#40. Romans 2:1 – Soulja Boy’s Favorite Verse (YYYOOOOOUUUUUUU!!) (Judgment Series, Part I)

Part II: The Conduct of Humanity

Wherefore, defenseless are you, O man! Everyone who is judging, for in what you are judging another, you are condemning yourself, for you who are judging are committing the same things.

Previously On…

“Wherefore” is one of the most important conjunctions in this clause (and in the whole body of work.) In this case, “wherefore,” dio, connects the two themes of “indignation” and “judgment.” The two are distinct; one dealing with anthropomorphic righteous anger, and the other considering the righteous Judge. In the first, He demonstrates a necessary frustration at unrighteousness, and in the second, He exposes it.

At the end of the preceding argument, Paul clarified that we are deserving of death for the charges presented in Rom. 1:18-23, and their effects in 1:24-32. The conclusion, on Paul’s end, is pre-supposed, but we have an entire Old Testament chock full of demonstrations of this conclusion. The very first penalty God ever provides in the text is “death” (Gen. 2:17.) While the execution of this penalty may be delayed (God’s verbiage in Gen. 2:17 gives leeway to this notion, saying “to die you shall be dying,” i.e. you begin to die, not immediately die,) the judgment itself is immediate, and its condemnatory effects present in us all, to this very day.

The soul that is sinning, it shall die (Ez. 18:20.)

The problem is… who is sinning? Paul was talking about irreverent and unjust individuals in his argument, right? He was speaking of everyone in impersonal fashion, see, “They were made vain in their reasonings, and darkened is their unintelligent heart.” He does not immediately approach you on a personal level with your actions, for no man enjoys being condemned at the beginning of a letter.

But once Paul has made sense – that is, formulated a rational argument that is true of all of us on a global scale – whether you heard him or not becomes the new test. Paul takes on a shift in perspective. He now speaks to us directly, saying, “You! You are sinning!” Instead of a first person plural, he is now speaking in second person singular. Yes – you have been singled out.

Come on, don’t be shy! It’s personal, yes, but it’s not like you could tell Him anything He doesn’t already know. And besides, Paul isn’t getting intimate with an air to play a superiority game; “Paul” is not above “you.” He does not exclude himself from his own analysis of the race-wide problem (Rom. 7, Phil. 3:1-8, etc.) He is simply the messenger.

We are defenseless from Paul’s prior explanations – the dishonorable bodies, emotions, and minds demonstrate our threefold failure to be just, or to be respectful toward righteousness, in any intelligible capacity. This is God’s nice way of saying, “Apart from Me, I have no idea how you’d even get out of bed without hurting yourself.”

We are unable to generate excuses, for there are none. God planned, at the beginning of His argument, on demonstrating that we are “defenseless” in light of established truth. The only other time we find the term is right here, in Romans 2:1, book-ending the argument which demonstrates our inability to defend ourselves properly. No race which commits such action can lay claim to “righteousness,” and no one – not even you, me, the guys from Now You See Me, Penn & Teller, Ronald Reagan, or any other smooth-talkers you might find – could talk our way out of the facts. The more we try to distance ourselves from the situation, fleeing this way or that – the more we find ourselves hopelessly cornered by Paul’s emphatic “You!”

We have furthermore briefly stepped away from the discussion of man’s conduct specifically. God must pause here, and enter a broad dialogue with the individual, as opposed to the individual’s acts. This applies to you, o human! You are defenseless because of your acts. No one who reads this passage is exempt from this. I do believe that, instinctually, because of Paul’s shift in tone, here, many people are dismissive of Romans as a whole. No one likes to feel challenged – especially not a race full of alpha males. Many Christians (not all – I’ve met some very honest ones in this regard, but definitely many) will simply exempt themselves from even considering themselves among Romans 1-3. It is this self-exemption which firmly demonstrates God’s point. “Why do you exempt yourself? I am speaking to you.”

YYYOOOOOUUUUUUU!!

When we read the first chapter, the argument was stand-offish, distant. It felt global, like you and your friends are in trouble – but you were in trouble together (makes it a little easier, I hope?) Because of this, it is sensible. We understood Rom. 1:18-20. We saw (and experience firsthand) the actions in Rom. 1:29-31. We know the conclusion of 1:32. You don’t have to dwell on yourself to grasp Paul’s point! You can look at whichever political party you dislike, the corruption of all structured systems, the educational decline of society, or any other parallel, and thus accept the terms of Paul’s argument naturally.

But here, you are placed in the spotlight. It’s uncomfortable. Now everyone’s looking at you. You will be the contrast for a few verses (2:1, 3, 5,) serving a structural contrast between your judgment and God’s (2:2, 4, 5-6.) The celestial hosts are witnessing you as you read. God knows you’re reading it. Christ knows you’re reading it. Satan knows you’re reading it. No, no, no, you can’t pretend you don’t remember it, now – you can’t plug your ears after the song has ended. To “unlearn” what is simply true would be cataclysmic cognitive dissonance.

Is it weird that this is kind of… claustrophobic, to me? Discomforting, like I’m a guinea pig in a lab. It’s disorienting, when you think about it. It feels this way because the defense is gone. You’re naked, so any “defense” you conjure feels like emotional reasoning, or blind disagreement. For most, this manifests in man’s instinctual “fight or flight” response (which I’ve been not-so-subtly alluding to, here.) And I get it! It’s pretty intense. Such a jarring statement can be disorienting; to this day, many simply deny the existence of their Maker, failing to grasp that “something” cannot come from “nothing,” in order to escape the prevailing thought here. This, indeed, does make life much easier to live at this time. It’s a difficult condemnation to live down, and many atheists are, interestingly, repulsed by the text because of this fact. These men are admirably able to admit to their own faults, and find that the Bible’s condemnation of the sinner to be an unnecessary guilt trip on their already-humbled psyche. And indeed, this is a worthy superpower, which much of the world could use today. But I will also ask: why, pray tell, should we be repulsed by a text that is in agreement with the facts concerning our imperfections?

The answer I have received is as I inferred in the previous paragraph: that the purpose of this argument, in Romans, is condemnatory. Whereas the atheist would not ultimately condemn themselves, as, from their perspective, they have done the best under the circumstances they have endured, even in ignorance, God would still have them condemned anyway, to “suffer great punishment and torture for eternity.” And, even if the punishment weren’t “eternal,” it would still be very unfair of this “good” God to punish a bunch of people whom He caused to act this way. To them, if God is real, and the world is the way it is today, then who would be more worthy of condemnation than their own Maker? To mindlessly throw blame on them after putting them in these situations would be completely unjust, spiteful, and dictatorial.

The religious zealot will further dissociate himself from this verse, but the method is undeniably worse than the atheist’s method. Whereas the atheist (generally) seeks to avoid condemnation, the law-bearer will attempt to self-justify (Rom. 10:1-2.) This is best seen in Paul’s audience at the time of this writing – many of whom were Jews (Rom. 1:16.) These people, in fact, found it blasphemous of Paul to associate their morality with the unjust dogs of the nations. They further found Paul to be a demonic opposer to their “one god,” an outsider who worked for the enemy (Acts 9:23, 29.)

Nevertheless, Paul does not exclude the Jew – or the modern-day Christian – with his “You!” He makes this especially clear by calling out the Jews in Rom. 2:17, which we will study at a later date. The faith of any today does not exclude them from Paul’s charge, here. We are a race of hypocrites, plain and simple, and no amount of “fighting” against God is going to help, relatively, nor is it unexpected, absolutely.

This is the primary defense of today – man’s argument for the last 2,000 years does not waver: “How, then, is God blaming? For who has withstood His intention (Rom. 9:19?)” However we paint it, this is the “fight” or “flight” response of individuals, and understandably so. Most do not know Paul’s evangel – and as such, most do not have a resolution for what seems to be a hopelessly insoluble problem.

Worse still, the fact remains; you are singled out, and your “fight” or “flight” response will not change the facts that have been presented by Paul concerning the human race. We are flawed, and yet, with our pathetic scope of knowledge, we presume to know better than others, and we overplay our hand by supplanting the true Judge with our own judgments in ignorance. Though our judgments often do align with the proper judgments of God, our ability to measure up to them as Christ did is atomically meager in comparison, and leads us to perjure ourselves.

God and Man

God does not begin an elongated presentation of His judgment process. Instead, He continues His argument by relation – your inability to act properly is evidence of your inability to judge properly. If you can’t act justly, then how can we honestly determine whether your judgment is true? Who among man has the right to judge?

(The answer is no one, by the way!)

The word “every” highlights this for us. The word “everyone” is not “all people,” or “all mankind,” or any such term. The word “all” in Greek is pan, and is not present in the passage. However, “every,” pas, is present, and references each individual referenced in the scope of the passage. Here is the transliteration of the clause, in Greek: “pas (EVERY) o (THE) krino (one-JUDGING.)” The language is more direct. That Paul takes the time to phrase it this way, instead of saying “All mankind is judging,” subconsciously places us as the “nominative” subject of Paul’s argument. Your life becomes the demonstration of Paul’s relational point. Surely, you have not always assessed a situation correctly, or have had all available information present for you in order to make a decision (in TV shows, this is where the juiciest bits of drama tend to unfold.) It is this poor decision-making (of which you, reader, are not exempt from, by design) that God can use to make His point. There is no better place to make such a direct demonstration of God’s judgment! The only human who has been present for all of your judgments – the good, the bad, and the ugly – is you. And you know you aren’t batting a thousand in the “truth” game. Be honest with yourself, here.

Imperative Distinction

Thank you for your honesty. Yes: in which you judge another, you are condemning yourself. “Another” here is in the accusative case in Greek – highlighting the direct object that the “nominative” subject (you, remember?) are acting upon. The term “different” is not derogatory, nor favorable. It is, simply, “other.” This is aptly pictured in the English. The uninflected Greek term is heteros, “DIFFERENT.” When you judge someone other than you, you are “condemning,” katakrino, “DOWN-JUDGING” yourself.

This verse immediately draws our attention to a critical difference – one which must be drawn as early as possible, and maintained throughout our studies – between “condemnation” and “judgment.” While both have the element “JUDGE” in them, we get “condemntation” from the prefix kata, in Greek, adding “DOWN” to the term to enforce a negative conclusion.

“Conclusion” is, arguably, the best way to put it. This concept is mentioned in the same word family, katakrino and katakrisis, six times in Romans (2:1, 5:16, 5:18, 8:1, 8:3, 14:23.) In contrast, “judgment” is referenced in its own word family, 29 times in Romans. These words are krino (2:1^3, 2:3, 2:12, 2:16, 2:27, 3:4, 3:6, 3:7, 14:3, 14:4, 14:5^2, 14:10, 14:13^2, 14:22,) krima (2:2, 2:3, 2:5, 3:8, 5:16^2, 5:18, 8:1, 13:2,) krimata (11:33,) and dikaiokrisia, (2:5.) The fact that these two are distinct in the Greek means that they should be kept distinct during learning time. One is clearly a result of the other. Let the event (judgment) and its effect (condemnation) remain separate, for the one effect in view at present (condemnation) is not the only effect.

What it Means

It means we’re all the same; condemned. We all judge, and cannot help but do so. Even Christ, in the likeness of sin’s flesh, found it necessary to judge (Matt. 23:33,) though, to be fair, we cannot compare to His justness; He has a right to judge, whereas the point of what we are reading is that we don’t match the qualifications to be judge or jury in God’s story. Instead, we are the defendant, and our lawyer has no case. God’s Lawyer, in the meantime, is impeccable! Flawless cross-examinations, inscrutable references, infallible conclusions, perfect cases. And you have now been placed on the stand.

All that we can do is sweat. God pulls a fancy switch-er-oo with the cases in this verse. First, He makes “every” nominative, as well as “one-judging.” By making both the one judging and the one being judged the subject of the sentence, He can then pair both together as the direct, impacted objects of the sentence. Sure enough, “another” is accusative, which pairs with “every,” while “yourself,” who is also the “one-judging,” becomes accusative as well. This shows us the circular nature of unjust judgment, which dovetails forcefully (gar) into the next clause: that “you who are judging are committing the same things.”

This statement above has led many to presume that judging others is inherently bad. While it is certainly true that no individual on earth right now has the ability or authority to judge others, it is presumptuous to presume that this de-values judgment itself. See, Paul doesn’t say that you are defenseless “because you judge.” He says that you are defenseless because, while you judge others’ sin, you yourself are sinning – the “same,” auta, is highlighted here as the plural, which is why the Concordant translates the term as “same things.” The goal is not to compare “murder” to “theft,” but “sin” to “sin,” to highlight the extremity of the righteousness in view (1:17.) It is not until we stop sinning that we will be able to properly judge. And, it’s because of the argument in 1:18-32 that we can realize that we will not be free from sin entirely while on earth. This body is going to die; the only just Judge is the One Who does not deserve death.

So don’t judge! Who can it hurt except YYYOOOOOUUUUUUU!!

- GerudoKing