We have a great venue in Southlake, TX at Grace Community Church, but space is limited, so reserve your spot today!

Click on this picture to visit the site, access conference info, and register today.

In the previous passage, Paul has said some pretty tough things about the Jews. True “Jewishness” is a matter of the heart and the Spirit, not simply a matter of race and physical circumcision. Paul, himself a Jew, is in some way redefining what it means to be Jewish. Abraham’s conversion from paganism was about heart transformation expressed through faith. Circumcision and the beginning of a new physical and racial family (later called Israel) was an outward expression of that inward reality.

From the beginning, the genesis of Israel as God’s people was all about bringing God’s blessing to all the peoples of the earth. God’s method of making that heart transformation available to those from every nation was to bring Messiah to earth through the Jewish people. Some of those Jewish people have rejected this Messiah, and in doing so, have missed out on the very purpose for their Jewishness. Circumcision loses its meaning if it is not an outward sign of the inward transformation for which Jesus is the ultimate fulfillment. Uncircumcised Gentiles, who have received the Jewish Messiah by faith, are a clearer fulfillment of God’s call to the Jewish people than a Jew who does not receive Jesus. In this very spiritual and covenant sense, they are themselves Jewish.

Paul’s question at in 3:1 makes sense within this context. He has made such a strong argument regarding the Jewish people that the obvious question is whether or not there is any advantage to being racially Jewish, a physical descendent of Abraham? The message of Grace and how the gospel includes Gentiles in the New Covenant always leaves room for some to leap to the wrong conclusion and adopt replacement theology. Just because God’s people are now made up of both Jews and Gentiles who together believe in Jesus, does it then follow that God is now finished with ethnic and/or national Israel? Does the Church replace Israel in God’s plan? Paul’s answer is a resounding NO!

Is there still any advantage to being a Jew Paul’s answer: “Much in every way.”

His argument hinges upon the faithfulness of God. Just because “some”, and I emphasize the word “some” Jews, don’t believe, their faithlessness does not nullify God’s faithfulness. More will be said about this in Rom 9-11, but at this point in Paul’s letter, it is important to note that though Paul is being very strong in declaring that faith in Jesus as Messiah is the fulfillment of all that it means to be Jewish, and that the inclusion of the Gentiles by this same faith within God’s covenant family is the intended aim of that fulfillment, we cannot simply set aside or in any way minimize the significance of the Jews as a race of people.

This passage also makes sure that we do not misunderstand God’s judgment of Israel as his final rejection of Israel. Though judgment was near (Jerusalem was destroyed a few years later in 70AD), Paul makes it clear that we are to hold fast in believing that 1) this judgment is just and 2) this judgment is not a final rejection of the Jewish people. God will ultimately display his faithfulness to Israel.

As a final, almost parenthetical, portion of this letter, Paul addresses the misconception that the strong message of grace encourages sin. We will see Paul come at this question from various angles in this letter. Here the argument Paul exposes goes something like this: 1) Unbelieving Israel will experience judgment but will ultimately serve as a demonstration of God’s grace for God’s glory; 2) If Israel’s unbelief is to result in God’s glory, then how can God justly judge Israel, since their disobedience and unbelief end up being a tool in his hand for his own purposes? In this passage Paul doesn’t give a clear answer, but he is setting the stage for later in the letter where he will give his own argument against this line of thinking. In this section, he simply rejects that argument with a clever play on words. Those who say that it is unjust for God to judge are themselves justly condemned for this argument.

The tension in this passage is clear and strong. The gospel is the declaration regarding how God has been faithful to his covenant through Messiah Jesus. The great expression of the Gospel is that both Jews and Gentiles who believe are now included together as the covenant people of God. But those Jews who have rejected Jesus and are currently under judgment are themselves still the seed of Abraham and the beneficiaries of God’s covenant promises.  How will God demonstrate his faithfulness to all of Abraham’s seed? Paul’s answers are still to come, but in no way will Paul allow us to forget about the importance of ethnic/national Israel, the promises God has made to them, and the faithfulness of our God to fulfill all he has promised them.

God’s character as a covenant keeping God is on the line. God’s faithfulness is sure and we can depend upon it. If (and I speak now as a Gentile) we can’t trust in God’s covenant faithfulness toward the Jewish people then we can’t trust God’s faithfulness at all. It’s a big deal.

The question is: who, exactly, is a Jew? And–how can you tell? There are several things that make this tricky, both culturally and theologically.

Culturally

Discussing race is a dangerous thing and you can’t address the question “Who is a Jew?” without race coming into it. Even if your goal is to make Jewishness about something other than race, you run the risk of offense. Those unwilling to consider the label “Jew” as anything other than a racial designation will be offended. Those who, very appropriately, are sensitive to anything that might be remotely construed toward antisemitism might also be very sensitive to such discussions. Those whose thinking tends toward either/or, yes/no, right/wrong, truth/error categories and who generally fail to see the nuanced and multi-layered way Paul uses language might also be offended. For Paul is content to here tell those who are racially Jewish that they are not Jews because of the condition of their heart. He is also perfectly comfortable referring to this same group as Jews elsewhere.  It’s politically correct and socially safer to not broach such subjects. But Paul does. Paul, the self-proclaimed “Hebrew of Hebrews” (see Phil 3:5), tackles this issue head on.

Theologically

This passage can also raise some theological angst. Telling  racial Jews that they’re not Jews and then telling those same racial Jews that Gentiles are now considered Jews because of what has happened in their hearts will invariably generate protests of “Replacement Theology”. This is the theology that supposes that God is done with the Jews, who have now been “replaced” by the Church. But this conclusion is only valid if we don’t consider the passage in context. Romans 9-11, which I will get to eventually, tackles this head on. No–Replacement Theology cannot be supported by the text, especially within the broader context. At the same time, neither can the cutting edge of what Paul says in Rom 2 be allowed to dull. It must be taken seriously and some sense must be made of it.

The difficulty is resolved when we consider God’s immutability (unchanging nature). There is no “Old Testament God” in contrast with the “New Testament God”. Gnosticism is not being supported here.  Paul is not introducing a “new” God. He’s not suggesting that the old god used to be concerned with outward things like circumcision but the new one is concerned with matters of the heart. No–God has always been concerned about the heart. Being chosen has always been a heart issue. Outward things like circumcision were always intended to be an outward expression of the heart that belongs to God. Being a Jew has always been a heart issue. Even Gentiles whose heart had turned toward God were allowed entrance into God’s covenant with Israel and circumcision was the outward expression of that heart change. Paul will, in a later chapter, speak about Abraham specifically and his major point will be that Abraham was counted righteous on the basis of his faith (a heart issue) before he was ever circumcised.

The New Covenant hasn’t introduced a new god into the story. The New Covenant has made it possible for human hearts to be transformed by the Spirit, for the Law to be written upon hearts. Because God has made this provision, anyone who believes can experience this heart transformation. What was available to Abraham’s children is now available to all who believe, regardless of race. Through Abraham and his seed, blessing has come to all the nations of the earth. That Gentiles are now included does not represent a replacement of the Jewish people, but rather the consummation of the very reason they were called by God in the first place.

As a Gentile, receiving Messiah doesn’t make me a Jew in the racial/ethnic sense. Receiving Messiah does, however, allow me to benefit from the blessing God promised to bring into all the world through the Jewish people. Because God chose them and through them brought Messiah, I am now chosen. Because the Jews, God’s chosen people, are themselves humans in need of Messiah, the same Spirit is available to them and represents the fulfillment of all it means for them to be Jewish.

“But if you call yourself a Jew and rely on the law and boast in God and know his will and approve what is excellent, because you are instructed from the law; and if you are sure that you yourself are a guide to the blind, a light to those who are in darkness, an instructor of the foolish, a teacher of children, having in the law the embodiment of knowledge and truth— you then who teach others, do you not teach yourself? While you preach against stealing, do you steal? You who say that one must not commit adultery, do you commit adultery? You who abhor idols, do you rob temples? You who boast in the law dishonor God by breaking the law. For, as it is written, “The name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you.

Paul is here addressing Jews who find their identity in their place in Israel and within Israel’s calling to be “a guide to the blind, a light to those who are in darkness, an instructor of the foolish, a teacher of children.” The blind, those in darkness, the foolish, and the children spoken of should be understood as being pagans, Gentiles. What is it that sets Israel into this special place among all the nations? It’s because they are “instructed from the law” and because in the law they have the “embodiment of knowledge and truth.”

But, according to Paul, how have the Jewish people fulfilled their calling? What’s their report card looking like? Their reputation among the pagans? Stealing? Adultery? Robbing Temples? Not all or even most Jews were participating in such things, but this was, nevertheless, their reputation among the pagans because of the actions of a few. The result? “The name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you.” Quite a scathing indictment. N.T. Wright clarifies this well.

“The point of Paul’s accusations in verses 21, 22 and 23, then, is not that he thinks all Jews commit adultery, or steal, or rob temples (Jews were often accused of temple-robbery because, since they didn’t believe in idols, they regarded pagan temples as trivial, unprotected by serious religious sanctions). The point is that if even some Jews are doing these things—and all Jews would know that there were plenty who were guilty as charged—this completely undercut Israel’s boast that, as a nation, it was still the light of the world, able to reveal God’s law and truth to the rest of humankind.” (Wright, N.T. (2004). Paul for Everyone: Romans Part 1: Chapters 1-8. London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge.)

Those who have the law don’t themselves keep the law. Those called to be the light of the world are themselves in darkness. Those through whom God promised to bring blessing to the whole world are themselves in need of salvation. Remember that the church in Rome was made up of both Jews and Gentiles. The Jewish believers in Jesus (along with all other Jews) had been expelled from Rome for a number of years and had only recently been allowed to return. During this time of exile, the Roman church had been exclusively Gentile. It is not hard to imagine the tensions that might have developed upon their return from exile and the need to reintegrate as Jewish and Gentile believers in communion. To the degree that the Jewish believers were still finding their identity in their Jewish heritage and seeing themselves as superior to non-Jews, this tension would only have been magnified.

So Paul, himself a Jewish believer, is making a strong argument toward Jewish believers. Don’t think for a moment his attitude is antisemitic. Nothing could be further from the truth. This is a critique from within that simply levels the playing field. Jews and Gentiles alike are in need of salvation.

All of us, Jew and Gentile alike are at the defendants’ table in the court room. But are we all to be judged by the same standard? After all, don’t the Jews have an advantage? They have the Law of Moses, after all. Hasn’t God, in a sense, given them the answers before the test? Jew and Gentile may be at the same defendants’ table in the courtroom, but to claim that God is an impartial judge when he’s given an advantage to one group prior to the judgment seems a stretch. Yet this is precisely what Paul does claim.

Yes, it’s true; the Jews have the Law of Moses. So by what standard will they be judged? On the basis of that same Law. But the Gentiles are not without any standard of judgment. Their own hearts have a basic awareness of right and wrong. When they stand in the judgment seat, their own hearts and consciences will be sufficient to bring condemnation. It seems both Jew and Gentile have enough rope to hang themselves.

There remains this theoretical possibility Paul keeps hinting at that people can (again, theoretically) be justified by fulfilling the requirements of the Law. We will find, as Paul’s argument progresses, that he doesn’t believe anyone (save Christ alone) can actually meet that standard. But here Paul makes it plain that this theoretical possibility is equally true for both Jew and Gentile. Any Jew who fulfills the Law in all he does will be justified on the basis of those works in the final judgment. Any Gentile who can stand before this same Judge without his own heart and conscience accusing him will also be justified. Theoretically possible. Highly unlikely.

We should again remind ourselves of what Paul made clear in the previous section. The Judge is merciful. If we will come with soft and repentant hearts, we may just find that he’s made provision for both the satisfaction of his justice and the expression of his love and mercy.

In the ESV Bible, the English word “church” is always used for the Greek noun ekklesia. It means “called out ones” and was used in Greek culture to refer to a town assembly. In classical Greek, it is functionally connected to another word, kerux, the messenger/herald (preacher) who would call the assembly together  and declare the government’s message.

“In Class. Gr., a public servant of supreme power both in peace and in war, one who summoned the ekklesía, the town gathering. This word, ekklesía, later was used for the Church. A kerux, messenger, was the public crier and reader of state messages such as the conveyor of a declaration of war.” (Zodhiates)

In the Greek translation of the Hebrew scriptures, the Septuagint, ekklesia referred to God’s people Israel in distinction from all other nations. In the New Testament, the term is used in two primary and important ways, the Church Universal, without reference to time or place, and the church in its local expression in a particular place and time.

“The term ekklesía denotes the NT community of the redeemed in its twofold aspect. First, all who were called by and to Christ in the fellowship of His salvation, the church worldwide of all times, and only secondarily to an individual church.” (Zodhiates)

Here is how Jesus used the term ekklesia.

“And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” (Matthew 16:18, ESV)

“If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church. And if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.” (Matthew 18:17, ESV)

It is important to note that in Jesus’ use of ekklesia, the idea of Universal Church is clearly seen in Matt 16 and the idea of a local church is indicated in Matt 18 with Matt 16 referring to the totality of the Church that Jesus himself will build and Matt 18 assuming that there is some local expression of this Church that is available and authoritative to arbitrate conflict.

“And he put all things under his feet and gave him as head over all things to the church, which is his body, the fullness of him who fills all in all.” (Ephesians 1:22–23, ESV)

The totality of Jesus’ authority, “all things under his feet”, finds practical expression through his relationship of headship “to the church”. The phrase “which is his body” refers directly and overtly to “the church”. Likewise, “…the fullness of him who fills all in all” also refers back to the word “church”. The church is his body and the church is his fullness. The church is his strategy for filling all things.

Of course no single congregation of believers can function as his body, his fullness. These uses of “church” refer to the entire communion of believers in all times and places. But the idea of a Universal Church finds practical expression in the regular gatherings of believers in a locality. In the New Testament we find that these gatherings have a variety of expressions.

The church in a house.

“Greet also the church in their house. Greet my beloved Epaenetus, who was the first convert to Christ in Asia.” (Romans 16:5, ESV)

“The churches of Asia send you greetings. Aquila and Prisca, together with the church in their house, send you hearty greetings in the Lord.” (1 Corinthians 16:19, ESV)

“Give my greetings to the brothers at Laodicea, and to Nympha and the church in her house.” (Colossians 4:15, ESV)

“and Apphia our sister and Archippus our fellow soldier, and the church in your house:” (Philemon 2, ESV)

The church in a city.

“And Saul approved of his execution. And there arose on that day a great persecution against the church in Jerusalem, and they were all scattered throughout the regions of Judea and Samaria, except the apostles.” (Acts 8:1, ESV)

“The report of this came to the ears of the church in Jerusalem, and they sent Barnabas to Antioch.” (Acts 11:22, ESV)

“and when he had found him, he brought him to Antioch. For a whole year they met with the church and taught a great many people. And in Antioch the disciples were first called Christians.” (Acts 11:26, ESV)

“Now there were in the church at Antioch prophets and teachers, Barnabas, Simeon who was called Niger, Lucius of Cyrene, Manaen a lifelong friend of Herod the tetrarch, and Saul.” (Acts 13:1, ESV)

“and from there they sailed to Antioch, where they had been commended to the grace of God for the work that they had fulfilled. And when they arrived and gathered the church together, they declared all that God had done with them, and how he had opened a door of faith to the Gentiles.” (Acts 14:26–27, ESV)

“When they came to Jerusalem, they were welcomed by the church and the apostles and the elders, and they declared all that God had done with them.” (Acts 15:4, ESV)

“When he had landed at Caesarea, he went up and greeted the church, and then went down to Antioch.” (Acts 18:22, ESV)

“Now from Miletus he sent to Ephesus and called the elders of the church to come to him.” (Acts 20:17, ESV)

“I commend to you our sister Phoebe, a servant of the church at Cenchreae,” (Romans 16:1, ESV)

“To the church of God that is in Corinth, to those sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints together with all those who in every place call upon the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, both their Lord and ours:” (1 Corinthians 1:2, ESV)

“Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy, To the church of the Thessalonians in God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ: Grace to you and peace.” (1 Thessalonians 1:1, ESV)

We should also note that in Revelation 2 & 3, Jesus has John take dictation for 7 letters to 7 local churches in 7 specific cities.

The church, or the churches in a region.

“So the church throughout all Judea and Galilee and Samaria had peace and was being built up. And walking in the fear of the Lord and in the comfort of the Holy Spirit, it multiplied.” (Acts 9:31, ESV)

“But Jews came from Antioch and Iconium, and having persuaded the crowds, they stoned Paul and dragged him out of the city, supposing that he was dead. But when the disciples gathered about him, he rose up and entered the city, and on the next day he went on with Barnabas to Derbe. When they had preached the gospel to that city and had made many disciples, they returned to Lystra and to Iconium and to Antioch, strengthening the souls of the disciples, encouraging them to continue in the faith, and saying that through many tribulations we must enter the kingdom of God. And when they had appointed elders for them in every church, with prayer and fasting they committed them to the Lord in whom they had believed.” (Acts 14:19–23, ESV)

“And he went through Syria and Cilicia, strengthening the churches.” (Acts 15:41, ESV)

“and all the brothers who are with me, To the churches of Galatia:” (Galatians 1:2, ESV)

What Stands Out.

As we study the use of the word church and the activities of those who are included in these local expressions of church, several things stand out. The church was identifiable, for it could be gathered. The church was structured and governed, for there were apostles, and elders. The church was a specific communion, for individuals were “in good standing” or, when needed, were removed from fellowship. The church was a place of worship, of the Sacraments (Eucharist and Water Baptism), of teaching, of the gifts of the Holy Spirit, of fellowship, of mutual service, of discipline (when needed) and of mission.

Are you part of such a congregation? If not, you need to be. It’s not about size. I attend a very large church of 20,000 people attending each weekend. In the past, I’ve been part of much smaller churches. But each congregation I’ve connected to would match the criteria of a New Testament church. Such connection and fellowship is an essential part of what it means to be a follower of Jesus.

“not neglecting to meet together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day drawing near.” (Hebrews 10:25, ESV)

“Now concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our being gathered together to him, we ask you, brothers,” (2 Thessalonians 2:1, ESV)

This gathering refers to two different but linked meetings. The first is the ongoing regular meeting of believers. The second refers to the final gathering of believers together when Christ returns. That the two gatherings are linked is clear, for the first, which deals with the ongoing regular gathering of believers, specifically mentions “the Day”, an overt reference to Christ’s return.

If you’re looking forward to the one, then don’t neglect the other. If you’re looking forward to the gathering of believers with Christ upon his return, then don’t neglect the regular gathering of local believers where Christ is in their midst.

We live in a day when it is increasingly stylish to “follow Jesus” without any connection to a local assembly of believers. Some may even try to talk you out of the need for such a connection. Don’t fall for it.

Yet we all have behavioral expectations. Every church or Christian institution I know of has categorized certain choices as inappropriate or off limits. In the Bible college I attended, we had all kinds of rules. Men weren’t allowed facial hair unless they were Jewish. We couldn’t grow hair past the top of our collars. We couldn’t walk on the grass. We couldn’t stay out past 11:00pm. Lights out at 11:30pm. No walking on the grass (clearly this one bugged me). No public (or private) displays of affection with girls. Girl had to wear skirts past their knees.

Was this legalism? Perhaps.

But if so, what might it mean to be free of legalism? Does trouncing on some freshly cut Bermuda Grass constitute freedom from legalism? For many it does. Because we think of legalism in terms of a particular set of rules, we tend to define freedom from legalism in terms of non-conformity to those rules. If your church doesn’t include instrumental music for corporate worship, then “freedom” means hiring a rock band. If your church doesn’t allow girls to show any skin below the chin, then freedom must mean the abandonment of such standards of modesty. The more skin the more freedom? Seems a suspicious trajectory if you take it far enough. But IF we define legalism in terms of rule keeping, this is the only definition of freedom available to us: not-rule keeping. But surely God has made us to be defined by more than what rules we do or do not follow.

What if legalism is something else altogether?

Paul tells as story in Galatians 4 about Abraham, Sarah, and Hagar. Through Hagar, Abraham’s son Ishmael was born. Through Sarah, Abraham’s son Isaac was born. They each represent one of two ways we can live before God. The two ways can be discussed with various terms: legalism/freedom, spirit/flesh, etc. The overall context of Galatians is Paul’s answer to the issue of legalism. Male believers in Galatia are being pressured to conform to Jewish law, specifically circumcision. This story lies at the heart of Paul’s response.

I find it interesting that the story isn’t about rules at all. It’s about source. The issue between Hagar and Sarah is that one relied upon what Abraham could do apart from God’s promise, provision, and power. The other relied upon God (though Abraham and Sarah obviously still had a role to play!).

Legalism is ultimately an expression of self-reliance. It’s not about rules. It’s about source. The problem with the Law isn’t that the Law isn’t right. It is. It just isn’t powerful. It can’t help you fulfill what it requires. It leaves you in the position of having to rely on self. Self-reliance is the root of legalism.

Once I recognize this, the issue of rules becomes a non-issue. If I’m truly legalistic (self-reliant), I can do so either as a rule keeper or a rule breaker. Either path, I’m relying on myself. If I conform to Bible Belt cultural mores concerning alcohol consumption or if I choose to adopt a more European approach–either way, if I’m relying on self I’m ultimately still bound in legalism.

On the other hand, if I’m looking to God(rather than my ability to conform to rules or my freedom to not conform) as my source, then there are very few rules that will bother me. His power enables me to follow any rule. This is the only model I’m aware of that makes sense of Paul’s actions. He wrote to the Galatians that if they submitted to circumcision then Christ would be of no benefit. This same Paul required Timothy to be circumcised in order to appease the Jews. Which is it Paul? Which rule should we follow? It’s not about that.

The Galatians were being asked to rely on their own effort to fulfill the Law. This isn’t congruent with Christ. Timothy wasn’t being asked to rely on his effort. His trust was in God’s power, promise, and provision. With God as his source, Timothy is free to submit to a great number of rather uncomfortable rules.

It’s all about source.

There’s no need to react to laws that prohibit by casting off all constraint. We are ultimately free to submit, to yield, to prefer others, to serve them. We can submit to rules, even unnecessary rules, without offense. This is true freedom from legalism.

In Paul’s writing we often find ourselves in a courtroom. Some of his language lends itself to that imagery and this is a great example. In this courtroom, where we’re sitting really matters. Things can go terribly wrong for us if we take the wrong seat. No where is this more true than when we think we belong behind the Judge’s bench. When we judge someone else, we always end up condemning ourselves. Why? Because our assigned seat is at the defendants table. When we presume to sit as judge, we nevertheless remain the defendant in the courtroom. Our judgement and condemnation of another applies to us because we are guilty. We did it.

We might not be guilty of exactly what the other person stands accused, but we are guilty all the same. Maybe we haven’t done what they’ve done, but we’ve done something on Paul’s list from Romans 1. It may not be a comprehensive and exhaustive lists of possible infractions, but there’s bound to be at least one thing on this list that should land each of us before the Judge.

“They were filled with all manner of unrighteousness, evil, covetousness, malice. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, maliciousness. They are gossips, slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless. Though they know God’s righteous decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.” (Romans 1:29–32, ESV)

When I render my judgement from the Judge’s bench toward the defendants table, I cannot avoid pronouncing that Judgement against myself, for I am the defendant. The Judge’s seat belongs to another. It is not mine. I must never sit there.

As scary as it might seem, the defendants table is the only place where I can hope for mercy. For if I leave the Judge’s seat for the One to whom it rightly belongs, I can receive mercy, for God is a merciful Judge. At first glance, it may appear that Paul himself has lost sight of what a merciful Judge God really is. There’s all this talk about God’s righteous judgement, stored up wrath, fury, tribulation, and distress whereby he renders to each person precisely what they deserve based on their wicked choices. But don’t miss Paul’s point.

Who are the defendants who must face God’s wrath?

1. Those who judge others.
2. Those with a hard and impenitent heart who will not repent in response to God’s kindness.
3. Those who presume upon the riches of his kindness, forbearance, and patience.

This group of people will have to face God’s judgement. This judgement will be based upon works. If there are any defendants who are part of the group above who have done what’s right, then they will be declared guiltless. But if they are guilty, then the decree will be just and the sentence severe. As Paul’s letter to the Roman’s unfolds, I expect we will discover that this hypothetical group of people who judge others, refuse to repent, and continue with hardened hearts who will be found righteous when their own works are judged is a non-existent group of people. Everyone, when their own works are measured, will be found guilty.

But the underlying assumption of this passage is that God is merciful. Facing his judgment on the basis of the evaluation of our merit is unnecessary. It’s only necessary if we harden our hearts, refusing to repent. If, rather than presuming upon his kindness, we were to surrender to his kindness with soft and repentant hearts, we could escape his wrath. He has made this possible through the sacrifice of Jesus, which will be the major theme of this letter.

Remember that the last section concluded with Paul’s declaration that he is not ashamed of the good news about Jesus’ Lordship over all the earth. He is bold to declare it, even if it’s risky to do so, because contained in this message is the long awaited revelation from God regarding how he will keep his covenant and once again make his moral excellence available to mankind, bringing us into right relationship with himself.

“For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things. Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen. For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error. And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done. They were filled with all manner of unrighteousness, evil, covetousness, malice. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, maliciousness. They are gossips, slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless. Though they know God’s righteous decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.” (Romans 1:18–32, ESV)

“For the wrath of God is revealed…” In the gospel, the righteousness of God is revealed. What’s the default state of affairs apart from that good news. God’s wrath is revealed against unrighteousness. If we don’t share in his righteousness, we will share in his wrath. There is no avoiding this dilemma.

“So they are without excuse.” No one will ever be able to claim they didn’t know. What God has revealed about himself to every single person just through creation is sufficient to leave us before his judgment without defense.

After making this clear, Paul goes on to describe the true nature of the unrighteousness against which God’s wrath has been revealed. What is the true nature of our problem? What is the question for which the gospel is God’s answer?

1. Our thinking is messed up. “The became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools…because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie…God gave them up to a debased mind…they were filled with all manner of unrighteousness.” Paul goes on to describe the fruit of this messed up thinking, which includes everything from sexual perversion to covetousness to being disobedient to your parents. This list, this “all manner of unrighteousness”, is the symptom, not the disease. The disease has to do with what has taken place in our minds and hearts.

2. The nature of our messed up thinking is idolatry. These phrases make this clear: “…exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things...they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator…they did not see fit to acknowledge God…” What is an idol? An idol is anything or anyone we put in a place in our lives that rightfully belongs to God. An idol is a false source. The long list of sinful behaviors Paul lists is simply an observation of the range of things we can look to besides God as our source. Pleasure. Affirmation from others. Possessions. Self. Control. The list could go on I’m sure, but Paul’s is quite comprehensive.

3. God will let us have what we want. “Therefore God gave them up…” If we want to look elsewhere for that which only God can provide, he will let us. But there will be consequences.

4. This is ultimately about honor. “…For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him…” We have “suppressed the truth”, without excuse we have judged God to be less than he is and looked elsewhere for significance, safety, provision, power. We have looked to self and then oppressed others with our selfishness. By aiming our honor away from God at other things, we have honored the creature rather than the Creator, for these are the only two possible categories. All of humanity is in this condition and we have not only embraced it, but we’ve judged it to be good.

The gospel is God’s answer to this dilemma. How will God, given this awful situation, fulfill his covenant promises regarding redemption and salvation? How will he bring the unrighteous back into a place of right standing with himself? Given that this is the problem, how might we better understand God’s solution? By very definition of the problem, we see that the gospel must be God’s way to reconnect us to himself as our source, to bring us back into a place of honoring him, looking to him, finding in him our all in all. The gospel must provide his way for us to disconnect from self as our source and cut off all the various expressions of selfishness that bring nothing but death into our world.

This is the problem.

Jesus’ death, resurrection, and ascension are God’s solution. The declaration of Jesus’ Lordship over heaven and earth contains within it God’s provision to bring us home. How? By faith–a faith that trusts Jesus, and follows him through the veil of his flesh, through the cross, putting to death the unrighteousness of a self-sourced life, and emerging on the other side with a brand new life, his life, reconnected to God as our source, with knee and heart and mind bowed to the gospel declaration that Jesus is Lord.