Romans 2:17–3:20

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.