes a question of God showing His own righteousness, if He so pleases. This He does, and in a way fully worthy of Himself.

He has pronounced clearly and firmly against the whole world. Dear friends, have you accepted His sentence? That is your only hope.

The law, he says, belongs to you. You boast that it refers to you exclusively. Very well — then hear what it says about the people, about yourselves. It speaks to you, as you admit. There is not one righteous man among you on whom God can look down from heaven... So every mouth is shut, and all the world is guilty before God.

God looked at men in the way Psalm 14 describes, and the sight was pitiful. The psalm reads: "The LORD looks down from heaven on the children of man, to see if there are any who understand, who seek after God." In view of such sweeping statements, anyone who pleads righteousness with God shows real insensibility to the true state of things. It suits us all better to admit that we are truly guilty, and then throw ourselves entirely on God's unlimited grace.

It is bad that no one is righteous (verse 10). It is worse that no one understands, for that means a state not just of ignorance but of insensibility. Worst of all, no one wants to understand or to seek after God — and righteousness and understanding and life are found in Him. To the natural man there is nothing desirable in God. Man is not right; he does not understand that he is not right; he has no desire after God who is right. In one word, he is dead towards God.

"There is none that understands" — the very intelligence of all is corrupted by sin. "There is none that seeks after God" — not even a right object is before them; there is no concern to know God.

"Oh, well," says the objector, "if man's understanding has gone astray, there are still his instincts and feelings. Those are sound, and if he follows them they will surely lead him to God." But count number three confronts us — there is no one who seeks after God. Then what does man seek? He seeks self-pleasing, self-advancement, self-glory. So he seeks money, pleasure, sin. What he seeks once the power of God has touched his heart is another matter. The point here is what he seeks according to his fallen nature, apart from the grace of God.

In Romans 3:10-11 the word "none" is repeated three times. We all easily agree with the first, "There is none righteous." Still, for an unrighteous man there is hope, if only he recognises his condition. But — "There is none that understands." If that is so, the only faint hope is that something draws a man Godward, so that he may begin to understand. But again — "There is none that seeks after God." Then hope is dead, as far as man is concerned.

The word of God says plainly, No. "There is none that seeks after God." He came to seek them, thank God, but when He came He was rejected... Notice that Jesus says, "You will not come" (the ESV reads, "you refuse to come to me"). I fully believe they are responsible for it; but where do you find, "You will"? ... God certainly does not stop anyone from coming, but such is the state of man's heart that he will not. This is why the work of God is necessary.

If men do not want Him, He wants them! Right after the rebellion in the garden, God called out, "Where are you?" The gospel tells us — blessed thought! — that God is now the Seeker after men. This is the meaning of His beloved Son coming among us. So the New Testament never commands sinners to seek the Lord, though it is still their responsibility to do so. Instead it tells them that God is seeking them. Jesus said, "The Son of Man came to seek and to save the lost."

All are free to come, but left to himself man will not come. There is none that understands, none that seeks after God. So the Lord shows clearly that if men are to be blessed, it can only be by sovereign grace.

It was a pitiful sight that God saw when He surveyed men in the way described in Psalm 14. … In view of such sweeping statements, it shows real insensitivity to the true state of things for anyone to plead righteousness with God. It is more fitting for all of us to admit that we are truly guilty. Then we can throw ourselves without reserve on God's unlimited grace.

Fourth, "All have turned aside." This describes the self-will of the flesh. It deliberately abandons God's way and chooses its own. We have not simply strayed off the road. The natural man turns his back on God on purpose and takes a way of his own choosing. The prodigal son deliberately left his father's house and went his own way.

The whole passage is a solemn picture of what the human condition really is, as God sees it. There is the absence of all good — the presence of all evil. God declares man completely unprofitable. He is of no profit to the God who made him, for he only lives to dishonour Him. He can profit neither his neighbour nor himself, for all the works of his hands are evil. The purposes of his heart are pure emptiness.

Fifth, "Together they have become worthless." Not only does the flesh choose its own path, but men drag one another down. Men try to forget God in the social circle. The self-will of the prodigal led him to choose his own way and travel to a distant country. Once there, he threw himself into the social round and tried to forget his father among a crowd of wrongdoers.

All are astray. All are unprofitable, even massed together. You can add zeros to zeros in their thousands, and it still adds up to nothing. And man's works are wrong as well as his ways. He may do a thousand things that look very fine on the surface. Yet they are all wrong, because the motive behind them is completely wrong. No work is right except the work that springs from seeking God and His interests.

God does not say that people who are not born again are never refined, or cultured, or able, or sweet-tempered, or generous, or charitable, or even religious. But He does say that none are righteous, none understand God, and none seek after Him.

There was a man named Joe Whitbread, a self-righteous man who boasted in his goodness. He fell ill, and a wise Christian visited him. Telling him he was a sinful man would have been useless; it would only have started an argument. So the visitor took another approach. He turned to Romans 3 and read: none is righteous, no, not one (except Joe Whitbread). No one understands, no one seeks for God (except Joe Whitbread)… That was enough. The word of God pierced his conscience, and he confessed that what was true of everyone was true of him.

"All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good, not even one" — that was what God saw when He looked down from heaven. But when God searched Jesus through and through, He found nothing but perfect love and perfect devotedness to God… Suppose it had ended there, with only Christ's own perfection. The whole result would have been to show our sinfulness and ruin more clearly by contrast. But He gave Himself. Peace was always His; it was for us that He "made peace by the blood of His cross."

He may complain that all these six statements are of a general nature... If he speaks like this, verses 13 to 18 confront him at once, giving the particulars. These particulars relate to six members of man's body: his throat, tongue, lips, mouth, feet and eyes. It is in the body that man sins, and deeds done in the body are to be judged in the day that is before us all. Notice that of the members mentioned, no fewer than four have to do with what we say. What an awful story it is! And what language!... An "open grave", for instance! Is man's throat like the entrance to a cave filled with dead men's bones and all uncleanness and stench? It is.

But something does come out from man's heart. It passes from the throat first, where there is the utter corruption of death — an open grave, revolting to the eyes of the living. Then the tongue, contaminated, becomes the tool of deceit. The lips might have held back both the throat and tongue. Instead they only make the plague of evil worse, adding to it the venomous poison of asps.

The third quotation is from Psalm 140:3: "The venom of asps is under their lips." The corruption of the flesh leads to lying. And lying leads to the poison of slander, because the flesh that can lie to your face will slander you behind your back.

In the main it is true of man that when he speaks he shows what he is. For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks (Matthew 12:34). So we read, "Their throat is an open grave; they use their tongues to deceive. The venom of asps is under their lips. Their mouth is full of curses and bitterness" (Romans 3:13-14). All these things come out of the heart, the seat of life, "and they defile the man" (Matthew 15:18).

But, argues the apostle, how is it with you? What does Scripture say about yourselves? What does your own law declare about your ways?... "What the law says, it says to those who are under the law." You cannot throw that solemn sentence of God at the Gentiles. You boast of your law: so be it. But "what the law says, it says to those who are under the law."

A poor end, you may say, to all this long education on God's part — all this painstaking discipline... The truth about man's condition must come out, and he must be made to realise and accept it. Guilty and with his mouth stopped before Him, he will then find what God can be for him in such a desperate situation.

The law speaks of what comes out of the mouth of the sinner who has never been born again. We shudder at its faithful testimony... Now the law speaks to the man under it, in order that his mouth may be stopped. A gateway open for such a flood of wickedness as this had better be shut up for ever. But if faith purifies the heart, and grace is poured into the lips, the outflow will delight the heart of the hearer.

The fourth quotation is from Psalm 10:7: "His mouth is full of cursing." Lying leads to slander, and slander leads to cursing. The slandered man hits back with cursing and bitterness.

If the heart did not hold these evils, the mouth could never pour them out. Here then we have an insight into the human heart. Note also where this awful quotation appears. It comes in the apostle's description of religious Jews, not in his account of the Gentile nations… So a person can sing the praises of God on Sunday and be guilty of cursing and bitterness towards men on Monday. Oh, the appalling corruption of the human heart! The Saviour had good reason to say: "How can you speak good, when you are evil? For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks" (Matt. 12:34). Yet it is one of the hardest of all lessons to learn that the heart of every man is incurably wicked.

These particulars relate to six members of man's body: his throat, tongue, lips, mouth, feet and eyes. Man sins in the body, and the deeds done in the body will face judgment in the day that lies ahead of us all. Notice that of the members mentioned no fewer than four have to do with what we say. One refers to what we do, and one to what we think; for the eye is the window of the mind.

Some may say, "I am sure I am not as bad as that; my mouth is not full of cursing and bitterness; I have never shed blood." Perhaps not. But you have the same nature as those who do. It is only a question of the difference of the fruit produced on the same tree. Suppose two men. One is brought up among thieves from birth, surrounded by every form of open sin. He flies into a rage with another and commits murder, and he is condemned to death. The other has been raised in the greatest refinement and worldly advantage. Perhaps he would not do the same gross outward acts of sin. But the angry thought that led the one to commit murder might lead the other to do something spiteful. The same evil root is in both men.

We move on to Romans 3:19. Here the apostle closes his detailed accusation of the whole human race, Gentiles and Jews alike: "so that every mouth may be stopped, and the whole world may be held accountable to God." No one can say a single word to excuse man's universal condition of guilt and ruin. No one can give a fair reason why God should not pass sentence at once.

That which was full of cursing and bitterness in Romans 3 is full of praise in Romans 15. Outward reformation could not produce so great a transformation. Only the mighty work of the Holy Spirit in the heart can do it. By that work God and Christ become known and valued.

He may complain that all six statements are general. He may remind us that when lawyers have a weak case, they talk in general terms to avoid coming down to details. If he says this, verses 13 to 18 answer him at once, for they give the details. The details name six parts of man's body: his throat, tongue, lips, mouth, feet and eyes. Man sins in the body, and God will judge the deeds done in the body on the day that lies ahead of us all. Notice that four of the parts named have to do with what we say. One refers to what we do, and one to what we think, for the eye is the window of the mind.

The fifth quotation is from Proverbs 1:16: "for their feet run to evil, and they make haste to shed blood." From "curses and bitterness" it is only a short step to murder.

Verse 14 sums up man's words; verse 15 his walk; and verse 16 his ways. That is the full condemnation of man, put positively. To add force to it, verses 17 and 18 put the case negatively, showing that there is not one redeeming feature in the picture. The way of peace they have not known; there is no fear of God before their eyes. This last point is the centre and spring of all evil. Little as we may understand it, all sin comes from a negative attitude toward God.

God brings man into court. He is putting forward a series of counts against him, not taken from one psalm or prophet only, but pieces gathered from different parts of the Scriptures, to show the different sides of man. Some of the counts sound as if they were spoken only against notorious sinners (vv. 13-16): "Their throat is an open grave." But some must apply to everyone — verse 17, for instance: "the way of peace they have not known." What man of Adam's race ever knew the way of peace? See how he ends the trial: "every mouth may be stopped, and the whole world may be held accountable to God."

When the same apostle was explaining the gospel of God to the believers in Rome, he quotes weighty and withering words from the early verses of this chapter of Isaiah to convict of sin and ruin, and so to prove the desperate need of grace (Rom. 3:15-17, 19-20). But he follows this with God justifying freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God set forth as a mercy seat through faith in His blood. This is truly good news to the sinner, Jew or Gentile.

From that throat, once an open grave, comes the perfume of immortal love. That mouth, once "full of curses and bitterness," is now filled with blessing. That tongue, long used for "deceit," now spreads the word of truth and life. Those lips, which once hid the deadly "venom of asps," are now full of life-giving grace. Those feet, once "swift to shed blood," are now fitted with "the readiness given by the gospel of peace," and run gladly in the pathways of mercy… the members have become instruments of righteousness.

(Verses 16, 17) The sixth quotation is from Isaiah 59:7-8: "Wasting and destruction are in their paths; the way of peace they do not know." Murder leaves ruin and misery behind it.

Verse 14 sums up man's words; verse 15 his walk; and verse 16 his ways. This is the complete condemnation of man, stated positively. To add force to it, verses 17 and 18 speak from the negative side, showing that there is no redeeming feature in the picture.

Romans 3 is a little more specific. God brings man into court. (Verse 9 and following.) He brings forward a series of counts He has against him... Some of the counts might seem to be spoken only against notorious sinners. (Verses 13-16.) "Their throat is an open grave." But some must apply to everyone — verse 17, for instance: "The way of peace they have not known." What man of Adam's race ever knew the way of peace?

Now all this was said especially and pointedly to the Jew. Paul reminds them of this in verse 19. They were the people under the law, and the law spoke first of all to them. They might wish to brush it all aside and pretend that it only applied to the Gentile. That could not be allowed. The laws of England address the English; the laws of China the Chinese; the law of Moses the Jew. Their own Scriptures condemn them. Those Scriptures shut their mouths and bring in the sentence against them — Guilty before God.

But destruction is not annihilation. "Destruction AND misery are in their ways" (Rom. 3:16) could not be translated, "annihilation and misery are in their ways." You could have misery before annihilation—but it would be impossible after. To feel misery along with destruction proves an existence still able to feel it. So destruction cannot mean annihilation. How careful the wording of Scripture is!

When the same apostle was opening up the gospel of God to the believers in Rome, he quotes weighty and withering words from the early verses of our chapter. He uses them to convict of sin and ruin, and so to prove the desperate need of grace (Rom. 3:15-17, 19-20). But he follows this up with God justifying freely by His grace, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, Whom God set forth as a mercy seat through faith in His blood. This is good news indeed to the sinner, Jew or Gentile.

The sixth quotation is from Isaiah 59:7-8: "Wasting and destruction are in their paths; the way of peace they know not." Murder leaves in its wake ruin and misery.

When the same apostle was opening up the gospel of God to the believers in Rome, he quotes heavy, crushing words from the early verses of our chapter. He does it to convict of sin and ruin, and so to prove how desperately grace is needed (Rom. 3:15-17, 19-20). But he follows this up with God justifying by His grace, as a free gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus.

Romans 3 is a little more specific. Man is brought into court. Here God brings forward a list of charges He has against him. They are not taken from one psalm or one prophet only. They are pieces collected from different parts of the Scriptures, so as to show the different sides of man. Some of the charges sound as if they are spoken only against notorious sinners: "Their throat is an open grave." But some must apply to everyone. Take verse 17 — "The way of peace they have not known." What man of Adam's race ever knew the way of peace? See how Paul closes the trial: "every mouth may be stopped, and the whole world may be held accountable to God."

Verse 14 sums up man's words; verse 15 his walk; and verse 16 his ways. That is the full condemnation of man, stated positively. To add force to it, verses 17 and 18 speak from the negative side. They show that there is no redeeming feature in the picture at all. They have not known the way of peace: there is no fear of God before their eyes. This last point is, after all, the centre and spring of all evil.

It is a sad yet true reflection that not only has man lost the enjoyment of peace, but he is quite incapable of regaining it. In Romans 3 Paul gives us, by the Holy Spirit, a striking summary of what man does and where he falls short. He ends it by saying, "and the way of peace they have not known. There is no fear of God before their eyes." How clearly today shows the truth of these words! Men away from God, looking for the way of peace, and all their efforts proving useless.

But men rejected the Prince of peace. His mission was peace, but men's refusal of Him has made peace impossible, and they have to suffer the sword instead. When the Lord Jesus thought of the consequences to men, He wept, saying: "Would that you, even you, had known on this day the things that make for peace! But now they are hidden from your eyes." And so it has become true of men everywhere: "the way of peace have they not known."

Once we had nothing to do with peace, for "the way of peace they have not known." That was no surprise while we were in unbelief, for "there is no peace, says my God, for the wicked." But God has sent the word "preaching good news of peace through Jesus Christ (he is Lord of all)." And Christ "came and preached peace to you who were far off and peace to those who were near." So now, even at a time like this, when everything is confusion, uncertainty and unrest, we know we have a right to it. Why? "For He made peace through the blood of His cross."

Before the Gospel reached us, as sinners of the Gentiles, we were without God, and "the way of peace" we did not know. But now the gospel has given our feet shoes. Not only shoes of privilege for the house of God, like the shoes given to the returned prodigal son, but shoes of peace for the fight.

The objector who says this is faced at once with verses 13 to 18, which give the particulars. These particulars relate to six parts of man's body: his throat, tongue, lips, mouth, feet and eyes. Man sins in the body, and the deeds done in the body will be judged on the day that lies ahead of us all. Notice that no fewer than four of the parts named have to do with what we say. One refers to what we do, and one to what we think; for the eye is the window of the mind.

By every avenue by which what is in man could come out — the throat, the tongue, the lips, the mouth, the feet, the ways, the eyes — in awful sevenfold completeness nothing but sin is expressed.

When Scripture states of Gentiles and Jews alike that "there is no fear of God before their eyes" (Rom. 3:18) it means that God has no place in their thoughts, and that they let His commandments put no restraint on the way they live. This is a terrible state, especially when we remember that God created man for Himself, to walk with Him and to do His will.

Scripture often speaks of the fear of God, and the word it usually uses carries the force of reverence. Here, though, it uses a less common word, meaning dread. Sinful men everywhere have no proper reverence for God, though they may secretly dread Him. But the man before us here has no dread of God... This is more and more true of people today. They have such large ideas of themselves and of their own powers that thoughts of God put no fear on their spirits — if they believe He exists at all. They feel they can ignore Him without risk.

The root of sin lies very deep indeed. It is nothing less than the will of man. So there is a great defect in any judgment about sin that is only moral. Thus the apostle closes his detailed account of ungodly living with this sweeping principle: "There is no fear of God before their eyes" (Rom. 3:18).

As the fear of God leaves the heart of man, his own self-will grows, and that produces endless folly. Today man's knowledge and cleverness have risen to heights no one dreamed of a century ago. His destructive folly threatens to sink to depths just as undreamed of. Psalm 36:1, quoted in Romans 3:18, exposes the root of it all.

Not every one of these traits will show in each person, because many things hold the flesh back from its full evil. In ordinary life, education, civilization and the outward forms of religion all keep the flesh from showing its full wickedness. But when the circumstances suit it, the flesh will break through every restraint and show itself in all its ugliness.

They did not know the Lord; "There [was] no fear of God before their eyes" (Rom. 3:18). Without this fear, there is no hatred of evil. Is it any surprise that they showed the most shocking corruption?

This is the law's testimony about those who are under it, "so that every mouth may be stopped, and the whole world may be held accountable to God." Men like to draw fine distinctions between one sinner and another in their own favour. Before God every one of those distinctions disappears.

But what about you, the apostle argues? What does Scripture say about you? What does your own law say about your ways? God looks down from heaven and says, "None is righteous, no, not one." … You cannot aim that solemn verdict of God at the Gentiles. You boast of your law — very well. But "whatever the law says it speaks to those who are under the law." … It was the law itself that exposed and announced how great their sin was in God's sight.

This does not mean, as it might at first seem, that all the world was under the law. He had stated the opposite. He had described the Gentile outside Israel as "without law" (Rom. 2:12, 14) — a law only "to themselves," which is the opposite of having law given by God. Their sins were open and undeniable. … The Gentile's mouth is already stopped. "You," he says, "you, who are no pagan — you, the people who profess to belong to God — yours is now stopped too: every mouth is stopped, the whole world is guilty."

True, God had given the law to Israel alone. But Israel's failure to meet it proved the condition of the whole world, just as testing a sample proves the condition of the whole batch.

God says, all the world is guilty before Him; or, as in the margin, Romans 3:19, "subject to the judgment of God" — and the judgment, or wages of sin, is death. Suppose someone told you that a man was in prison, found guilty, under sentence of death. And suppose you replied, "Oh no, he is only on probation, and if he does his best he will never be executed." Would that not deny the prisoner's true condition?

If a shopkeeper has false weights, what can the official standard weights do but condemn him? They would show how far short his weights fell. But they could never call short weights honest. The law did just this: "through the law comes knowledge of sin."

The apostle closes that part of the subject by quoting Scripture, first from the book of Psalms and then from the prophet Isaiah, to show that there is no righteousness in anyone, in heart or in life. The effect of all that is to close men's mouths. As long as a man's mouth is open, he will defend himself. … But when he stands on trial before God's righteousness, and his true character comes out, he has nothing to say. Every mouth is stopped, and all the world is guilty before God. A silent, guilty world — a world that stands convicted of sin, not a word to say — what then? God speaks. He says, I will proclaim My righteousness.

My friend, your mouth too must be shut. Before blessing reaches your soul, you must find out that you are a poor, lost sinner, without excuse in God's presence. … Their mouths were stopped when once they got into God's holy presence. Have you ever been there? That is the place where mouths get shut.

Here the apostle finishes his detailed charge against the whole human race, Gentiles and Jews alike: "so that every mouth may be stopped, and the whole world may be held accountable to God." This means no one can say a single word to soften man's universal condition of guilt and ruin. No one can give a fair reason why God should not pass sentence at once. How would a man feel standing before the judge with nothing at all to say in his defence? This is exactly man's position in relation to God. He may not be convinced; he is convicted beyond all argument.

If any works could justify anybody, those of God's law must be the surest benefit to the Jew. But the truth is that no human being will be justified in His sight on any such ground. On the contrary, law never produces holiness. It only brings a full knowledge of sin.

It makes no allowance for weakness. It knows nothing of sincere but imperfect obedience. If it did, it would not be what it is — "holy and righteous and good." The sinner cannot get life by the law just because the law is what it is. If he could get life by it, either it would not be perfect, or he would not be a sinner. Its absolute perfection makes clear and seals man's absolute ruin and condemnation.

The law does convict of sin, "since through the law comes knowledge of sin." But it cannot remove the sins, or free us from the power of sin. The law is only a plumb-line to show the crookedness of the wall. Holding a plumb-line against a crooked wall will never straighten it. It is just as foolish to think the law can justify a guilty sinner. So the law convicts us not only of being sinners before God, but of being helpless sinners.

He does not say that through the law comes sin, but only "knowledge of sin." Sin was already there, and it only needed law to bring it out in the form of "transgression." It is as if I say to my child, "you must not touch that knife." My prohibition reveals the tendency in his heart to do his own will. It does not create the tendency; it only reveals it.

Even as to convincing power, he does not say that through the law comes knowledge "of sins." Conscience already told us that. He says knowledge "of sin." "All have sinned" comes at the end of Romans 3.

The law came in — to do what? To make clear what man was. He did not know himself. But it did not put him right… God did not give it with the aim of justifying. He says it in plain words, "For by works of the law no human being will be justified in his sight." So the aim of the law was not to justify. It was to make clear where man was and what he was. Then he could learn his own helpless ruin, and turn to God to learn what He is.

The beginning of the argument proved the Gentiles ruined, and the end proves the Jews ruined. Every mouth is stopped and the whole world is under judgment to God. What is His sentence? Is there no mercy? There is His righteousness by Christ Jesus, righteousness which justifies the believer.

The verdict shuts every mouth and brings the whole world in guilty before God. As soon as it falls, God opens His mouth to declare His remedy.

And now the way lies open for the gospel. The shutting of man's mouth opens God's. The exhaustion of man's resources throws the full burden of his salvation onto the arm of God. There is no righteousness in man. The gospel cannot reopen that question; it is closed forever.

God's righteousness means God maintaining all His rights in a right way. This must come first, because sin is lawlessness — man asserting his own will against God's rights. It is fitting, then, that the gospel opens this way. After the terrible unfolding of man's sin, its first word is "the righteousness of God."

It is God's, not man's. It has its character, quality, and source from God, not from man… It comes from God for man, not from man for God. So it carries the character and qualities of its source, whoever may be given to benefit from it.

It is natural for a convicted sinner to dread the righteousness of God. He argues that if a holy God deals rightly with a guilty sinner, it can only be to judge him for his sins. It never occurs to the sinner that God can righteously forgive his sins. But when we learn what the righteousness of God is, we discover something else. The very quality in God that we think is against us is the very quality that, above all others, is for us as sinners. It is the solid foundation of our peace as believers.

The law demanded righteousness from man that he was unable to give. The gospel declares God's righteousness to man, without making any demand on man. It is now clear that God, in righteousness, is proclaiming the forgiveness of sins to the sinner, and justifying the ungodly who believe in Jesus.

Romans 3:21 does not deny that law exists or that it matters. It shows that God's righteousness is now manifested apart from law.

The law and the prophets did not display the righteousness of God. Yet the law, in various forms, pointed to another righteousness that was coming. The prophets brought it out, if possible, still more clearly in their words. The one supplied types, the others assured that the Lord's righteousness was near to come. But now the gospel tells us it has come. Now divine righteousness is a revealed fact… There is no veil now. There was once, but the death of Christ tore it from top to bottom.

It is not merely that this righteousness exists; it is now manifested. It existed long before in the purposes of God, since God never justified anyone in any other way. But He did not display it until the gospel was brought out and preached… From Adam onward, no sinner ever stood, or ever could stand, in God's presence except in God's righteousness. But God had not displayed it until now.

If this righteousness were man's, it would have to come by the law. The law is the perfect measure of man's righteousness. So it would be only for the Jews, who alone had that law. But it is God's, and by faith, and so for all.

This righteousness of God is made known in the gospel, entirely apart from the law. The law demanded righteousness from man that he was unable to render. The gospel declares God's righteousness to man, without making any demand upon man... It is now clear that God is righteously proclaiming the forgiveness of sins to the sinner, and justifying the ungodly who believe in Jesus.

It is the righteousness of God by faith in Jesus Christ. Man has not accomplished it, man has not procured it. It is of God, it is His righteousness; by believing in Jesus Christ we come to share in it. Had it been a human righteousness, it would have been by the law, which is the rule of that righteousness — a law given to the Jews only... It is a righteousness of God for man, because no man had any for God. Wherever there is faith, there it is applied. The believer possesses it.

The manuscripts differ here. Some of the most ancient ones leave out "and upon all." But I agree with those who keep the longer reading. I have little doubt that the words were dropped because the eye or ear caught one "all" and missed the other... The first phrase marks the direction of God's righteousness. It is not, like the law, restricted to a single nation; it addresses itself "unto all" men without exception; but the benefit depends on faith in Jesus Christ, and so it only reaches and takes effect "upon all that believe."

God's righteousness, so to speak, stretches out its hands kindly towards all men instead of frowning on them. And for those who believe, it comes down on them like a robe, so that they stand dressed in it in God's presence. All this happens without righteousness losing its own proper character in any way, or ceasing to be what it is.

The only standard for measuring men is "the glory of God." All have fallen short of it — the best as well as the worst — so there is no difference. If it were only a question of conscience, or of human righteousness, there might be some difference. If the standard were only human, some shades of distinction could easily be drawn. But it is not so. All must be ruled by the glory of God, and ruled that way, all fall short alike.

Grace meets us just as and where we are, and meets all men alike, whether Jew or Gentile, philosopher or simple... All are alike in the ruin — all are alike the objects of the remedy.

It does not say this righteousness is upon those who have this or that experience, or who feel saved. But if you can say, dear reader, that you are one of those who believe, you have God's word that His "righteousness" is upon you. And if "God's righteousness" is upon you, you are fit to dwell in His presence without a spot.

Language this wide leaves no one a way out. It puts the whole human family under God's judgement. And nobody can lift themselves out of that condition. No amount of human effort — reforming your life, giving to the poor, and so on — can wash away a single sin.

The basic truth of the gospel is that there is no difference between one person and another. That does not mean everyone has sinned the same number of times, or as seriously. The day of judgment will bring out that difference. It will put each person who is not saved by the gospel in his place according to his works. So degrees of sin are real, and God will judge them all with perfect fairness. But that is not a question of salvation. As to that, everybody is precisely on the same footing.

God measures people by one standard only: "the glory of God." All have fallen short of it, the best as well as the worst. So there is no difference. If the question were conscience, or human righteousness, there might be some difference. A human standard would let you draw fine distinctions between people. But that is not the standard. God measures everyone by His glory, and by that measure all fall short alike.

There has been only one man in this world whom the glory could own as worthy of it. To Him there came a voice from the excellent glory: "This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased" (2 Peter 1:17). In Him, then, we see what the glory of God requires in a man. Do we match Him? Here alone is the true standard by which we can measure ourselves correctly. Suppose a young man wanted to join the royal guards. There is no point in him arguing that he is the tallest person in town. If he is below the fixed height, he is out.

Not only have all sinned. Notice the wording too: "all do come short of the glory of God." The correct reading is "do come short," not "have come short." What a standard God gives! God does not say, "You have come short of what you ought to be." Most would admit that; but He says, "You have come short of my glory."

Nothing will meet their case except being "justified by His grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus" (v. 24). But who asked for this? Who pleaded for it? No one. God in His grace, and in keeping with His love, has given what no creature, aware of its own failure, would ever have asked for. You can imagine a cry going up for forgiveness, so that the deserved punishment might be turned aside. But imagine a sinner who really feels how serious his guilt is. Who could dream of him asking the Judge of all the earth to justify him freely by His grace?

Does this apply to the believer? On the contrary, no believer comes "short of the glory of God." And how is this? Because there is One in the glory who bore my sins on the cross. And He who is in the glory of God is my life and my righteousness.

The word translated "propitiation" here should certainly read "mercy-seat." Hebrews 9:5 uses the same word and translates it that way. That explains the term "set forth." In the tabernacle, no one saw the mercy-seat in the holiest place except the high priest, and only on the day of atonement. So it was a hidden mercy-seat. By contrast, Christ as the mercy-seat stands in the open — open to everyone in this day of grace, in the preaching of the gospel. Everyone is free, and indeed invited, to approach.

The word "propitiatory" is the one the Greek Old Testament uses for the "mercy-seat." ... The mercy-seat was the place in Israel where atonement, or propitiation, stood "set forth." It was the formal basis on which God dwelt in relationship with a sinful people. It was the throne of God, where He dwelt between the cherubim, and the blood sprinkled on it made it a "mercy-seat."