Romans 3:1-8 – Let’s Invalidate Objectors!

 Part II: The Conduct of Humanity

Before we continue, I hope you’re having a fantastic day! All days are blessed, even in their struggle, so please, appreciate everything that is being offered, here!  Please don’t forget the purpose of this entire roast! Just to reiterate, these are verses 1:18-19, which every verse since then has been a spiritual proof of this ideal:

“For God’s indignation is being revealed from heaven on all the irreverence and injustice of men who are retaining the truth in injustice, because that which is known of God is apparent among them, for God manifests it to them.”

With this in mind, let’s talk about any objections either the Jews or gentiles may have on this subject.

What, then, is the prerogative of the Jew, or what the benefit of the Circumcision?

It’s a fair question. What privilege comes with the circumcision? What’s the point if circumcising yourself doesn’t save you from the judgment of God and, per 2:25-29, doesn’t really have any value for Jews apart from spiritual truth? Surely, in Scripture being parted like this, there’s no value for the Jew today??

Much in every manner.

Ha haa! I knew i- wait, what?

For first, indeed, they were entrusted with the oracles of God.

Oh. Oh, yeah, well, that is a thing. The word “entrusted” gives this a stronger responsibility than just “shown” or “the channel” of truth. This is to show that what was promised to Israel is still for Israel. They are promised a kingdom that will dominate the earth for 1,000 years, in peace. Their king will still be the Christ, Son of God. They have this promise, and God, unlike man, doesn’t go back on His promises. He hasn’t “forgotten” them, by any means. In fact, check out this incredible loop-de-loop:

It is a direct result of their murder of their Messiah that so much of their history over the last 2,000 years has been painful and horrific – their transgression has reverberated through their people as time has gone on. Their temple was destroyed, (66 A.D.) with over a million murdered, they failed at fighting the Romans in a second war (132-136 A.D.), as such were scattered across Europe, Africa and parts of Asia at 1/3 their original size, and the Palestinians took over their ground until Roman Catholicism put those two religious sects at odds with each other (I’m historically paraphrasing here.) Catholics persecuted Jews throughout 400s, so much so that nearing the 700s, the Jews banded with the Muslims to defeat the Catholics, leading to a brief period of peace for them in Spain. Most Jews across the continents gathered in Spain, hearing of this peace. From 882-955, under the rule of Abd al-Rahman III, in Cordoba (the center of Spain.) They were allowed to grow financially and religiously, even though they were a) subjected to another world power, and b) making deals with unbelievers that disregarded the Word of God at every turn.

Fast forward to the 11^th and 12^th Century, when the Jews are persecuted by the Muslims (go figure.) Catholics regained control of Spain and pushed the Jews out of their land once again. Many fled and found asylum in Poland, while many others were continually persecuted in other parts of Europe, such as England, France, Hungary, Austria, and Spain (the last one being especially fierce, being the Spanish Inquisition, in which thousands of both Jews and Muslims were persecuted.)

Those that stayed in Poland were okay until 1772, when the Russian queen, Catherine the Great, along with Austria and Prussia, conquered Poland – Poland ceased to be a nation, and Jews, after bouncing around in the big cities and finding little opportunity, were pushed into a small portion of the Russian empire with the Polish, called the Pale of Settlement.

They were eventually kicked out of this area in 1882, and while many fled to America (land of ‘freedom,’) many fled to Israel’s original location (which had become Palestine) in the hopes of reestablishing their homeland. By 1914 (the start of WW1,) there were almost 80,000 documented Jews in Palestine. Of course, it was around this time that the Nazi movement reign took over Germany and conquered much of Europe. We know the story and we know the horrific loss during this time. By the end of WW2, the United Nations were created, and in 1947, the UN approved and established Israel again as a nation, in the very same place that Abraham was called out to begin with, and was the same place God promised their kingdom would come to fruition.

God has not forgotten them, but they have been living in apostasy over this time. Their struggle continued even then (the Arab-Israeli war and more,) but their promise is still there and it will still be fulfilled. This struggle reveals that they are currently in apostasy, and have no direct contact with God, the way that they did in the Old Testament – but it does not reveal that God is permanently finished with them, especially because Paul points out here, to Rome, to the nations, that He is not finished with them, as they hold His oracles.

His oracles state, very clearly, that their promised kingdom is theirs alone, and that they will have religious and national freedom and physical sovereignty over the earth. Even with everything Paul has stated so far, he is conceding that, even in judgment, this is their allotment and the promise made to them, in faith (Gen. 12:1-3.)

For what if some disbelieve? Will not their unbelief nullify the faithfulness of God?

The second objection: what if they don’t believe God? Will this make God’s promise void?

May it not be coming to that!

This may sound off-topic, but I promise it has a point. Almost every American public school I’ve ever seen has followed the same critically flawed idea in the nation’s history: when kids cannot pass the standardized testing material for the course, the solution is to “juke the stats” (to use a Wire term,) or dumb down the test for the majority to have an easier attempt. This is a frustrating system to me because it both lowers the average intelligence of the country, and brushes aside the good students that could have a successful future. It’s a frustrating notion that prevents people from achieving more than they otherwise could (in a relative sense.) The idea, here, is that because a few people need help, the majority are prevented from advancing. Thus, over time, the few people become the majority, and the cycle inevitably repeats itself.

This is not the case with God.

God does not throw out at all. The new majority creates the few positives in the minority – but the minority is God’s Promise that no one will be forgotten – all will be taught on God’s time and all will advance through Him and Him alone. This is a promise. It is not a “maybe,” or an “If, then” statement. In spite of his run-ons, Paul’s statement above could not be speaking plainer: the unbelief of man does not eliminate the faithfulness of God. May it never come to that!

Now let God be true, yet every man a liar, even as it is written: “That so Thou shouldst be justified in Thy sayings, And shalt be conquering when Thou art being judged.”

God’s Words hold bearing, while man’s does not. Disbelief makes one a liar, as an intuitive understanding of God, as we discussed over chapter 1 and 2, is apparent in man. Disbelief doesn’t change His words, which are true. How shallow would it be if He went, “Oh, you don’t believe Me? Well, how ‘bout I just toss ya into hell for eternity?’” Good Lord! We’ve still not seen that idea written so far, but let’s keep going; maybe it’ll magically pop up somewhere in here.

The terms in the quote here are a little complicated, and I will explain why momentarily, but in the meantime, this is Paul’s second quote of the Old Testament, from Psalm 51:4 – “Against You, against You alone have I sinned And done what is evil in Your eyes, so that You may be justified when You speak, And be cleared when You judge.” We do evil so God can hold us accountable, and be redeemed accordingly. We are put through the trial in order to perceive the Love that is God.

The reason the quote is so funky-looking is because this is one of those uncommon instances in the Bible where you see why the Greek language was used to contain the evangel of God. The English language is unable to capture this strange “middle-tense” that stands between passive and active, as it is an imperfect mashup of other languages. A.E. Knoch’s honorable attempt in the Concordant Literal to translate this as evenly as possible is to be applauded, and it’s another reason I’m using this particular translation. The following is the definition of middle-tense, as given by A.E. Knoch, and understood by all who know Greek:

“English has two voices, the active (where the subject does the action himself, “I testify,”) and the passive (where the subject is acted upon, “it is testified.”)

Greek has three voices, the active (“I testify,”) the passive (“it is testified”) and the middle (“I am attesting” – such English equivalents, however, are very rare.) In the middle voice the subject is affected, more or less, by the action. Its force varies greatly, so that it sometimes seems to be passive or active. As this voice can seldom be given any consistent English equivalent, the forms of the middle voice are always followed by the special sign, a circle with a dot in the middle.”

Sure enough, every time you find this use of the “Middle tense,” you’ll see that circle with a dot. Here, the active is David speaking, and the passive is that David has spoken, while the middle tense combines the two to the best of the English translator’s ability. I’m taking the time to share it so heavily now because there will be important comments later that use this middle voice.

Anyways, second objection is brought to a close, here: no way can the Jew try and subvert the righteousness of God, because God is remaining faithful, even in their unbelief.

Now if our injustice is commending God’s righteousness, what shall we declare? Not that God Who is bringing on indignation is unjust! (As a man I am saying it.)

The third objection out of the mouth of the doubting Jew. This one is more subtle. He starts by saying something true, that Paul’s previous answer explained with David’s psalm: our injustice commends God’s righteousness. Our failure proves His faithfulness. The million dollar question is sound, here, and one that we come across most often in today’s unbelieving community: Isn’t God unjust, then, for judging us if our failures are used with purpose, here?

I want to note, quickly, that this question is not in relation to God’s sovereignty, though in my opinion there is an undertone, here. Paul will have more to say about that topic, again, later in this letter. This must be established, first.   He must ask this question as a man, as in, one that has no clue on God’s perspective. Just writing the question seemed to freak him out.

May it not be coming to that! Else how shall God be judging the world?

The answer, of course, is a resounding “no,” and Paul will explain why in greater detail throughout the entirety of this book. For now, he exclaims (as though you would be crazy to think this way,) that just because God raises indignation against sin does not make Him unjust.

His second statement, the question there may seem inconclusive, but think about it. The initial question from the Jew starts by conceding that God is righteous! Obviously, if this One is bringing down anger, then, it’s not an unjust anger!! His judgment of the world has to be just, and if anger is a part of that judgment against sin, it is the correct response. The question, which is a setup, has no connecting tissue because it must state first that the Judge of the world is perfect. The world will face the coming indignation, as tensions in the world today are setting up perfectly for its divine arrival, and God has promised in faith that it will occur (see: the Unveiling prophecy.)

Yet if the truth of God superabounds in my lie, for His glory, why am I also still being judged as a sinner, and why not say, according as we are calumniated and according as some are averring that we are saying, that “We should be doing evil that good may be coming”? – whose judgment is fair.

Calumniated – make false statements about

Paul asks two questions, here, and it’s through them that we can get into the hypocrisy of the doubt – the first question Paul asks is, “Why am I, Paul, still being judged as a sinner, if the truth of God superabounds in my lie?” This is the thought process many try to use to ignore God’s Word. Well, if I’m being judged as a sinner, that means I am being found guilty, right? We all know through experience that with a guilty judgment comes a guilty verdict, and if God is in control, then we are found guilty by no means of our own. Paul will explain, throughout the entirety of Romans 5-11, why this works for God’s glorification, but for now, he’s responding to this question with a sleight of hand. The fact that they seek Paul’s judgment as opposed to focusing on their own reveals that they aren’t properly understanding what’s being said, here. From what we understand of the evangel so far, the judgment, being the indignation, in this case, is designed to glorify God and teach the sinner! Yet all they can think about is Paul’s punishment – not even their own, but Paul.

The second question Paul poses is, “Should we keep committing evil acts so that good may be coming?” This question is from the Jews that continually chased after him and claimed that his gospel amounted to such an absurd phrase (Rom. 6:1, 15.) Paul again points out that this is not true, but that this is a form of projection. This is their argument – “Let’s be unjust that we can recommend God’s righteousness.” The Jew would excuse himself from punishment because God created evil to glorify the good (Is. 45:7,) while simultaneously damning Paul for teaching the same idea, and condemn and punish him for doing so while twisting his words in the process.

God’s judgment is fair. The above objections fall apart when considered properly, through a righteous lens. Hereditary privilege fails. Unbelief being protected by God’s faithfulness fails. The notion that because God is using evil for good magically justifies them fails. Sin serves a double purpose in displaying God’s grace and wisdom on His enemies (though we haven’t seen this proven yet in the evangel, it will be proven in the coming chapters,) and also displays His indignation and power to punish His creation – like a parent to a child, He is allowed to do so. To quote Rogers yet again, “God’s righteousness will be glorified in His judgment of the very sin that gives grace its opportunity.”

Notice that the objector here is called incorrect, but not condemned. “Indignation” still doesn’t mean “all eternal burning,” because where is the teaching in this? It’s a temporary subject, as temporary as these first three chapters laying out mankind’s transgressions. The circumcision gospel couldn’t answer these questions, which is why the Jews got so pissed with Paul for saying things that seemed, in many ways, completely opposite to what Jesus Himself would teach, and of course, what their hypocritical teachings would convey about themselves and their worldly brethren.

- GerudoKing