#70. Romans 3:9-11 – The Final Stretch

Part II: The Conduct of Humanity

What, then? Are we privileged?

Take a wild guess.

This passage, I figure, could be rationally interpreted in two different ways. In the first sense (and, I think, the more logistically probable one,) is that Paul wraps up his argument with the representative Jew. He asks, “are we privileged?” As if he were assuming a relation to the Jew, he is saying, “Be honest: with everything you have heard, concerning the failure of the Jew to hold up their end of the Sinai covenant (2:17-29,) and with the truth that God will faithfully fulfill our privileges through faith alone, on His terms, whether we have trespassed the law or not (3:1-8)… do our privileges exempt us from God’s indignation and judgment? Considering its necessity in righting the race’s failures (2:5-10,) knowing that it is indeed deserved (1:29-32,) with a view to the good news I’m about to share (2:16,) which is not limited to Jewish prerogatives, but is directed toward all (1:16,) is there any special reason, whatsoever, that we should remain untouched by the indignation and judgment of God?”

On the other hand, Paul has also returned his attention to you, dear reader. Though he asks the same question as he does the Jew, his framework and argumentation is no more strained. He has finished dealing with the objections from the peanut gallery. He must, after demonstrating the necessary proofs, conclude this portion of his argument. Are we privileged? He himself states, in his Philippian letter, that he relinquished his denominative “Jew” status (3:1-8.) He has forfeited all in the name of Christ, especially his religion. Together, you and he may be assumed as the “gentile,” the “Greek.”

The answer to the question, of course, is thus:

Undoubtedly not, for we previously charge both Jews and Greeks to be all under sin, according as it is written, that “Not one is just” – not even one.

Undoubtedly not. You could not rationally claim to some “privilege” without reasonable doubt. Our 8 billion+ population should be enough to verify for us that not one is just. There are none who die who could be considered “just.” Our physical bodies deteriorate and cripple. We wither away into lifelessness. This is our reality, and something we can never ignore. Our numerous attempts to extend our lives have never succeeded. Attempts to try have not yielded results. At most, modern medicine has helped delay the inevitable. The entire healthcare industry operates and thrives on this very premise. We recognize that we are dying, and that no “fight” on our end has caused any major societal issue to permanently dissipate. Racial issues persist. Professional issues persist. Internal battles still wage. Wars are still fought. Genocides are still enforced. The global scale has become too large for us to contain. We have unutterably failed, as a race, to justly self-govern.

Both the Jew and the Greek have failed to do these things. There is no evidence in the Jewish history that would show their right to rule, but their gifting of it after they are properly crafted in spirit by God. There is further no evidence that the Greek has shown their right to rule. The best that the gentile has done is America, and goodness, there are thousands upon thousands of issues that our government could not even begin to solve, with their current spending habits and lax care for the citizen’s alleged “rights.”

Not One is Just

Paul said, at the beginning of the letter, that he was not ashamed of his evangel, and I have previously intimated that 1:18-3:20 shows that not even sin could lessen the good news that God brings. Yet I further emphasize that the evangel thrives upon the news of man’s failure to achieve. The premise of the evangel relies on our failure to attain to righteousness of our own volition.

Thus, no extremity to the sin can or will hinder Paul’s argumentation. In fact, the stronger the sin, the better it actually serves the evangel’s message (more on this when we discuss the Christ.) It is the gospel of the unashamed.

This, indeed, poses a very practical problem for many of our friends and family in the pews. I hear many, in their exegetical tangents, convey a sorrow or remorse for some allegedly destined for “eternal damnation,” whether annihilation or some kind of torturous hell. Is this not sufficient evidence that their message is not the message Paul is about to share? If they are ashamed of even a portion of the effects of their message, then how can their proclamation align with Paul’s (thus God’s?)

This is the truth; both politically, and religiously, humanity fails. Politically, the greatest republic fails, since it is founded on the pre-supposed Arminian claims to free will. The two ideologies reflect each other quite well; Arminianism reflects republicanism. Both maintain that humanity is responsible for its own well-being – on the supposition that mankind can do right, if they so choose.

Lest we fail to recognize the sheer scope of our own failure, Paul writes us a four-stanza essay as a summarized indictment, which will finalize the argument. We will presently consider the first stanza, which conveys the critical message: we are no heroes. Romans is, first and foremost, unveiling the sinner. Be honest with yourself. You are not exempt from the argument thus far. This may sting, emotionally, but when you evaluate yourself (using any number of methods,) the conclusion that can only be reached is that you are not perfect, and in fact many of mankind’s actions – no matter how well-intended – are short-sighted, and often serve greater flaws for ourselves or others.

There is only One Hero in Romans. He is shared on word four of Romans: Ieysou. He alone is the Victor, Who alone is just. Paul has proven our need for the evangel, yes, but the evangel itself concerns Jesus (1:3.) Without it, we remain without a foundation. We operate through unjust means. Humanity is in dire straits; we need a new beginning, but because of sin operating in us, the New Beginning is often shunned (though this is my personal experience, I find most often that He is shunned because He does not set about to “resolve” your current troubles in the flesh.)

Not (Even) One

“Not one is just” – not even one. Not one is understanding. Not one is seeking out God.

It is often argued that there is a flaw in Paul’s argument. The objector here is throwing a Hail Mary (it is so poor, in fact, that Paul does not even acknowledge it.) The argument is thus: “Not one is just. Yet Paul says Jesus is just! Therefore, Paul’s argument is invalid.” These objectors begin word games, making strange remarks like, “Paul only means “all ‘without distinction!’”

This argument is, like the others, made with a view to discount Paul, establish their own righteousness in some fashion (on unjust grounds,) and thus evade judgment. The problem is that any objection which excuses sin or enables mankind’s action discounts the argument and establishes a faulty premise, on which a just evangel cannot operate. It is true that the Jew and the gentile are considered together, here, without distinction (I will have more to say on this when we consider the Hebrew passages being quoted.) But to act as though “without distinction” is only what Paul means would mean that the evangel is no longer to “all who are believing,” but to the minimum who are believing.

Logically, then, only one Jew and one Greek would need to be saved through this evangel in order for it to be fulfilled! It would turn Romans 3 from a race-wide indictment, to a hyper-specific indictment of the “worst of the worst.” Given numerous points from Paul (such as “our injustice commends God’s righteousness,”) this would mean that most who are unjust are not worthy of the salvation committed by the evangel!

In truth, Jesus is the exception that proves the rule. Not one is just – like Jesus. The entire context of 1:18-3:20 has expressly excluded Him from the conversation, aside from one brief name drop in 2:16. The evangel (concerning His Son) has been absent from the conversation, and He will not be discussed until 3:22.

Both Jew and Greek are unjust. There is no way around it. This perspective should be obvious. Unless you are a villain in a Tarantino or Scorsese film, or perhaps some Machiavellian archetype, you are likely able to recognize the simple truth of this fact. Most I’ve ever spoken to can fairly acknowledge that they are imperfect, that they make mistakes (they sin,) that they live in ignorance to many facts.

Most, ideally, wish for a peaceful world where they can make fair wages for a fair day’s work. As already demonstrated in Paul’s argument, the conscience of man is intuitively pointed at “good.” There is a reason, for example, so many films can point at utopian ideologies (take Bill and Ted’s Excellent Adventure, where George Carlin prophesies, “The air is clean, the water is clean – even the dirt is clean!”) Mankind wants good, being created in the Image of God (Gen. 1:27.) Yet at our very core, we are unable to effect the righteousness. We do not merely “fail,” but we cannot do right as Jesus does.

Paul emphasizes the truth that not one is just by adding, “not even one.” The term “not even” is, literally, “not yet” in Greek. It appeared one other time in Romans 2:28, where it was clear that “not yet” is the true circumcision apparent in flesh. The same is true here, in Romans 3:10 – assuming that no one has heard the evangel of God, not yet one can be considered “just.” This is a global unrighteousness.

By doubling down, Paul indicts man to commend what he will contrastively recognize of God. Here, in 3:10, he twice identifies man with a lack of righteousness. Yet in 3:21-22, he twice identifies God with righteousness. This is to show that God’s righteousness meets the unrighteousness and can resolve it, no matter the extremity of the unrighteousness (for the hand of Yahweh is not too short to save.)

Another, technical purpose for emphasizing the quote “not one is just” with “not even one” is because the original Hebrew does not say “not one is just.” It reads, “not one is kind.” Furthermore, it applied specially to those of the nations. The Jew intuitively exempts themselves from such a charge – that is, until Paul relates back to his present argument, concerning both Jew and Greek, saying “Not even one.” Similarly, the righteousness of God as presented in Romans 3:21 is indeed for all, yet in 3:22 the method of its application to the race is given, through faith alone. The righteousness of God is indeed destined for the unjust (all.) Yet this righteousness only comes about through faith.

This grammatical pattern will be seen a few more times throughout Romans (5:12-19, for example,) and we will concern ourselves with it when we arrive.

Understanding or Seeking

Mankind does not understand this. The weight of this condemnation, apart from the evangel, is too much for the mind to take, more often than not. When I realized these fundamental facts concerning myself, I slipped into a great depression – the effects of which I still reckon with to this day. When the argument is properly understood, the entire notion of self-esteem vanishes. You learn that there is no reason for you to esteem the “self.” You are a failure. Your victories are shortsighted. Your gains are temporary and dissipate. Your comfort does not deny the outcome of this flesh – death.

Believe it or not, sharing this argument with other people, in spite of the abundant evidence in its favor, actually frustrates them. They don’t like to hear it, and I often have a strained relationship with them, afterward. I often don’t even get to the “evangel” part of the story, because man is yet not matured enough to face this problem with intellectual integrity. Such fully proves the irreverence of mankind.

We simply do not understand. Not one of us does – which means that not one of us carries within ourselves an intellectual integrity of our own will. The term “understand” in Greek is sunieymi, “TOGETHER-LET.” It is to make out the meaning. Not one of us can recognize the reason for our sin. Its purpose, to the vast majority of Christendom (the one group who should know, riiiiiiiight?) is ignorant to it. Though God explains the purpose for sin multiple times (Ecc. 1:13, 3:1-20, Rom. 1:16-18, 11:32, 2 Cor. 12:7-10, etc., almost as if a 2,000 page book about God would explain God,) we remain confused, employ wordplay and attempt to obscure the facts to appeal to ourselves.

This terrible indictment, as with indignation and judgment, is a necessary prerequisite to realizing the evangel. Apart from a recognition of sin (3:20,) the evangel remains veiled (3:21.) Paul’s argument continues to point forward, then, toward the righteousness displayed in the evangel. To contrast our lack of righteousness (3:10,) God’s righteousness is conveyed at the very opening strain of the evangel (3:21.) Not one human being is righteous before God – yet the good news is that God is righteous, and is now manifesting this righteousness in us, through Jesus Christ’s faith alone (3:21-22.)

This is the only solution to human unrighteousness, misunderstanding, and lack of seeking. We are not commanded to “make ourselves righteous,” or even to “make ourselves holy,” in light of this conclusion. In fact, there is no direct command given by God through Paul until Romans 12:1. The burden of “action,” from Romans 3:21-11:36 is God. The argument here is not designed for you to go, “Oh man, I need to do something,” but to go, “Oh man, I can’t do anything. Dear God, what can You do?” 

To fail to understand this is proof of our irreverent minds. To refuse to seek God (Who is correlated with righteousness) is proof of our unjust actions. Thus the first stanza of Paul’s conclusion rounds off Romans 1:18. We do not understand God, and we do not seek God. Apart from God-given faith, neither our thoughts nor our dispositions glorify Him.

From here, many in the pews will likely disagree. The phrase “I found God” is quite common in the Bible belt. Yet this should be more proof that religious communities are not sharing the same message as Paul. Paul does not claim that you can find God, but that God has known you. We fail to note that we are dependent upon Him, and not vice versa. That big ball in the sky that quite literally gives you energy, making perfectly timed revolutions around the sun, juxtaposed by a smaller ball in the sky which sets the limit for the sea, and disables it from swallowing the rest of the land? That big “Jupiter,” whose gravitational pull keeps the asteroid belt from pelting us into extinction? The gravitational balance of the universe? Dark matter? Light matter? The subatomic particles which craft a perfectly hollow atom for your body to thrive? The perfect system within your body which enables just the necessary senses for your growth?

“The God Who makes the world and all that is in it, He, the Lord inherent of heaven and earth, is not dwelling in temples made by hands, neither is He attended by human hands, as if requiring anything, since He Himself gives to all life, and breath, and all.”

To recognize God as God is to realize the truth of the matter. Religion does not portray God as a God of purpose, of subjection, and of justness. Their god bargains with you. “Hey, I know you’re not saved, and I can save you, if you… <insert church requirements here.>” More often than not, the “requirement” is repentance. Yet nowhere in Paul’s argument does salvation become dependent on repentance! The charge for repentance and God’s ability to save are mutually exclusive.

The reason for this is sin. Sin makes us doubt God’s power and His goodness. Sin, through the mouthpiece of religion, mocks a universal Saviour, One Who will not rest until all hear the evangel and believe it. Sin makes God out to be forgetful of His own blessings, by discounting His promise to Abraham, throwing His promises to the nations. Sin discounts His faithfulness, proclaiming that He will abandon all who disbelieve. Sin discounts His love, proclaiming that love somehow juxtaposes righteousness, and that He cannot choose to save any of His own volition.

Yet the evangel exposes this sin for what it is, by proclaiming the One Who conquers it. There is no rationale, under Paul’s valid argument, that dictates that man could “find” God, or “help” ourselves, or “help” Him in any way. Our “decision for Christ” is a farce, one proclaimed by man to disguise the true salvific work of God. It is not ours, but His choice. It is impossible for us to justify ourselves. If salvation relies upon “our decision” in any way, then we are the arbiters of our own righteousness. In truth, justification is not out of us (Eph. 2:8.) We have no room to boast. It is God Who justifies the irreverent (Rom. 4:5.) Justification is gratuitious (3:24,) in His grace (3:24,) sourced in His ability (1:16.)

Thus, we can appreciate how the first stanza of Paul’s conclusion is resolved by the evangel. We are not just – until we are covered by the evangel of God. We are not understanding – until we are given it by the evangel of God. We are not seeking – until we are motivated by the evangel of God. When we begin with God as God, and not a pretend god who leaves the option to the unjust while perpetuating sin for eternity, the evangel’s strength and authority truly begins to shine, effectively changing the individual for the better.

- GerudoKing