Additional Thoughts on Romans 2

Additional Thoughts on Romans 2 December 4, 2003

A few additional thoughts on Romans 2:

1) As Dunn points out, Paul is clearly lining out a series of oppositions in the latter part of this chapter, much as he does in Galatians:

manifest ?Enot Jew ?Emanifest circumcision ?Eflesh ?E gramma /letter ?Epraise from man
hidden ?EJew ?Ecircumcision ?Eheart — Spirit ?Epraise from God

This indicates that the whole contrast here is between OC and NC realities, between “flesh” and “spirit.” The Jews are those who are in the new covenant, who enjoy the realities of the fulfilled covenant ?Ecircumcision of the heart, through the Spirit, praise from God. Because those within the NC “keep the law” and “fulfill the law” they honor God’s name among the Gentiles, in contrast to those who do not keep the law and bring blasphemy upon the name of Yahweh. And God responds to their honoring of His name by praising them.

2) Verse 27 makes a neat reversal of the initial verses of the chapter. There, Paul addresses an interlocutor (probably to be understood as Jewish) who is eager to judge others and hopes to escape the judgment of God by passing judgment on others. But those who judge others, even if they judge other rightly, but fail to keep Torah themselves will be “judged” (v 27) by the Gentiles who keep Torah through the Spirit. The tables are turned, and the “righteous” who participate in the judgment of angels, who eat from the tree of knowledge, are not the “naturally” circumcised, but those who though “naturally” uncircumcised do the things written in Torah.

3) In verse 27, “keep” translates TELOEIN, “complete,” “accomplish,” “bring to its proper end.” It seems naturally to point ahead to 10:4, that Christ is the “telos” of the law for those who believe.

4) Verse 26 introduces the notion of “reckoning.” The word has been used before (2:3), but this is the first time that it is (implicitly but undoubtedly) God who is doing the reckoning. Here uncircumcision is “reckoned” circumcision if the uncircumcised one keeps the law. God reckons those who are “by nature” outside the covenant as being “inside” the covenant if they keep (PHULASSO here) the law. How does this affect our reading of the later “reckoning” passages in chapter 4? There is surely a connection, since Paul’s discussion of God’s reckoning of Abram as righteous is followed immediately by a discussion of circumcision (4:1-12). But I don’t see the connection at the moment.

5) There is a subtext of resurrection running through the latter part of Romans 2. Verse 29 is the first mention of the Holy Spirit since 1:4, where the “Spirit of holiness” is the agent of Jesus’ resurrection. Further, the Spirit-letter contrast is picked up in 7:6, where are release from Torah comes about through “death to that by which we were bound,” and leads to service “in the newness of the Spirit.” Thus, the Jew whose circumcision is of the heart by the Spirit is the one who is participating in the resurrection power of Jesus.

6) The phrase “DIA GRAMMATOS KAI PERITOMES” in verse 27 seems very odd. Paul asserts that the one who is “naturally” (EK PHUSEOS) uncircumcised but who keeps Torah will judge (woodenly translated) “you the through letter and circumcision transgressor of Torah.” This has been rendered as “though having the letter of the Law and circumcision are a transgressor” (NASB), but the DIA is more naturally instrumental rather than concessive. It is not that the circumcised becomes a transgressor IN SPITE OF his possession of Torah and circumcision; rather, it is THROUGH the possession of Torah and circumcision that he becomes a transgressor. If this is right, this is the first introduction in Romans to what is in my mind a key theme, namely, the fact that the Torah, far from solving the problem of sin, exacerbates it. This is unpacked in Romans 5 and 7, and comes to a great climax in 8:1-4. Is is possible that this instrumental force for DIA has already been argued for in the preceding verses? Is it perhaps precisely the possession of Torah (and its transgression) that produces the situation of verse 24, that the name of Yahweh is blasphemed among the nations because of them?


Browse Our Archives