Expositiono of Romans 2:17-29

Opening Remarks

Good morning!

I want to extend my gratitude to everyone who showed up for our first community garden meeting; everything went really well.

I am really excited to see how God is going to use this to display the love of Christ

I emailed out the notes and video of this meeting for those who want to review it

And I want to remind everyone that this Friday @ 1:30 is the meeting to plan for repainting the halls

Your reading assignments for next week: Romans 3:1-8

Alright, we have so much to get to today, so let’s jump right in!

Introduction

Now that Paul has critiqued the Gentile conception of righteousness, his next task is to refute the Jewish conception of righteousness through the law outside of Christ. And what is quite striking about this argument is that a full 1/3rd of Paul’s argument is composed of quotations from the Old Testament, which both suggests that there were Jewish Christians in Paul’s audience, and that Paul believes his view of righteousness through Christ is explicitly Biblical!

Before we get into our exegesis, I want to ask for your patience as I take a moment to explain why I preach the way I do. I believe this is worth our time because Biblical preaching is being dismissed in our age.

A lot of preachers have gotten into the habit of preaching surface-level sermons. They take a snippet of the text and then spend their time thinking up clever stories and anecdotes to catch your attention and make you come away feeling good and happy. I’ve been told by others to dumb my sermons; explaining the structure of the text, how arguments progress, and the context of the text is too boring. “Regular people”, they say, “don’t care about all that.” But I believe that kind of preaching is misguided, and is the recipe for cultivating “itching ears”.

So why do I preach this way? Why explain the grammar, structure, and things like this? I do this because I want you to be able to test my teaching. To be convinced that what I am preaching is true. And if true, to be confident enough in God’s word that you will change your beliefs and your life if necessary to live by faith in the things that you hear! And I know this is a very tall order. So I preach this way to accurately explain the meaning of God’s word to you in order to “bring about the obedience of faith”!

So I thank you for bearing with my little detour here. But sometimes I really do think it is necessary to defend the need for Biblical preaching in our age.

Now let’s get into our lesson.

Exegesis

Today’s lesson brings us to Paul’s second argument, which progresses in one movement from 2:17-3:20. He advances his point that “the gospel reveals the righteousness of God” by arguing that legal-righteousness is insufficient to establish our righteousness before God; we need something more!

To make this argument, Paul uses diatribal rhetoric. You may remember this refers to dialogue with theoretical interlocutors (or opponents). The purpose of this kind of rhetorical argument is to show the weakness of the opposition’s view in contrast to your own. Paul wants to demonstrate the superiority of the righteousness that comes by faith.

For this reason, Paul has carefully chosen specific texts from the Old Testament to engage his Jewish interlocutors: Romans 2:24; 3:4, 10-18.

Romans 2:24 CSB

24 For, as it is written: The name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you.

We see the inferiority of legal-righteousness: human hypocrisy maligns the good we profess by the evil we practice.

Romans 3:4 CSB

4 Absolutely not! Let God be true, even though everyone is a liar, as it is written: That you may be justified in your words and triumph when you judge.

We see that God is justified in judging human sin:

One of Paul’s chief points throughout Romans is to defend the righteousness of God

So God is justified in condemning the Jews because they practiced the sins they denounced

Romans 3:10–18 CSB

10 as it is written: There is no one righteous, not even one. 11 There is no one who understands; there is no one who seeks God. 12 All have turned away; all alike have become worthless. There is no one who does what is good, not even one. 13 Their throat is an open grave; they deceive with their tongues. Vipers’ venom is under their lips. 14 Their mouth is full of cursing and bitterness. 15 Their feet are swift to shed blood; 16 ruin and wretchedness are in their paths, 17 and the path of peace they have not known. 18 There is no fear of God before their eyes.

And so Paul establishes our universal corruption:

All humanity has together become corrupt

We all practice the evils we denounce

Therefore, God is righteous in his judgment of the human race.

All of these texts are carefully designed to advance Paul’s argument that the righteousness of faith is superior to legal righteousness. And this point is vital to understanding the theological climax of Romans in chapters 9-11, which answers an implied question: What makes us God’s children?

“By The Spirit Not The Letter”

The importance of “righteousness” to the Christian faith cannot be overstated. Failing to understand the basis of Christian righteousness has disastrous consequences, for “without holiness no one will see the Lord” (Hebrews 12:14)! And we’ve seen the fruit of this failure in modern Christianity, as those who would abuse “grace” as their license to sin have caused the name of Jesus to be blasphemed among unbelievers. “Personal righteousness” is essential to the Christian faith.

And so I've felt a weighty burden for my preaching to carry this message. A burden to challenge the belief that “self-mastery” or “rule keeping” is sufficient. Such righteousness is wholly insufficient to bring us before God and will robe us of our peace, our joy, and even our perseverance!

We need to hear the words of the apostle Paul:

Galatians 5:4–6 CSB

4 You who are trying to be justified by the law are alienated from Christ; you have fallen from grace. 5 For we eagerly await through the Spirit, by faith, the hope of righteousness. 6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision accomplishes anything; what matters is faith working through love.

Both “self-mastery” and "legal-righteousness” share the same flaw in that we are not the true masters of our own “self”, and we still do the very things we know are wrong. These constructs of righteousness are flawed simply because of our unrighteousness!

The superiority of the righteousness that comes by faith is what Paul is explaining:

Romans 10:4–5 CSB

4 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes, 5 since Moses writes about the righteousness that is from the law: The one who does these things will live by them.

Paul undertakes to explain one of the central truths of the gospel, which offers a superior conception of righteousness based on faith. And this will be the sum of his theological arguments in Romans as expressed in Romans 11:26-27:

Romans 11:26–27 CSB

26 And in this way all Israel will be saved, as it is written, The Deliverer will come from Zion; he will turn godlessness away from Jacob. 27 And this will be my covenant with them when I take away their sins.

We see the argument for “the righteousness of God that comes by faith” in 1:17 being taken up and carried all the way through to this end. In this way, Paul tells us that the heart of the gospel is God taking it upon himself to turn godlessness away from his people!

So now we should ask an important preliminary question: “where did Paul get the idea that the gospel calls for a superior form of righteousness?”

I want you to think about that question.

Does the good news of Jesus ever call for a superior form of righteousness to that of the law?

Yes, in fact, Jesus based all his teachings for Christian living on this point:

Matthew 5:17–20 CSB

17 “Don’t think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. 18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or one stroke of a letter will pass away from the law until all things are accomplished. 19 Therefore, whoever breaks one of the least of these commands and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven. But whoever does and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 20 For I tell you, unless your righteousness surpasses that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never get into the kingdom of heaven.

So I am proposing that Paul is making this argument here, and using it to answer the prior implied question, “what makes us children of God?” We can not ascend to God’s throne through self-mastery, nor can we earn our way into his presence through the law. And to this last point, as a Pharisee of Pharisees, and a Jew born under the law, Paul was uniquely suited to speak.

Now let’s jump into our text:

Romans 2:17–18 CSB

17 Now if you call yourself a Jew, and rely on the law, and boast in God, 18 and know his will, and approve the things that are superior, being instructed from the law,

“Now” (v. 17): Whereas many Bibles will translate this word “but”, the CSB consistently prefers “now” wherever “δὲ”, which is a logical conjunction, functions to extend and continue a previous thought.

I want to stress the continuity of Romans. You can’t study any part of Romans in isolation from the rest of the letter because the whole letter unpacks and develops one central message. And this is consistently reflected in the grammar Paul uses in Romans.

“If you call yourself a Jew, and rely on the law, and boast in God” (v. 17): Paul identifies three pillars in the Jewish construct of righteousness: first, their heritage as God’s people; second, their reliance upon the law; and third, their confidence in God.

The Jews believed that they were called to be the light of the world.

We see this theme in Isaiah:

Isaiah 42:6 CSB

6 “I am the Lord. I have called you for a righteous purpose, and I will hold you by your hand. I will watch over you, and I will appoint you to be a covenant for the people and a light to the nations,

Jews celebrated that God chose Israel and gave them his law in order to make them a beacon of virtue to the rest of the world. Before his conversion, Paul himself would have seen this calling of Israel as the rock on which he could stand. He was a Jew and God had called Israel to this position, therefore he was secure.

“and know his will” (v. 18): Then Paul draws three conclusions from these pillars of Jewish righteousness: first, the Jews are enlightened.

There is a kind of confidence and peace that comes from knowing.

Have you ever experienced sudden and unexplained health-complications? You go in for testing and wait to learn what is wrong with you. You look online and discover that it could be anything from mild gas to rare flesh-eating bacteria. You suffer in the darkness of the unknown.

Not so with the Jews! They know the will of God! They have the answers.

“and approve the things that are superior” (v. 18): Second, the Jews not only know the will of God, but they, unlike the Gentiles, wholeheartedly agree with God’s law and approve his superior truths. Whereas the Gentiles philosophize about the virtues of their vices, the Jews see these things for what they are and condemn them, approving instead of the superior virtues illuminated by God’s law.

“being instructed from the law” (v. 18): Third, the Jews were not tossed about by the unstable speculations of human philosophy, which today blows one way, and tomorrow blows the other. They have been taught by God.

These things are the dangerous pillars of religious hypocrisy.

Romans 2:19–20 (CSB)

19 and if you are convinced that you are a guide for the blind, a light to those in darkness, 20 an instructor of the ignorant, a teacher of the immature, having the embodiment of knowledge and truth in the law—

“and if you are convinced that you are a guide for the blind, a light to those in darkness” (v. 19): Paul takes the presuppositions of religious hypocrisy and shows how they influence our self-perception. With the false-assurance of religious knowledge, we become convinced that we are like the “healing balm of Gilead” for the world. We believe we can guide the lost and give light to those who are stumbling around in the darkness.

And remember, isn’t this what the prophet Isaiah said was Israel’s calling? After-all, if we just take one passage and lift it from the prophet’s message, we can wrap it up and preach what the people want to hear.

Israel wasn’t paying attention to the rest of Isaiah’s message:

Isaiah 59:9–10 CSB

9 Therefore justice is far from us, and righteousness does not reach us. We hope for light, but there is darkness; for brightness, but we live in the night. 10 We grope along a wall like the blind; we grope like those without eyes. We stumble at noon as though it were twilight; we are like the dead among those who are healthy.

Isaiah 59:15–17 CSB

15 Truth is missing, and whoever turns from evil is plundered. The Lord saw that there was no justice, and he was offended. 16 He saw that there was no man— he was amazed that there was no one interceding; so his own arm brought salvation, and his own righteousness supported him. 17 He put on righteousness as body armor, and a helmet of salvation on his head; he put on garments of vengeance for clothing, and he wrapped himself in zeal as in a cloak.

The error of religious hypocrisy is that it ignores its own failures and attends only to its virtues. And this is the error shared by all such constructs of “self-righteousness”, whether from the Jews by “the law”, or the Romans by “self-mastery”. Our fundamental problem is that we don’t do the good that we know we ought to do.

“an instructor of the ignorant, a teacher of the immature, having the embodiment of knowledge and truth in the law” (v. 20): One of the earmarks of this kind of religious hypocrisy, which presupposes its own self-enlightenment, is that it takes upon itself the superior position as one who instructs the ignorant.

This symptom illustrates the flawed self-perception of all such virtue signaling: there is hypocrisy at the heart of all who take it upon themselves to “illuminate the ignorant” while themselves being fools!

Paul is dismantling the same hypocrisy Jesus pierced through:

Matthew 7:4–5 CSB

4 Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the splinter out of your eye,’ and look, there’s a beam of wood in your own eye? 5 Hypocrite! First take the beam of wood out of your eye, and then you will see clearly to take the splinter out of your brother’s eye.

We cannot escape this fundamental truth: I am not righteous for correcting and judging other people’s errors if I also break the law. All such hypocrisy must be called out lest this error deceive our minds and be accepted as true.

Romans 2:21–23 CSB

21 you then, who teach another, don’t you teach yourself? You who preach, “You must not steal”—do you steal? 22 You who say, “You must not commit adultery”—do you commit adultery? You who detest idols, do you rob temples? 23 You who boast in the law, do you dishonor God by breaking the law?

“You then, who teach another, don’t you teach yourself?” (v. 21): Paul is arguing that the fundamental flaw in this conception of righteousness is our hypocrisy. And this truth is inescapable. We cannot be righteous on the basis of our own virtues because we are deeply flawed.

So those who wish to illuminate the ignorant, should they not first instruct themselves?

“You who preach, ‘You must not steal’—do you steal?” (v. 21): When God created the world, he gave people dominion over his creation, which necessitates personal ownership. God acknowledges individual rights over their property, and these rights are the basis for our accountability to God for how we use the things we own. So God rightly condemns taking what belong to others. Whether big or small, stealing from others is always wrong because it violates the stewardship and dominion God has given them.

So we know what is right. Good. Now do you do what you know is wrong?

Maybe we reason that what we steal is not wrong. But now we are no longer depending on God’s law, but have taken it upon ourselves to become the source of wisdom. And we will be found guilty by our own hypocrisy.

“You who say, 'You must not commit adultery'—do you commit adultery?” (v. 22): When God created the world, he made us in relationship with others. So one’s faithfulness in their relationships may perhaps be their most important measure of righteousness. How do we treat those we love? Are we unfaithful to them?

I think perhaps the most significant mistake Christians make in understanding righteousness is to apply the construct of “legal righteousness” to what Jesus told us about adultery.

Jesus said,

Matthew 5:28 CSB

28 But I tell you, everyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

But this was spoken in contrast to the law (i.e. “you have heard it said”, v. 27), suggesting that Jesus was speaking from a different paradigm. Jesus has in mind here the kind of unwavering commitment to our covenant spouses that arises from the heart. Which begs the question, are we faithful from our heart to our spouses?

Some might instruct others about marriage, but what about their own marriage?

“You who detest idols, do you rob temples? ” (v. 22): These same Jews who thought of themselves as the moral light of the world and so condemned idolatry turned around and themselves profited from idols.

Some ambiguity in this phrase exists, but the same term is used elsewhere in Acts 19:37 and refers to taking profit from the temples, usually by dishonest means. And within the Jewish context, this could easily refer to conducting any business with pagan temples since all such business would be illegitimate to begin with.

In other words, Paul is saying, “So you say that you know what is evil in God’s sight, but then seek to profit by it?”

“You who boast in the law, do you dishonor God by breaking the law? ” (v. 23): We can view this argument as the sum of the previous arguments that presents the essential error in all such virtue-signaling: we do the very things we denounce in others. Whatever standard we place our confidence in, we violate by our own conduct because we have all become inwardly corrupt, and no one, under any standard - whether divine or human - upholds what they believe to be right.

Romans 2:24 CSB

24 For, as it is written: The name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you.

“For” (v. 24): Once again we encounter another gar clause, which explains the logical reasoning of the previous statement. How do the Jews dishonor God by breaking his law? They do so by causing God’s reputation to be slandered through their hypocrisy!

They claim to represent God, and then give people grounds to accuse him when they do the very things he condemned.

“As it is written” (v. 24): We’re going to notice throughout Paul’s letter to the Romans, which is primarily purposed to “bring about the obedience of faith among the gentiles”, that he will rely heavily upon the authority of Scripture. “Yes”, this argument deals with Jews, but it also carries forward the point that he wants the gentiles to understand. Which means we must be careful that we don’t overly refine Paul’s letter to the point of breaking its continuity.

We should also observe that in quoting Scripture to the Gentiles, Paul shows that the Old Testament is an important part of God’s revelation to Christians. And so it is authoritative to Christian life, being understood through Christ within the paradigm of the righteousness that comes by faith.

So you might say that Romans teaches us an important hermeneutic for interpreting the Old Testament in light of Christian thought.

“The name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you” (v. 24): The way the Jews dishonor God by breaking his law is by causing God’s reputation to be slandered through their hypocrisy!

Romans 2:25 CSB

25 Circumcision benefits you if you observe the law, but if you are a lawbreaker, your circumcision has become uncircumcision.

“Circumcision benefits you if you observe the law” (v. 25): You’ll notice that this verse has no conjunction, meaning that Paul is simply elaborating on the thought that he has been developing so far. He is giving us the definition of “legal-righteousness”, which is very transactional: “we are righteous by doing what is right”.

Suppose your child enters an athletic league. They are a really good competitor. But, they have a bit of a temper. You’ve seen this temper manifest at home, and have been working with them, seeing some improvement. But their team makes it to State competition, where the pressure is on, and your child cracks, flying off the rails and getting ejected from the game. So you wait for your child outside the locker room. On the ride home you tell your child what happened and attend to their emotional wounds. Your child is embarrassed. Frustrated. And self-disappointed. Before bedtime put your hands on your child’s shoulders, look them in the eyes, and tell them not to give up. You know they can do better. You believe in them, and they know it. You hug and say good night.

This contrasts the difference between legal righteousness and the righteousness that comes by faith. The righteousness of the law is based on our performance. And under that model, your child rightly got ejected from the game. And there is nothing wrong with their ejection. The league did was not unfair to your child. But the righteousness that comes by faith was seen in the hug at the end of the night. Under this model, the child rides home with their father, who loves them, and teaches them how to stand up straight next time.

So are you going to base your relationship with God on the righteousness of the law? Then you will be ejected from the game because you have already violated its standards. And, oh by the way, those standards are right! You yourself judge others by the same standard and affirm that it is good. But you don’t live up to it!

“but if you are a lawbreaker, your circumcision has become uncircumcision” (v. 25): And so we see the fundamental conundrum of the whole human race; though we are capable of knowing what is right and agreeing with goodness, we still do all the things that we agree are wrong!

Romans 2:26 CSB

26 So if an uncircumcised man keeps the law’s requirements, will not his uncircumcision be counted as circumcision?

“So” (v. 26): Bear with me for a moment as we do some basic exegesis. Some versions translate this word as “therefore”, which can be confusing to the reader because this isn't the same "therefore” from verse one.

You may remember that verse one translates the Greek word “Διὸ”. And you’ll remember how we explained the difference between “For” and “Therefore”; “for” explains the reason for the previous statement, whereas “therefore” gives the meaning of the main proposition. So I said the reader should look back and find the main idea being talked about to frame the context of what comes after the “therefore”.

That’s not what we should do here.

Mounce’s Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words οὗν

serves to mark the resumption of discourse after an interruption by a parenthesis

Vine’s Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words Now

is sometimes used in continuing a narrative, e.g. Acts 1:18; 1 Cor. 9:25; or resuming it after a digression

This is why I think the CSB is preferable here, because it avoids this confusion by translating with “so”, which “serves to continue the narrative after an interruption or digression.”

With this in mind, look down at your Bibles: I think Paul is picking up the narrative portion of his argument in verses 12-16, which argued Gentile accountability before God despite their ignorance because of the moral law written on their hearts that they live by every day, and tying this thought now back into his argument against the Jewish righteousness of the law.

“if an uncircumcised man keeps the law’s requirements, will not his uncircumcision be counted as circumcision?” (v. 26): And now we should recognize a shift back into the narrative style of Paul’s diatribal rhetoric whereby Paul proposes arguments to challenge his hypothetical interlocutor.

Paul’s argument goes like this:

“What do you think, you who call yourself a Jew, and rely on the law, and boast in God, and know his will, and approve the things that are superior, being instructed from the law? You who possess the outward covenant sign of God’s law, yet dishonor God by violating the substance of his righteousness therein. Will not the person who does God’s will be counted as righteous, even though they do not have the sign of his covenant?”

By what confidence can someone stand in the presence of God on the basis of legal-righteousness when they have the sign of his covenant but violate its terms?

The counterpoint to Jewish confidence in the law is that in the same way as gentile righteousness becomes a law in itself, so living by the terms of God’s covenant is the true sign of the covenant, which invalidates any boasting in circumcision when one violates the substance of circumcision itself.

Romans 2:27 CSB

27 A man who is physically uncircumcised, but who keeps the law, will judge you who are a lawbreaker in spite of having the letter of the law and circumcision.

Paul refines the scope of his argument by repeating his thesis: those who live by the substance of God’s covenant will judge its violators even though they do not themselves possess the sign of God’s covenant.

Imagine Joe goes to find laborers to cut grass at the unemployment office. He picks up ten workers and signs their form to hand into the unemployment office. They go to their workplace and he instructs them about their work. He comes back in two hours at ten and finds eight of them asleep under a tree with McDonald’s wrappers scattered all over the place. So he wakes them up and fires them. Some might protest that he signed their form. But it doesn’t matter. They weren’t doing the work they were contracted to do. And as they’re walking away, Joe notices a band of thirteen men with the right tools in hand for this job walking down the street. He runs over and asks them where they are headed. They say the job their boss contracted them to do fell through. So they’re going home. Joe calls them to work and sends them to help the other two faithful laborers he got from the unemployment office.

Do you think the two laborers with the right unemployment forms will object to the new laborers that only have the right tools and willingness to do the work that Joe employed them to do? Which one will take Joe aside and chastise him for employing willing workers?

So Israel cannot object to the inclusion of the Gentiles on the basis that they are not circumcised.

Romans 2:28 CSB

28 For a person is not a Jew who is one outwardly, and true circumcision is not something visible in the flesh.

“For” (v. 28): We once again encounter another gar clause, which explains the logical reasoning of the previous statement. On what basis are objections to God’s inclusion of uncircumcised Gentiles invalid? On the duel basis that the Jewish heritage is not based on physical decent and circumcision does not consist of mere outward marks.

“A person is not a Jew who is one outwardly, and true circumcision is not something visible in the flesh” (v. 28): We must pay careful attention to Paul’s argument here because these are the seedlings that he is germinating, which will later grow to bear fruit and answer the opening question we posed previously:

What makes us God’s children?

Are we included among God’s people simply because we possess and agree with the superior truths of his law, even though we violate his standards? Or are we his children because we possess the marks of his covenant, though we repudiate his name by our own hypocrisy?

Paul convincingly proves this standard is woefully inadequate to establish our righteousness before God.

Romans 2:29 CSB

29 On the contrary, a person is a Jew who is one inwardly, and circumcision is of the heart—by the Spirit, not the letter. That person’s praise is not from people but from God.

“On the contrary” (v. 29): At this point Paul states the premise that will carry the rest of his argument forward in 3:21-31, where he will consolidate his first two arguments to restate his main thesis from 1:17 in new terms. He is going to state here the premise that will later answer our burning question, “so what makes us the children of God?”

“A person is a Jew who is one inwardly” (v. 29): To draw on our prior analogy, this premise is the seedling that will germinate over the course of the next eight arguments to 11:17-24, where Paul will use the analogy of the branches grafted into the tree to explain who are the God’s children.

We also need to recognize that we will observe this seedling germinate throughout chapters 4, 5, 6, and 8, as Paul explains the righteousness of faith in Abraham and David, the contrast between death through Adam’s unfaithfulness and life through Christ’s faithfulness, and what that new resurrection life looks like as we walk in the power of the Holy Spirit.

In other words, the righteousness that comes by faith is the righteousness that comes from the inward person.

“and circumcision is of the heart - by the Spirit, not the letter” (v. 29): Most importantly, however, the righteousness that comes from the inward person is that which comes from the Spirit, not the letter of the law.

We see this intimated by the Old Testament Prophets:

Deuteronomy 10:16 CSB

16 Therefore, circumcise your hearts and don’t be stiff-necked any longer.

Jeremiah 4:4 CSB

4 Circumcise yourselves to the Lord; remove the foreskin of your hearts, men of Judah and residents of Jerusalem. Otherwise, my wrath will break out like fire and burn with no one to extinguish it because of your evil deeds.

Jeremiah 9:25–26 CSB

25 “ ‘Look, the days are coming—this is the Lord’s declaration—when I will punish all the circumcised yet uncircumcised: 26 Egypt, Judah, Edom, the Ammonites, Moab, and all the inhabitants of the desert who clip the hair on their temples. All these nations are uncircumcised, and the whole house of Israel is uncircumcised in heart.’ ”

Paul brings these truths roaring into the Christian consciousness through Christ. What could not be done previously because of the weakness of their flesh, God has accomplished upon the cross through his Son by sending us the Holy Spirit.

Therefore, this righteousness comes from God and not people. This is the superior righteousness that Jesus called for in his great sermon.

“That person’s praise is not from people but from God” (v. 29): This statement is the perfect transition to carry this argument on because it illustrates the superiority of the righteousness that comes by faith by showing that such righteousness comes from God and not people. Any righteousness that comes from people must by definition be inferior to that which comes from God.

Conclusions

To bring this message home requires setting all of this together in plain terms.

What I have been attempting to do is show how Paul is calling the Christians in Rome to deliberate amongst themselves about what the right course of action is for them to take in response to what Jesus has done from the empty tomb. Although they are a small band of believers in the mightiest city on Earth, culturally isolated, ridiculed, and held in contempt, they have believed the good news of Jesus’ resurrection. And if Jesus has been raised from the grave, then everything has changed for the whole world because God has unveiled his righteousness for the whole world to see.

God is preparing to judge the world for their unrighteousness. He will not allow human rebellion to go unanswered.

So what should those who want to be approved of God do?

They dare not try to enter his presence on the basis of their own righteousness because they will surely be undone when he uncovers their hypocrisy.

The resurrection of Christ gives us the answer. Let every person come to God in faith and be inwardly changed by the resurrection power of the Holy Spirit. Let us believe in God and trust him. Then he will establish our feet on the solid rock that will not crumble when the storms come. Let us live by this faith.

And those who would live by this kind of faith will not shrink back from the disapproving world around them because they do not stand in their own righteousness.

We have the same question before us: we are small, but in whose righteousness do we trust? We have been called to a great Kingdom service! We have a risen King who has conquered death itself! Whom shall we fear? Shall we go home and do nothing about what we have been given in Christ? Would such faithlessness not be to us as if we were not inwardly circumcised by the Holy Spirit?

So I invite you to come celebrate the victory won by Christ.