Romans 3.5-God is Justified For Exercising His Righteous Indignation upon Jewish Unrighteousness
Wenstrom Bible Ministries
Pastor-Teacher Bill Wenstrom
Wednesday October 3, 2007
Romans: Romans 3:5-God is Justified in Exercising His Righteous Indignation upon Jewish Unrighteousness
Lesson # 76
Please turn in your Bibles to Romans 3:1.
This evening we will continue with our study of Romans chapter three.
Sunday morning we noted Romans 3:3 in which Paul poses another question to his readership and answers this question as well, teaching that Jewish unfaithfulness does not render inoperative God’s faithfulness.
Last evening we studied Romans 3:4 in which Paul emphatically answers his rhetorical that he posed to his Jewish audience in Romans 3:3 and declares that God will be vindicated in His judgment of men.
This evening we will study Romans 3:5, in which Paul poses another question to the unsaved Jew that rejects the idea that God is unrighteous for exercising His righteous indignation against Jewish unbelievers if their unrighteousness makes conspicuous God’s righteousness.
In Romans 3:3-4, Paul teaches that Jewish unfaithfulness does not render inoperative God’s faithfulness to Israel and that God will be vindicated when He judges unsaved mankind.
In Romans 3:5, Paul addresses another objection of the Judaizers as to whether or not God is justified in exercising His righteous indignation towards the unsaved Jews when their unrighteousness magnifies the righteousness of God.
He addresses this objection since it could be implied from Romans 3:3-4 that if the unrighteousness of unregenerate Jews serves to demonstrate the righteousness of God, is not God unrighteous for exercising His righteous indignation upon Jewish unrighteousness?
Romans 3:1, “Then what advantage has the Jew? Or what is the benefit of circumcision?”
Romans 3:2, “Great in every respect. First of all, that they were entrusted with the oracles of God.”
Romans 3:3, “What then? If some did not believe, their unbelief will not nullify the faithfulness of God, will it?”
Romans 3:4, “May it never be! Rather, let God be found true, though every man be found a liar, as it is written, ‘THAT YOU MAY BE JUSTIFIED IN YOUR WORDS, AND PREVAIL WHEN YOU ARE JUDGED.’”
Romans 3:5, “But if our unrighteousness demonstrates the righteousness of God, what shall we say? The God who inflicts wrath is not unrighteous, is He? (I am speaking in human terms.)”
Corrected translation of Romans 3:1-5: “Therefore, what is the advantage of being a Jew? Or, what is the benefit of circumcision? Great in every respect! Indeed, the primary one that they were entrusted with the declarations by God. So then, what if-and let us assume for the sake of argument some did not believe, then will their unbelief render inoperative God’s faithfulness? No! Absolutely not! God must be acknowledged as true but each and every member of the human race a liar. Just as it stands written, for all of eternity, ‘that You will be acknowledged as righteous by means of Your pronouncements so that You will be victorious while You are undoubtedly being accused of injustice.’ But, if-and let us assume for the sake of argument our unrighteousness does cause God’s righteousness to be made conspicuous. What then is the conclusion that we are forced to? Is God unrighteous, while inevitably exercising His righteous indignation? No! (I am speaking according to human viewpoint.)”
Romans 3:5, “But if our unrighteousness demonstrates the righteousness of God, what shall we say? The God who inflicts wrath is not unrighteous, is He? (I am speaking in human terms.)”
“If” is the conditional particle ei (ei)) (i), which introduces the protasis of a first class condition that indicates the assumption of truth for the sake of argument.
In Romans 3:5, the basic relation that the protasis has to the apodasis is “evidence-inference.”
The evidence is that Jewish unrighteousness demonstrates the righteousness of God and Paul is inferring from this evidence.
The inference is that God is unrighteous for exercising His righteous indignation against unrighteous Jews.
The rhetorical question rejects this idea as well as the negative particle me in the emphatic position of the apodasis of Romans 3:5 and the statement me genoito, “may it never be!” in Romans 3:6.
Paul is making an induction about the implications that this piece of evidence suggests in order to refute his opponents, who claimed He taught that God had permanently rejected the nation of Israel for their rejection of Jesus of Nazareth as their Messiah and thus implying that God was unfaithful to His promises.
In fact, in Romans 9-11, Paul teaches that God has not permanently rejected the nation of Israel because of His faithfulness to His promises He made to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and that a partial hardening has happened to Israel until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.
The use of the first class condition is a debater’s technique and is used as a tool of persuasion.
Paul is anticipating the objection of his Jewish opponents in order that he might emphatically refute it.
Their argument would be that if Jewish unrighteousness magnifies the righteousness of God, is God then, justified in exercising His righteous indignation towards them?
Romans 3:5, “But if our unrighteousness demonstrates the righteousness of God, what shall we say? The God who inflicts wrath is not unrighteous, is He? (I am speaking in human terms.)”
“Our” is the personal pronoun hemeis (h(mei$), which is used by Paul in order to identify himself with his opponents, the Judaizers, in order to refute his objection.
Of course, Paul is not a Jewish unbeliever but rather he employs debater’s technique by assuming the position of the self-righteous Jewish unbeliever in order to destroy that position.
In other words, he sets up a straw man in order that he might knock him over.
“Unrighteousness” is the noun adikia (a)dikiva) (ad-ee-kee-ah), which refers to the unsaved Jew as having “no” integrity in the sense that his character is “not” sound, and does “not” adhere to the will of God, and is “not” upright, honest, perfectly whole, is “diminished,” and “unsound,” “impaired” and in a “bad” condition.
In context, the noun adikia describes the unsaved Jew as having “no” virtue in the sense that he has “no” moral excellence, “no” goodness, and his conduct does “not” conform to the will of God.
In Romans chapter two, Paul described the unrighteousness of the Jew in detail.
First of all, they committed the same sins that the unsaved Gentiles committed according to Romans 1:28-2:1.
Romans 2:4-5 teaches that they held in contempt God’s infinite kindness, tolerance and patience towards them, which was meant to lead them to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ and were thus obstinate and unrepentant.
The unsaved Jews failed to keep perfectly the Mosaic Law and were merely hearers of the Law according to Romans 2:12-13.
They were pretentious as a result of the privileges that God gave them according to Romans 2:17-20.
The nation of Israel failed to live up to her privilege of being the elect nation of God and being the custodians of the Old Testament Scriptures, which contained the records of the covenants made with their forefathers after the flesh, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.
In relation to this, she failed in her responsibility of being the custodians of the Old Testament Scriptures since 2 Chronicles 34:1-30 records that during the reign prior to King Josiah Israel, the Jews misplaced and lost the written record of God’s law.
The nation of Israel was also hypocritical in that they did not practice what they taught the unsaved Gentiles and yet made a pretense of being spiritual, which resulted in the unsaved Gentiles blaspheming the character of God according to Romans 2:21-24.
This passage teaches that the unsaved Jews were involved in stealing, adultery, and robbing pagan temples for personal profit.
In fact, in her history, Israel was involved in idolatry according to Exodus 32 in their worship of the golden calf.
The unsaved Jews were involved in racial bigotry in that they would not associate with the Gentiles peoples and thus failed to lead them to the Lord.
The unrighteousness of Israel was also manifested in their self-righteousness in that they sought to establish their own righteousness rather than receive God’s righteousness through faith in Jesus Christ according to Romans 10:1-3.
Their seeking to establish their own righteousness independently of God’s righteousness in the Person of Jesus Christ manifested the fact that they were involved in evil, which is independence from God (Isaiah 14:12-14).
The unrighteousness of the nation of Israel was manifested by their arrogance and presumptuousness in thinking that being biological descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob would gain them automatic entrance into the kingdom of God and protect them from the wrath of God (Matthew 3:5-9; 8:11-12; John 8:34-45).
It was also manifested in that they presumptuously thought that being circumcised and possessing the Law could gain them automatic entrance into the kingdom of God and protect them from eternal condemnation (Romans 2:25-29).
The nation of Israel’s unrighteousness was most clearly manifested when they crucified their Messiah, Jesus of Nazareth, the Christ.
Acts 2:36, “Therefore let all the house of Israel know for certain that God has made Him both Lord and Christ -- this Jesus whom you crucified.”
Romans 3:5, “But if our unrighteousness demonstrates the righteousness of God, what shall we say? The God who inflicts wrath is not unrighteous, is He? (I am speaking in human terms.)”
“Demonstrates” is the verb sunistemi (sunivsthmi) (soon-is-tay-mee), which expresses the idea that the unrighteousness of the unsaved Jew caused the righteousness of God to be made more conspicuous.
“Conspicuous” means, “easily seen, visible, readily observable, attracting special attention as by outstanding qualities.”
The unrighteousness of the unsaved Jews caused the righteousness of God to be easily seen, visible, readily observable, attracting special attention by its outstanding quality.
“The righteousness” is the noun dikaiosune (dikaiosuvnh), which describes the character of God as having perfect integrity in the sense that His character is perfectly sound, perfectly adhering to His perfect standards, and is upright, honest, perfectly whole, undiminished, sound, unimpaired and in perfect condition.
The righteousness of God refers to the character of God as having perfect virtue in the sense that His character is perfect moral excellence, goodness, and His conduct is conformed perfectly to His perfect standards.
Now, we come to the apodasis of the first class condition, which is introduced “implicitly” meaning without a structural marker.
The negative particle me (mhv) (may) appears at the beginning of the apodasis introducing the rhetorical question indicating that a negative answer is anticipated.
“Shall we say” is the verb ereo (e)revw) (er-eh-o), which is used with the interrogative pronoun tis, “what” to express Paul’s hesitation and revulsion in presenting a rhetorical question that anticipates the objection of the Judaizers, which infers the unthinkable and the preposterous, namely, that God is unrighteous.
“The God” is the noun theos (qeov$), which refers to the second member of the Trinity, the Son of God, the Lord Jesus Christ who manifested and represented the Trinity before men and was the member of the Trinity who made the promises to the patriarchs and the nation of Israel.
The definite article preceding the noun theos indicates that the Lord Jesus Christ is in view here since the article indicates that God is “well-known” to Paul’s unsaved Jewish readership since he is referring to the God who manifested himself to their forefathers, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.
The Son of God is that member of the Trinity who manifested God to men.
“Who inflicts” is the verb epiphero (e)pifevrw) (ep-ee-fer-o), which is used with the accusative form of the noun orge, “righteous indignation, wrath” and means, “to cause someone to experience something with implication of imposing or making use of one’s authority, thus to exercise.”
In our context, the verb epiphero speaks of God causing the unbeliever to experience His righteous indignation by making use of His authority or power.
“Wrath” is the noun orge (o)rghv) (or-gay), which refers to God’s attitude of “righteous indignation” in response to any thought, word, or action of mankind and angels, that is opposed to His holiness and manifests itself in actions that judge and punish the guilty.
The only way to avoid God’s righteous indignation is to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ.
John 3:36, “He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him.”
“Unrighteous” is the adjective adikos (a&diko$) (ad-ee-kos), describes the state or condition of being unrighteous and is applied to God here in Romans 3:5.
Thus, Paul’s Jewish opponents were accusing him of teaching that God was unrighteous based upon his statements in Romans 3:4 that Jewish unrighteous made more conspicuous the righteousness of God.
Romans 3:5, “But if our unrighteousness demonstrates the righteousness of God, what shall we say? The God who inflicts wrath is not unrighteous, is He? (I am speaking in human terms.)”
“I am speaking in human terms” is a parenthetic apology for the blasphemous concept of God being unrighteous and refers to speaking according to human viewpoint.
The idea that God could ever be unrighteous is strictly “human viewpoint.”
For the Jews to come to this conclusion they would have to deny a basic doctrine taught in their Scriptures that God will judge the world, which Paul will point out to them in Romans 3:6 (Genesis 18:25; Psalm 96:13; Isaiah 66:16; Joel 3:12).
Romans 3:5 teaches that God is justified and His integrity is not compromised by exercising His righteous indignation upon Jewish unrighteousness and to express such an idea is based upon flawed human viewpoint.
In fact, the exercise of God’s righteous indignation upon Jewish unrighteousness serves to confirm the integrity and holiness of God in that it demonstrates God’s total and absolute rejection of anything that is contrary to His perfect character and integrity.
God’s holiness meaning the absolute perfection of His character guarantees that God will always be justified in exercising His righteous indignation upon the unrighteousness of human beings whether Jew or Gentile since His holiness can have nothing to do with human sin.