Synopsis on Romans (Part 1 - Chapters 1-2)

I recently had a rather short but invigorating discussion with Chris Tilling on the nature of many things, some theological such as the atonement, but also in regards to more important matters such as the evil that is coffee, tea (except green tea), and chocolate (Chris is still in a poor, pitiful, depraved state when it comes to proper knowledge about the evil of such things. I blame it on Wright). But among other things, we also talked about the whole "righteousness of God" thing and the blasphemous assertions that N.T. Wright makes about it (oh wait... I forget, I am not John Piper!). At which point, he then begged me to enlighten the world with my oh so great wisdom regarding the topic, to correct the errors of the Wrightianists and the Piperians.

Seriously though, Romans has been a letter I have studied for a few years now since it has been made such a pivotal part of Christian theology. I have come to a somewhat different understanding on the book because of what I found to be weaknesses with both the classical Reformed view and the New Perspective view. I have even gone to the point of having the inspiration to write a commentary down the road on the book once I get a grasp of Greek to enlighten to world (though I might instead bring it into darkness). So I am going to give a summary of my view on what I believe Paul is talking about in Romans. By implication, it will address the book of Galatians, but I am not pursuing that mainly because Paul addresses somewhat different questions which would only obscure this series.

Before starting though, let me mention that I have written two posts in the past on Romans (which you can read here and here).

I believe the book of Romans can be divided into 5 sections. Chapters 1-2 discuss the issues of sin and righteousness. Chapters 3-6 discuss the righteousness of God vs the Law of Moses, faith, and the redemption that is in Christ. Chapters 7-8 is kind of a miscellaneous section, though one might say it a development of a person from being under the Law, to being freed by Christ, to having the benefits of the Spirit working in their lives, to looking for the hope of complete redemption (including the creation and the body) and to endure in the face of sufferings because of what is to come. Chapters 9-11 is focused upon the situation with Israel. Finally, chapters 12-16 is focused primarily upon practical matters of behavior. This post will focus upon Chapters 1-2.

Chapter 1 has a contrast between verses 16-17 and 18-32. In the former, Paul explains the nature of the Gospel is power is for that who believe and that God's righteousness is revealed by faith, likewise, to those who trust God (I ascribe to the meaning of faith in Romans the meaning of trust in God, especially to fulfill His promises and to be merciful, and not merely intellectual and creedal acceptance). These two verses I believe set up the primary issues through which Paul develops in the following chapters: the power that is present in salvation and the way that God's righteousness is shown to the world.

The first is rather self-explanatory, but let me clarify my meaning about God's righteousness. Wright says this refers to the covenant faithfulness of God. On the other hand, Piper maintains that it is God's commitment to do what is right. On a purely technical definition that Paul is giving this phrase, I will agree with Piper's assessment more or less. He even goes on to state it is something that we should have but that we do not, and I will agree that in a "natural" state we will not. However, in the end where most Reformed theologians will take that (and I am sure Piper does being Reformed, though I haven't read through his works on the matter) is to say that Christ's righteousness (therefore God's righteousness) is imputed to believers. I, on the other hand, would ascribe that Paul is trying to emphasize the moral standard which we as Christians are to live by in this world (to have a righteousness/perfection like God; see Leviticus 19:2 and Matthew 5:48). Furthermore, the nature of God's righteousness is shown to those who trust God by others who have trust in God (most perfectly by Jesus Christ's trust in God, which I will go into in my next section).

Paul then goes on to contrast the gospel and God's righteousness with the wrath that comes upon "the ungodliness and unrighteousness of men" (vs. 18). First off, the contrast is between the gospel and wrath and "the righteousness of God" and "ungodliness and unrighteousness." So this is one reason why I ascribe a moral connotation to "the righteousness of God." Secondly though, Paul describes the further and further falling into depravity that certain man came into in a step by step process. With each act of disobedience, God gave the sinners into a deeper level of sinfulness (which could also be referring to as hardening, which is discussed in Romans 9).

Now this is speculation on my part that I am not as confident in, but it may be possible that Paul was purposely just building up the wickedness and depravity of these people (they were probably Gentiles) further and further in order to get some of his Jewish audience to get into an emotional state of presumably righteous indignation against such disobedience. But then all of the sudden, Paul turns the tables in Chapter 2. All those people who were condemning such wickedness, Paul shows to be condemned because they do the exact same thing without repentance. Many of the readers were not better off than those people whom Paul had described and so, unless they repented, would have the same punishment brought upon them. Now Paul doesn't explicitly state that he is directed this towards Jews, because it is probably his purpose at least in part to apply this to everyone who might be such hypocrites, but no doubt Paul had the Jewish population particular, as we can see when we look at what Paul states later on in this chapter.

Paul explains that there will be a judgment of everyone's deeds and that there will be no partiality for the Jews in this judgment. Everyone who desires good will receive eternal life, whereas everyone who obeys unrighteousness will receive wrath (the same wrath as mentioned in Romans 1:18). However, not merely is the same standard applied to everyone, but it is applied to the Jews first and then the Greek (and all Gentiles). Salvation is for the Jews, and so they are first in line, so to speak, to receive the blessings. But likewise, because they have such a privileged position, they will also be the first to receive punishment for which they had done (I will develop the meaning of this concept further in the post on 9-11).

Moving further, the impartial judgment is described in terms of the Law (the Law of Moses to be specific). Everyone who has the Law will be condemned (that is, to be sentenced to death) by it if they disobey it, and everyone who do not have the Law will also be put to death even though they don't have the law. The conclusion that is to be drawn then is that it is the ones who have and follow the Law that are deemed as righteous (justified) by God. Justification/acceptance by God is not automatic by merely having knowledge of the Law (and therefore by implication, by being a Jew).

But there may be a question (though Paul doesn't explicitly state it) as to whether the judgment is really impartial because if the Gentiles perish without the Law, and the Jews perish with the Law, does that mean then that there are different standards, therefore there is some partiality? Paul states that some of the Gentiles instinctively do the things of the Law and therefore have a law in themselves. In other word, the same basic things that are contained in the Law of Moses, the rest of the world has because, as Romans 1:20 says, God's qualities can be seen by the world (although, I would add, maybe not perfectly). The implication is that people have a conscience that can condemn or defend them when Jesus comes to judge.

At this point then, Paul asks those who are Jews that boast in God, have the Law, and feel they can instruct the blind if they do the same thing they teach. Many of them don't, and as a result they are part of the reason that the Gentiles blaspheme God. Now, Paul states that circumcision (which can stand for the whole Jewish system) is of no value itself if there is one does not in turn practice things of the Law. Therefore, the person who is true Jew in meaning and the one who is truly circumcised (circumcised in the heart) are those who keep the Law and so is inwardly a Jew and not only a Jew by name, since God's people were to be obedient. Paul concludes this chapter with two things: 1) that this circumcision was by the Spirit instead of by the letter of the Law (more specifically by the standards set forth in the Law of Moses in writing) and 2) that these people do not seek to be praised by men (or in other words, to be seen as good teachers as is implied by the context) but rather to be praised by God).

A couple of comments to add about Romans 2:13 before I conclude this post. First off, as is indicated by context, justification is referring to the character of the person. This has implications for the following usages of the word because it would be problematic to assign a fluid usage of the word where it means a declaration of character in one part, but soon after it means something significantly different. Secondly, there may seem to be a conflict between this verse and the teachings laid out in Romans 3-4. However, if one notes the context, the idea is doing what was intended by the Law, the very intent of the Law (or the spirit of the Law), whereas in Romans 3-4 it is referring to trying to be justified by a strict observance of the letter of the Law (as mentioned in 2:29). Certainly, Paul did not mean to say those that did not have the Law but did the things of it follow the strict, literal things prescribed in the Law of Moses, because how can we expect them to have such a detailed knowledge of something they never saw?

And so that concludes my synopsis on the first two chapters. I find that these two chapters set the stage for the following chapters (as one might expect), such as the way righteousness is revealed, the power in salvation (although those two are mentioned only briefly), justification, the problem of sin, issues regarding the Law, and the meaning of being a Jew. All these issues are thoroughly addressed by Paul in the following chapters. Therefore, in my future posts, I will probably reference heavily these two chapters just to give the context of the letter.