READINGS ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS (2)
[p. 11] READINGS ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS (2)
Rem It may help, if you would give a few words as to what leads up to this chapter.
JT Our remarks last time did not go beyond the earlier verses of chapter 1. We dwelt at length on the fact that Christ is “marked out Son of God in power, according to the Spirit of holiness, by resurrection of the dead”; and that it is “the gospel of God ... concerning his Son”.
I think what came before us especially was that the epistle sets out the gospel in an orderly way; showing how God has come in in Christ for the recovery of man. So that the opening passages are rather introductory. Then, the state of the whole race of mankind is depicted in the second half of that chapter. Then, that division of the race that was, so to say, civilised and cultivated, especially the Greek, is taken account of in the early, part of chapter 2. Then the Jew, who had the law, is treated of. So that, “every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God”. And now, in the latter part of chapter 3, God opens up His remedy in the gospel.
Rem The epistle thus becomes very comprehensive. There is nothing in scripture like it, as a presentation of the gospel to all men. You have been summarising up to the point where the righteous judgment of God rests upon all. It suggests, morally, what we get in the flood: God said, “The end of all flesh is come before me” (Genesis 6:13). Here the end of all flesh has come before God morally. Everyone is shut up to God.
JT So that God is now free, having convicted all, to open up what He has in His mind as a remedy.
WLP [p. 12] Is that the reason both Jew and gentile are brought under the same judgment?
JT At the end of chapter 1 it is man in general; but in chapter 2 the cultivated, or enlightened, sections of the race are dealt with, the Jew and the Greek. It says, “to Jew first and to Greek”. I was noticing in the early part of chapter 2 how man is addressed, “O man”.
Rem So that really it is a voice universal, not only to the Jew and the Greek, but to the barbarian; and not only in Paul’s day but in every day. It is a universal voice, “O man”.
JT The address to man is very suggestive both in regard of judgment and of blessing. “Thou art inexcusable, O man, every one who judgest”. The thought of man is prominent in certain sections of the Old Testament. In Ezekiel we see how that God, on the ground of the breakdown of the flesh in Israel in the presence of the law, widens out. Ezekiel himself is habitually addressed as “son of man”. As if God were speaking to man in the Son.
Rem I suppose that in the gospels the counterpart of all this would be found in Luke.
JT Luke is a sort of confirmation of Paul’s doctrine, hence it is the “Son of man” who is presented there, having man in view.
Rem So that the point reached in chapter 5 would correspond very much with the prodigal son brought into the Father’s house. “We are making our boast in God, through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom now we have received the reconciliation”.
BP Had Judaism to break down before the general title, man, could be brought in?
JT Judaism had broken down, so that in addressing man God shows what is in His mind. Only, in chapter 2 it is in a condemnatory way, “Thou art inexcusable, O man, every one who judgest”. That is to say, man had forfeited the title to judge — to judge another. There was reserved to him the responsibility of judging himself; but the incongruity of judging another, when guilty himself, is shown.
Rem It is significant that this aspect of the gospel should be addressed to the Romans, because all men were under the dominion of Rome; it was then the centre of the world. Now God would meet them on the ground of His righteousness. How masterly it is that everyone is first brought under the judgment of God. How can we judge one another? We are all a set of sinners — criminals!
JT That is the feature emphasised in chapter 2, the inexcusability of man, however cultivated, for the Greeks were cultivated; but how could they judge others when doing the same things themselves?
BTF Chapter 2 refers to Greeks who, perhaps, did not know God.
JT I think so. The address at Athens by Paul formally states that they did not know God; in fact, their altar bore the inscription “To the unknown God”. Paul says, “Whom therefore ye ignorantly worship, him declare I unto you” (Acts 17:23). But they had certain knowledge which distinguished them from the ordinary heathen, and, on the ground of that, they set themselves up as judges. So the early part of chapter 2 is intended to convict the Greeks, and all such in all time, and to show the inexcusability of attempting to judge when the principle of self-judgment has not taken effect. It is that which brings in habitually, as you will observe, the judgment of God. “We know that the judgment of God is according to truth”. That is, there was a judgment about these things; the very things they pretended to judge; but the only judgment which was of any account was the judgment which was according [p. 14] to truth.
AFM They had a measure of light, but had no power with the light they possessed, and so practised the same things they exposed in others.
Rem Is not that because they intentionally used the light they had to enhance themselves as men on earth? They had no intention that that light should advance in the universe anything superior to themselves.
CAM How would they be acquainted with the judgment of God? Chapter 1 seems to allude to what we call God’s governmental ways. I mean, in the things that happened to them as evil doers — they suffered.
JT “Who knowing the righteous judgment of God, that they who do such things are worthy of death, not only practise them, but have fellow delight in those who do them”.
CAM Did they know of the righteous judgment of God through His governmental dealings?
JT I think so. The flood was a known fact. The flood really stands at the beginning of the history of mankind viewed generally. It is a monument of God’s judgment, and all the families of Noah would have that testimony. Besides, there is the statement: “The invisible things of him are perceived, being apprehended by the mind through the things that are made, both his eternal power and divinity, — so as to render them inexcusable”. There is, in that way, a witness in creation, and in the government of God, therefore, adequate testimony as to what He is as against evil. Chapter 1 is on that ground.
ARS Man had a witness. For instance, “The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament showeth his handywork” (Psalm 19:1). Any ordinary man must know the heavens were called into being by some power.
[p. 15] JT Besides, they had the government of God which continues. Government had been committed to Noah. The flood too was the evidence of God’s judgment of sin, and the testimony of the flood is known in all nations.
Rem There was the character of God also, as seen in creation. In Acts 14 we have “We also are men of like passions with you, and preach unto you that ye should turn from these vanities unto the living God, which made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all things that are therein: who in times past suffered all nations to walk in their own ways. Nevertheless he left not himself without witness, in that he did good, and gave us rain from heaven, and fruitful seasons, filling our hearts with food and gladness”. So there are His power and goodness seen in creation, and His government as given to Noah, and witnessed in various ways among the nations. Every day brings an evidence of God’s goodness. “His compassions ... are new every morning” (Lamentations 3:22,23).
Rem God’s goodness “leads thee to repentance”.
JT The existence of death in the world was a standing testimony to the judgment of God. Men were dying constantly. The apostle says, “Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses”. That was a witness to all of the government of God, so that men were without excuse. They knew the righteous judgment of God and, yet, they continued to do such things as were worthy of death and to have fellow delight in those who did them.
PHP The goodness of God leads to repentance; if a man accepts God’s thought of him, he would be led into the light.
JT So it says, “To them who, in patient continuance of good works, seek for glory and honour and incorruptibility, life eternal. But to those that are contentious, and are disobedient to the truth,
[p. 16] but obey unrighteousness, there shall be wrath and indignation, tribulation and distress, on every soul of man that works evil, both of Jew first, and of Greek; but glory and honour and peace to every one that works good”. Wherever self-judgment comes in, and feeling after God, He is near at hand to help and to bless. It says, “That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us”. He was not far from any one of them. For instance, Naaman the Syrian and Cornelius; these are only samples. There were doubtless numberless similar cases. Wherever men took cognisance of the testimony which God placed before them, He was not far from any one of them. God was near all the heathen nations to help them in self judgment. So there was “glory and honour and peace to every one that works good”. These are the conditions.
Rem Ruth was a beautiful example of that.
JT And do you not see in the Book of Job another witness brought in as to what went on under these conditions, aside altogether from the law or the special promises made to Israel? There was a man who was exercised, and exercised by the testimony that was available. He alludes to the different things which witnessed to what God is, the heavens, and so on, and we see how God wrought for him.
BTF In what way would you say the gentiles “are a law to themselves”?
JT Their conscience bore witness, but their thoughts accused or excused them. Instead of accepting the testimony which God presented, they went by their own thoughts and feelings. All the accusing or excusing was between themselves — God was left out.
BTF Did not that imply that they were guilty as to wrong doing, although they had not the law as the Jew had [p. 17] it?
JT They did the things the law condemned. So that as sinning without law, they were judged without law. There was plenty to judge them without the law. They left God out of the moral codes, but He was taking account of everything, and so “the secrets of men” are to be judged by Him. What is alluded to here is the universal manner of God’s dealings in Old Testament times. We are apt to confine Him wholly to the Jew, whereas this is not at any time the case. Time after time He goes out of His way, as it were, to show the gentiles He has His eye on them for blessing, or for judgment. He is the God of the gentile as well as of the Jew.
Rem If the gentiles see God in His government, in His works, and in His character, and respond to Him, and seek after Him that becomes a law to them. These are principles which God has ever acknowledged from the beginning.
JT “These, having no law, are a law to themselves; who shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts accusing or else excusing themselves between themselves”. God has put the whole history of the gentile into that small compass. He is looking at what goes on in their hearts and consciences and all will be judged by Him: “in the day when God shall judge the secrets of men, according to my glad tidings, by Jesus Christ”.
ANW Chapter 2:8 is remarkable in that connection. It brings in disobedience.
JT “But to those that are contentious, and are disobedient to the truth, but obey unrighteousness, there shall be wrath and indignation, tribulation and distress, on every soul of man that works evil, both of Jew first, and of Greek”. These verses help us in meeting the question constantly raised as to what testimony the heathen had, or have. God knows the testimony, and He knows the effect of it on their [p. 18] consciences and hearts. So whatever accusing or excusing of themselves there may have been, God holds them accountable for the testimony presented and the effect on their consciences.
AFM Does not chapter 1:19,20, show that? Every man has a testimony wherever he may be.
Rem I suppose the pivotal point is really the conscience. When sin came in, the conscience came into evidence and that is the universal possession of every sane person. So that the judgment of condemnation rests upon the nations as such; but then, those who discern, such as Ruth, Ittai, the Queen of Sheba, and all that came along searching after Him, found Him. It is a principle that always holds good.
JT The conscience remains and will remain, even eternally. I suppose, it will be the vehicle of greatest torment in the lost.
ANW Is not that the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil?
JT It is what man acquired through disobedience. Among the heathen, it was there. So it says, “their conscience also bearing witness”.
CAM They were supposed to recognise God’s eternal power and divinity. Was it not to value what they saw in creation? Would you go as far as to say that they had before them what was suggestive of Christ?
JT Yes, although they were ignorant of what created things represented. David, who was accustomed to look into the heavens had, I suppose, some thought of it when he said, “The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork”, and, “In them hath he set a tabernacle for the sun, which is as a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, and rejoiceth as a strong man to run a race” (Psalm 19:4,5). One would gather that there was a glimmering of light in his soul of something beyond the mere orbits in the heavens. One feels David, being an [p. 19] astronomer in a spiritual sense, had some glimmerings as to Christ. The sun is a beautiful figure of Him.
Rem They had also that which spoke of God’s goodness: “He maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust” (Matthew 5:45). All that was a testimony to His goodness; but death was there, death reigned; everyone came under its power. Why was that? The conscience of man should surely make that inquiry. So there was a witness to the just and righteous judgment of God upon sin in man.
AFM The last verse of chapter 1 confirms that, “who knowing the righteous judgment of God, that they who do such things are worthy of death”.
PHP I suppose this governmental dealing on the part of God in regard of men in the past is now superseded by the gospel.
JT There is another feature. He says, “For there is revealed wrath of God from heaven upon all impiety”. This comes in as a background to the gospel. The wrath of God as revealed from heaven seems to be an additional thought here and, hence, it only enhances the conditions of the gospel. It brings home to man the seriousness of rejecting the gospel. Note the expression here, “is revealed”.
BTF Describe how it is revealed.
JT With one other exception, it is the only mention of the word ‘heaven’ in the whole epistle. This is to be noted. God is graciously withholding His wrath in order that man should have every opportunity to believe the glad tidings. Yet, there it is, not hidden, but revealed, and revealed from heaven. So that it will be overwhelming. We all know that everything that comes from heaven is beyond human control. So that the wrath that comes from heaven is to be overwhelming.
BTF [p. 20] Is it not in the sense of judgment to come?
JT It is not judgment at the present time, for “now is the accepted time” — the world is in reconciliation. The wrath is revealed not against men exactly; but against their unrighteousness and impiety.
Rem In regard to our brother’s question, I take it that where the gospel has never been proclaimed these foundation principles that we are going over are still maintained. Where Christ has never been spoken of, or known, the testimony of God is seen in His government and in creation.
AFM Referring to wrath, it is not the judgment of the nations as such, as in Matthew 25, is it?
JT I think the wrath spoken of here would go on to the final wrath against all impiety, the unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness. It refers to men, and, inasmuch as it is a question of men, God deals with their secrets. As it is put here, “in the day when God shall judge the secrets of men, according to my glad tidings, by Jesus Christ”. He speaks of a day. It seems as if it would, in this epistle, go on to the great white throne and the final expression of it in the lake of fire.
ANW I suppose it would hardly be said to be revealed until Christ had died. I was thinking of John 3:16; yet the last verse of that chapter ends with, “The wrath of God abideth on him”, which I very much doubt would be mentioned without verse 16. I suppose there it is on account of not believing on the Son.
JT The reference there, in the mind of the Spirit, is undoubtedly to the Jew. They were guilty of rejecting the Son’s testimony; and so were the subjects of the wrath of God, and of it abiding; it is abiding on the Jews, as such, at the present time.
ANW I was putting it in contrast to “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten [p. 21] Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life”. If the gift is not recognised, the wrath is the consequence.
Rem So the statement here is not specific as to any particular period. “For there is revealed wrath of God from heaven”. And it embraces everything until the final separation of evil from good. I think it is an abstract presentation of the thing. You would expect it in an epistle like this, which really treats of God’s relation with men.
JT You would expect it would be emphasised that God has entered into judgment and must of necessity deal with every detail of evil, not only with national evil, for He does deal with that, but He deals with personal guilt. His wrath has reference to personal guilt. It says, “shall judge the secrets of men”. Not national counsels here; but the secrets of men. Their secrets are known and they shall be dealt with.
Rem Morally, this epistle in the middle of chapter 3 answers to Genesis 6, “The end of all flesh is come before me”. For Noah and his family an ark was provided, whereas here we get the mercy-seat. “But now without law righteousness of God is manifested ... righteousness of God ... towards all, and upon all those who believe”. The contrast is very beautiful.
CAM You alluded to “revealed wrath” as a background for the gospel.
JT It is. But wrath is something which stands out prominently as revealed during this whole dispensation, not as applied or executed, but as revealed, as a witness against evil. The question might be raised as to how God regards men and their wickedness which exists all the time. What are God’s thoughts about it? Is He indifferent to it? It seems to me that these two chapters set the conscience of the Christian at perfect rest. Wrath is revealed [p. 22] against all unrighteousness of men, not only national things, but individual guilt.
AFM Would you present this in the glad tidings? You spoke of wrath as a background for the gospel.
JT Most certainly. It is most essential that the judgment of God against sin should be presented. I suppose this epistle is the lesson book as to how the gospel is to be presented. We must bring in the principle of God’s judgment of individual guilt. It seems to me that that is emphasised here. “The judgment of God is according to truth upon those who do such things”. It is unerring. He does not forget anything. The guilt of the whole human race, and the guilt of each individual, shall come before Him, and shall come before that individual. He will see to it that every individual shall bow to His judgment. Emphasis is laid on the existence of books at the great white throne, which is most remarkable. So each one has to face his guilty history there, if not before. And I am sure his conscience will justify God in consigning him to the lake of fire.
BTF Will you discriminate between conscience and new birth.
JT A man is born anew, but his conscience is affected by the light presented to him. I think that as born again a man recognises responsibility to God.
ANW Would one be responsibility and the other sovereignty, conscience referring to responsibility and new birth to God’s sovereign act?
JT Man received a conscience by partaking of the tree of knowledge of good and evil; but he does not lose it when he is converted. It is an element in him God-like, for he can judge between good and evil. Adam as fallen had not the power to refuse the evil; the Christian has, and power too, to choose [p. 23] the good.
Rem Conscience always connects itself with responsibility.
PHP Does Romans 3 deal with man in his guilt simply?
JT Man was proved guilty, or subject to judgment before God. The reference, I think, is to a court of law. “We have before charged”, the apostle says. We all know that courts of justice have reference to acts committed; not to what one is, although the latter may be in evidence by the facts presented.
Rem That is emphasised with remarkable clearness in connection with the mercy-seat in the second section of chapter 3. There we see that even deeds in Old Testament days are all held up, as it were, waiting for the mercy-seat. That is, God held them in abeyance. It is the deeds that are in view not the state of the persons who do them.
JT That is how it reads, “whom God has set forth a mercy-seat, through faith in his blood, for the showing forth of his righteousness, in respect of the passing by the sins that had taken place before, through the forbearance of God”.
CAM God is not going to judge a man for what he is but for what he has done.
JT A great point in the epistle is to vindicate God. He is righteous in whatever He does. These chapters are an immense relief to the enlightened conscience in regard to the evil that exists in all the different nations. These chapters show that there is not one item of sin that God is not taking account of, all is carefully noted down.
Rem The Old Testament, which is cited here, shows that God is not really looking for the evil; He cannot help seeing it. In Psalm 14, “The Lord looked down from heaven upon the children of men, to see if there were any that did understand, and seek God”.
[p. 24] BTF Is the great object of these opening chapters to bring the whole world in as guilty before God?
JT That is the point. “Now we know that whatever the things the law says, it speaks to those under the law, that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world be under judgment to God”. It is very touching to see that God is looking for good, not evil. How eagerly He looks for the good!
CAM We have had the philosopher and the heathen, we might say, but what about the Jew?
JT His mouth is closed as well. He is spoken of; “But if thou art named a Jew, and restest in the law, and makest thy boast in God, and knowest the will, and discerningly approvest the things that are more excellent, being instructed out of the law; and hast confidence that thou thyself art a leader of the blind, a light of those who are in darkness, an instructor of the foolish, a teacher of babes, having the form of knowledge and of truth in the law: thou then that teachest another, dost thou not teach thyself?” He gives a remarkable description of a typical legal Jew here. “Thou art named”, he says, and then how that such an one is by the law condemned.
Rem The end of all that was: “The name of God is blasphemed on your account among the nations”. That was very terrible. They had been given a place of peculiar blessing and privilege; but the end was that there were blasphemies of God’s name on their account. This made their sin the more enormous.
JT And then another principle is brought out at the end of chapter 2, “For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, neither that circumcision which is outward in flesh; but he is a Jew who is so inwardly; and circumcision, of the heart, in spirit, not in letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God”. Wherever such an one is found, in the whole earth, he is a true [p. 25] Jew.
Rem There was no such one found, was there?
JT Not as in the flesh. But we have been speaking of people like Job, like Rahab the harlot and Ruth, Cornelius and others. These were circumcised in heart and spirit; but then, they were the fruit of God’s sovereign work.
Rem Paul takes up that idea in Galatians 6:16. “As many as shall walk by this rule, peace upon them and mercy, and upon the Israel of God”. It is a question of the heart.
BP You were saying that this section dealt with acts committed. Is not the state of man taken up later in the epistle?
JT It is; state is taken up formally from verse 12 of chapter 5 to the end of chapter 8. That which troubles a man first of all is not his state, but the sins he has committed.
BTF Is the Jew referred to in chapter 3 a true Jew?
JT That is the nation. “What then is the superiority of the Jew? or what the profit of circumcision? Much every way: and first, indeed, that to them were entrusted the oracles of God”. They had the oracles of God.
Rem It is a historical fact to which he is alluding here — the advantage they had on account of having the oracles of God. The Lord said to the woman of Samaria, “Ye worship ye know not what; we worship what we know, for salvation is of the Jews” (John 4:22). The oracles of God are not connected with Christians. Peter says, “If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God”.
JT It gave an immense superiority to them over all the other nations that they had the oracles of God.
CAM But it increased their responsibility.
BP What would become of one in heathendom who found God through what he saw in [p. 26] creation?
JT I think the book of Job is the light that God has graciously given as to what obtained in the, so-called, heathen world. He is not far from any one who feels after Him. He has His own way of taking care of them. If a sparrow does not fall on the ground without His attention, He will take care of all who feel after Him.
Rem “Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?” (Genesis 18:25). What may be the manner of His workings in detail is another matter; but we know He will do right.
CAM It is remarkable that Job had the light of resurrection. For instance, he said, “Then call, and I will answer” (Job 13:22). Would it be right to think he got the light of resurrection from creation?
Rem There is a witness to it every autumn when the crops are gathered in. “Thou fool, that which thou sowest is not quickened, except it die” (1 Corinthians 15:36). Every incoming of life is a suggestion of resurrection. Even such a simple thing as lying down to sleep. When we lay ourselves down in the night we expect to rise in the morning.
Ques Do you think Job lived immediately after the flood?
JT He may have been a contemporary of Abraham. At any rate, he had regard for the testimony presented to him. He feared God. But it was not until the end of the book that he said, “I know that thou canst do everything” (chapter 42:2). He learned that through what God said to him.
AFM Do you think a man in a heathen country today could be converted by the testimony of creation?
JT The testimony now, of course, is Christ, who is presented in the gospel. God has His own way of meeting men in every circumstance. If there is genuine exercise God will send the gospel message, as we see in Cornelius; and He will set such an one [p. 27] in relation to the saints too. I think the knowledge of God in our souls settles all these questions. Job says, “I know that thou canst do everything”. God can connect a soul with the church wherever he may be found.
Rem The Lord sent Philip to the eunuch.
JT If a sparrow does not fall on the ground without the Father — mark that, it is not only without His knowledge, but without Him — how much more would an enlightened heathen be cared for. Whoever and wherever he may be, God can take account of him and care for him in His own way.
Rem The great thing for us is that we have divine principles, and “Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?”. When it comes to certain details we may not know just how God may act; but we know Him, and therefore we know He will act according to those principles.