Lessons #51 and 52
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+ 1. It is best to use this note after you have listened to the lessons because there are +
+ comments given in the actual delivery not in the note. +
+ 2. The Bible abbreviations are as follows: CEV =Contemporary English version, +
+ CEB = Common English Bible, ESV= English Standard Version, +
+ GW = God’s Word, ISV = International Standard Version, +
+ NAB=New American Bible, NASB= New American Standard Bible, +
+ NEB= New English Bible, NET = New English Translation, +
+ NLT = New Living Translations NJB = New Jerusalem Bible, +
+ NJV = New Jewish Bible, TEV = Today’s English Version. +
+AMP = Amplified Bible, UBS = United Bible Society +
+ HCSB = Holman Christian Standard Bible +
+ 3. Notes have not been edited for grammatical errors. +
+ 4. Text is based on 1984 edition of the NIV +
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Introductory remark about judgment (Rom 2:1-2)
1 You, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgment on someone else, for at whatever point you judge the other, you are condemning yourself, because you who pass judgment do the same things. 2 Now we know that God’s judgment against those who do such things is based on truth.
In the introduction of this epistle to the Romans, we indicated that the first thing Apostle Paul discoursed after introducing the theme of “God’s righteousness revealed through the gospel” is God’s response to unrighteousness that he discoursed in Romans 1:18-3:20. There are four major issues the apostle developed under God’s response to unrighteousness. We have considered the first major issue, which is, God’s wrath and punishment against idolatry in Romans 1:18-32. The second major issue the apostle communicated to his readers is that God’s judgment is independent of the Law in Romans 2:1-16. The apostle began his discourse on this second major issue with introductory remarks in verses 1 and 2. Next, in verses 3 to 6, he discoursed on judgment for hypocrisy, stubbornness, and lack of repentance. This is followed by discourse on God’s reward based on a person’s work not mere possession of the Law in verses 7 to 13. He ended the second major issue with the discourse that indicates the law and conscience affect God’s judgment in verses 14 to 16. It is the introductory remarks of the apostle that is the concern of our present study.
The introductory remarks of the apostle concern the concept of judgment as applied to humans and God. His first introductory remark in a sense indicates that by virtue of hypocrisy on the part of humans, they have no excuse for judging others unfairly. His second introductory remark reminds believers of how just God’s judgment is. Because of the two introductory remarks of the apostle, we derive a message we believe the Holy Spirit intended to communicate to you, the believer in Christ. This message is You should be careful in judging others since you have the tendency for hypocrisy, and you are not God whose judgment of people is always correct.
The apostle takes the concept of knowing God’s righteous commands through general revelation by those in idolatry and applies it to those who have special revelation, that is, primarily the Jews although we cannot rule out Gentiles who are now believers that are privileged to have the Scripture available in the time the apostle wrote this epistle. Of course, there is no specific indication in verse 1 that leads to this interpretation. However, there are at least two reasons for our interpretation. First, the apostle began verse 1 with a Greek conjunction (dio) that is used to draw what may be considered a self-evident inference or taken as a relatively emphatic marker of a result and so may be translated “therefore, for this reason.” The use of this conjunction has been variously interpreted by commentators. In fact, some argue that the word was wrongly included in this verse by copyist who misread the Greek text that contained a Greek adverb (dis) that means “again” and so wrote the Greek word translated “therefore” in our verse. Every indication is that the Greek conjunction we have is indeed what the apostle wrote. Those who accept this fact consider it as either a conclusion to what precedes or that it points forward and indicates the conclusion of the argument Paul is making in the first two verses of the chapter we are considering or that it is merely a transitional particle and so should not be translated as reflected in the CEV or the TEV. It is my interpretation that the Greek conjunction translated “therefore” in Romans 2:1 is used to draw an inference or to state emphatically something that results from what preceded. In our passage, what preceded is the knowledge of God’s righteous command the apostle mentioned in Romans 1:32. Thus, if any inference is to be drawn, it must be based on what preceded Romans 2:1. The preceding section of our passage is focused on those who are in idolatry in spite of God’s revelation of Himself through creation, that is, what we described as general revelation. To apply what the apostle stated about knowledge of God’s righteous command to another group of people requires knowledge based on special revelation where God’s righteous commands are clearly given. It is for this reason that we interpret that the word “therefore” is used to draw inference from what was said previously to another group of people, namely, the Jews with possibility of Gentile believers being included. Second, the apostle changed from the use of plural in describing those with knowledge of God’s righteous command in Romans 1:32 to the singular you in Romans 2:1. A logical explanation of such a switch is that the apostle now had in mind an individual that represents the class of people with special revelation of God’s righteous commands. It is for this reason we contend that the apostle had in mind those who are recipients of special revelation as he wrote what he did in the second chapter of this epistle. Of course, many explain the use of the singular as merely “a form of a diatribe, a type of discourse used by preachers and philosophers of that century” in which case an imaginary dialogue takes place between the apostle and another person. True, the apostle used a diatribe, but its use supports the point we made that the apostle has moved from addressing a group of idolaters that certainly were Gentiles to an individual in the class of those with special revelation, that is, the Jews, and probably including Gentile believers. The apostle’s classification of humans into two groups – Jews and Gentiles – in Romans 2:9 suggests that he was thinking more of the Jew than a Gentile when he began his discourse in verse 1. Gentiles were characterized by idolatry in contrast to the Jews of the time of the apostle that had distanced themselves from idolatry because of their Babylonian experience of God’s judgment for idolatry. The point we are emphasizing is that the apostle had shifted his discourse from humans in idolatry although they have general revelation of God through creation to individuals who have God’s special revelation, specifically the Jews.
Be that as it may, we contend that it is a person with special revelation that the apostle addressed in the sentence of Romans 2:1 You, therefore, have no excuse. The literal Greek reads Therefore you are without excuse. This is because the word “have” is translated from a Greek word (eimi) that basically means “to be” although with various nuances. For example, it may mean “to have” in the sense of “to possess,” as Apostle Paul used it to describe that those who preach the gospel and teach God’s word have one purpose as he penned in 1 Corinthians 3:8:
The man who plants and the man who waters have one purpose, and each will be rewarded according to his own labor.
In our passage of Romans 2:1, the Greek word has the sense of “to be,” that is, “to have the quality of being.” For it is this meaning of the word that translators of the NIV used to translate our Greek word in a passage that contains similar phrase we have in our passage, that is, Romans 1:20:
For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.
The sentence men are without excuse as we explained in verse 20 indicates that people have no excuse for involvement in idolatry. The verbal phrase of Romans 2:1 have no excuse is concerned with the fact that those who have specific revelation have no excuse for their failure as those who are involved in idolatry. By the way, the expression “no excuse” is translated from the same Greek word (anapologētos) the apostle used in Romans 1:20 that pertains to not being able to defend oneself or to justify one’s actions hence means “without excuse, inexcusable.”
The person that has no excuse is described in the NIV of Romans 2:1 you who pass judgment on someone else. Literally, the Greek reads O man, every (one) judging. The word “man” in the literal translation is translated from a Greek word (anthrōpos) that means “a human being” without regard to gender. It can mean “man” as male person. The word may mean “person” as that is the way the word is used by Apostle Paul in the instruction to Titus about the kind of individual to avoid as given in Titus 3:10:
Warn a divisive person once, and then warn him a second time. After that, have nothing to do with him.
The phrase a divisive person is literally a divisive man but the instruction is to apply to both men and women and so it is best to use the meaning “person” to translate the word. In our passage of Romans 2:1, the word has the sense of “person” although the Greek form used implies the word is used for addressing someone. The Greek form of the word that we indicated has the meaning of “person” in Romans 2:1 is used by itself four times in the Greek NT, all in the gospel of Luke. Luke used the Greek form found in our passage to narrate how the Lord Jesus described the paralytic man He healed after the effort his friends put to bring him to Jesus and so our word is translated “friend” in Luke 5:20:
When Jesus saw their faith, he said, “Friend, your sins are forgiven.”
When a man approached the Lord Jesus to help settle the estate of his father with his brother, Jesus questioned him by addressing him as “man” in Luke 12:14:
Jesus replied, “Man, who appointed me a judge or an arbiter between you?”
The word is used twice by Peter to address the man who identified him as one of the disciples of Jesus Christ according to Luke 22:58:
A little later someone else saw him and said, “You also are one of them.” “Man, I am not!” Peter replied.
An hour later someone identified Peter as a Galilean and by implication a disciple of Jesus that he vehemently denied knowing Jesus as stated in Luke 22:60:
Peter replied, “Man, I don’t know what you’re talking about!” Just as he was speaking, the rooster crowed.
In these four usages of the Greek word that literally means “man,” the intention was to be emphatic in addressing the object of an assertion. Apostle Paul did not use the Greek form alone in our passage of Romans 2:1 so that there is more to his use of the Greek word that means “person.” He used it along with another Greek word probably in a way to put a person in their place or to cause a person to become aware of the person’s limitation. This interpretation is not easy to garnish from most of our English translation as we will demonstrate.
Apostle Paul was in a sense animated that he addressed the imaginary person that is without an excuse in such a way that should get the person’s attention to recognize the individual’s limitation in light of what the apostle writes in the verse. This we say because of the Greek phrase that addressed the one that apostle said is without excuse is as we have given literally O man. Majority of our English versions did not translate the Greek phrase. The NIV used the word you to translate the Greek phrase that literally reads O man.
The letter “O” in the literal translation O man is translated from a Greek interjection (ō) that is a marker of personal address that is mostly used for expressing emotion as it is used in Jesus’ commendation of a woman’s faith that came to Him to heal her daughter as reported in Matthew 15:28:
Then Jesus answered, “Woman, you have great faith! Your request is granted.” And her daughter was healed from that very hour.
The translators of the NIV omitted the Greek interjection since the sentence Woman, you have great faith! is more literally O Woman, you have great faith! The interjection may be used to address a person without emotion involved as when Luke addressed Theophilus in his introduction of Acts as we read in Acts 1:1:
In my former book, Theophilus, I wrote about all that Jesus began to do and to teach
The Greek reads O Theophilus and not just the name Theophilus. The interjection may also be used as an exclamatory utterance with the meaning “O, Oh, How” as Apostle Paul used it to express his deep appreciation or wonderment of God’s wisdom as he concluded the doctrine of election as stated in Romans 11:33:
Oh, the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable his judgments, and his paths beyond tracing out!
This usage in Romans 11:33 notwithstanding, the predominant use of the Greek interjection is as a marker of address.
Therefore, based on the Greek words we considered, the Greek phrase the apostle used that literally reads O man consists of two markers of address directed to someone. This combination is used five times in the Greek NT, four of these by Apostle Paul. The apostle used it in a passage that he also referenced “judgment” as in the passage we are studying although in a question form in Romans 2:3:
So when you, a mere man, pass judgment on them and yet do the same things, do you think you will escape God’s judgment?
The phrase a mere man is literally O man. The apostle used it in a sense to remind a person that may want to question God’s election that the individual is a created being as the Greek phrase is used in Romans 9:20:
But who are you, O man, to talk back to God? “Shall what is formed say to him who formed it, ‘Why did you make me like this?’”
The apostle used the Greek phrase to address Timothy as a man devoted to the service of God as stated in 1 Timothy 6:11:
But you, man of God, flee from all this, and pursue righteousness, godliness, faith, love, endurance and gentleness.
The phrase man of God is more literally O man of God. The final usage of the Greek phrase we are considering is by James probably in the same sense of reminding a person that the individual is a created being with human limitations as in the question of James 2:20:
You foolish man, do you want evidence that faith without deeds is useless?
The phrase foolish man is more literally O foolish man. Thus, the literal phrase O man or you in the NIV we are considering could be used in a positive way or in a negative manner. In our passage of Romans 2:1, it is used in a negative sense that is intended to put a person in their place and to remind the person of their limitations that the person seems to forget.
It is the activity of an individual that in a sense got the apostle fired up and eager to put an imaginary person in their place as in the clause of Romans 2:1 you who pass judgment on someone else. Literally, the Greek reads every (one) judging. This is because the verbal phrase pass judgment is how the translators of the NIV rendered a Greek participle of a Greek word (krinō) used that may mean “to judge, pass judgment upon, express an opinion about” as it is used in the Lord’s instruction concerning looking down on others in a condemning way in Luke 6:37:
“Do not judge, and you will not be judged. Do not condemn, and you will not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven.
The word may mean “to judge as guilty, condemn” as in Nicodemus’ question to Jewish leaders regarding what they said about Jesus as stated in John 7:51:
“Does our law condemn anyone without first hearing him to find out what he is doing?”
The word may mean “to punish” as in Stephen’s sermon as he referred to God’s promise to Abraham of punishing those who would enslave his descendants in Acts 7:7:
But I will punish the nation they serve as slaves,’ God said, ‘and afterward they will come out of that country and worship me in this place.’
The word may mean to make a judgment based on taking various factors into account, hence means “to judge, think, consider, look upon,” as in Apostle Paul’s statement to the Jews who rejected the gospel message, as stated in Acts 13:46:
Then Paul and Barnabas answered them boldly: “We had to speak the word of God to you first. Since you reject it and do not consider yourselves worthy of eternal life, we now turn to the Gentiles.
In our passage of Romans 2:1, the word means “to pass unfavorable judgment upon someone,” that is, “to find fault with” or “to criticize” or “to condemn.” The Greek indicates that the imaginary person described with this activity of criticizing or condemning others has formed the habit of being critical or condemnatory of others as indicated in the phrase of Romans 2:1 someone else that is not in the Greek text but implied.
The activity of the individual that is in the habit of criticizing or condemning others causes the individual the apostle addressed to be reminded of their human limitations. In fact, the apostle indeed conveyed that such a person is a hypocrite although the word “hypocrite” is not directly used. The person’s hypocrisy is described in the explanation the apostle gave in Romans 2:1 for at whatever point you judge the other, you are condemning yourself. We contend that this clause provides an explanation that enables us to recognize the apostle was concerned with hypocrisy. You see, the word “for” is translated from a Greek conjunction (gar) that has several usages. For example, it can be used as a marker of inference with the meaning “so, then, by all means” or it can be used as a marker of explanation with the meaning “for, you see.” In our verse, it is used as a marker of the explanation that indicates the apostle is concerned with hypocrisy on the part of the person that habitually criticizes or condemns others.
The explanation that indicates the person involved is a hypocrite is that the individual that criticizes or condemns others is also doing the same to self as in the clause for at whatever point you judge the other, you are condemning yourself. This clause is indeed an explanation of a hypocrite. The person who judges others condemns self probably because the individual does not recognize the same failures in self for which the person judges others. A hypocrite is usually an individual that sees the faults in others but not in self. Consequently, Jesus Christ in His Sermon on the Mount tells us that a hypocrite sees the failures of others and not of self as implied in the record of Matthew 7:5:
You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.
The same concept of a hypocrite being concerned with failures of others and not of self is presented in a slightly different form in Luke 6:41:
“Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye?
If a person can see the fault of another but not their own such is a classical definition of hypocrisy. In fact, a hypocrite often does worse things than the person criticized. In other words, a hypocrite will minimize self-failure while magnifying that of others. This is the reason the Lord Jesus stated that the person who is a hypocrite sees the “speck of saw dust” in another person’s eye but not the plank that covers their own eye. I am saying that when a person is a hypocrite the individual will not recognize that the person’s failure is worse than those criticized, probably for failures that may not have the same effect on humans as theirs. I make this statement, so we recognize that with God there is no small or big sin. Every lawlessness is a sin before Him, but the impact of our sins varies on humans. For example, the impact of adultery is not the same as the impact of murder. Nonetheless, both are sins before God that carry equal penalty. That aside, the point is that hypocrites minimize their failures while magnifying that of others. Thus, Apostle Paul, by indicating that a person who criticizes others for a certain act condemns self although the person may not be aware of it is calling that person a hypocrite.
The apostle proceeds to give the reason for stating that a person who judges others for a certain action is also condemning self. In effect, the apostle gives a reason that justifies our use of the word “hypocrite” in the verse we are considering. This reason is given in the last clause of Romans 2:1 because you who pass judgment do the same things. The apostle is still concerned with the person that he charged with hypocrisy as conveyed in the clause you who pass judgment. Again, the apostle implies that the person involved has the habit of criticizing or condemning others but the one that criticizes is no different from those criticized because the one that criticizes does exactly the same thing as the individual criticizes as in the verbal phrase do the same things.
The word “do” is translated from a Greek word (prassō) that may mean “to engage in activity or to behave in a certain way,” hence means “to act, behave,” as the word is used of the activity of those who killed Jesus as in Peter’s explanation of their action as due to ignorance according to Acts 3:17:
“Now, brothers, I know that you acted in ignorance, as did your leaders.
The word may mean “to do” or “to practice” as it is used to describe the activities of those who were involved in sorcery in Ephesus that had their scrolls burned upon believing in Jesus Christ as we read in Acts 19:19:
A number who had practiced sorcery brought their scrolls together and burned them publicly. When they calculated the value of the scrolls, the total came to fifty thousand drachmas.
In our passage of Romans 2:1, the word means “to perform or to do,” that is, “to do or carry out an action; often conveying an idea of wrongness in the action.” The apostle used a present tense in the Greek to indicate that the one that criticizes or condemns another has also formed the habit of doing exactly the same things the individual criticizes another person.
The apostle was concerned with stating a general principle that he was not specific as he described what the one that criticizes others does. For the phrase the same things of Romans 2:1 is intended to cover a broad range of activities that are sinful such as stealing or adultery the apostle mentioned later in Romans 2:12 or the twenty-one list of vices he cited in Romans 1:29-31. The point is simply that the apostle wanted to state the principle that when a person does the same thing for which the individual criticizes or condemns others, such practice is best described as hypocrisy. Of course, hypocrisy may also involve knowing and doing what is right but because of fear of others one stops doing what is right. This was the kind of hypocrisy Apostle Paul charged Apostle Peter of doing along with other Jewish believers. Peter ate with Gentile believers but when some people showed up from Jerusalem, he withdrew from his fellow Gentile believers in that he stopped eating with them as stated in Galatians 2:12–13:
12 Before certain men came from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles. But when they arrived, he began to draw back and separate himself from the Gentiles because he was afraid of those who belonged to the circumcision group. 13 The other Jews joined him in his hypocrisy, so that by their hypocrisy even Barnabas was led astray.
In any event, the first introductory remark of Apostle Paul pertaining to judgment as it concerns those who have special revelation of God about His righteous commands is that such individuals have no excuse in unfairly judging or criticizing others. The reason is that it is hypocritical to criticize or judge others for doing the same thing you do. The implication is that to be free of being regarded as a hypocrite one has to ensure that the person lives according to the truth so that there is no room for duplicity in one’s behavior pattern. This brings us to the introductory remark concerning judgment as it pertains to God.
The apostle indicated that his second introductory remark about judgment is related to the first in that the same concept is continued although this time the focus is God and so Romans 2:2 begins with the word Now in the NIV. The word “now” is translated from a Greek particle (de) that is routinely translated “but” in our English versions, as done in our present verse in the KJV, to reflect a contrast between clauses but when a simple connective is desired, without contrast being clearly implied, it may be translated “and” or “now” and in certain occurrences the particle may be left untranslated as is the case with our verse in the CEV, the ESV, the NRSV, among others. In our passage, it may be translated “now” or “and” to indicate the apostle is continuing with the topic of judgment he introduced in verse 1.
The apostle begins with the sentence of Romans 2:2 we know. The word “know” is translated from a Greek word (oida) that may mean to grasp the meaning of something or to comprehend, that is, “to understand, recognize, come to know, experience” as the word is used to describe the question of the disciples regarding Jesus’ statement of how in a short period of time, they would not see Him but will also see Him shortly after that, as stated in John 16:18:
They kept asking, “What does he mean by ‘a little while’? We don’t understand what he is saying.”
The sentence We don’t understand what he is saying is literally we don’t know what he is saying. The Greek word may mean “to remember, recollect” as Apostle Paul used it in deemphasizing his importance in water baptism in 1 Corinthians 1:16:
(Yes, I also baptized the household of Stephanas; beyond that, I don’t remember if I baptized anyone else.)
The Greek word may mean “to know” in the sense of having information about someone or something as Apostle Paul used the word to indicate that the Galatians, prior to their salvation, did not know or have the true information about God, the creator, in Galatians 4:8:
Formerly, when you did not know God, you were slaves to those who by nature are not gods.
The Greek word may mean “to understand how, to learn how” as Apostle Paul used the word to convey the sense of learning how to control one’s sexual desire to avoid sexual immorality as stated in 1 Thessalonians 4:4:
that each of you should learn to control his own body in a way that is holy and honorable,
The sentence each of you should learn to control his own body of the NIV is literally each of you know how to possess his own vessel. The Greek word may mean “to honor, respect” as in the instruction of the Holy Spirit through Apostle Paul regarding what is expected of believers relating to their spiritual leaders as stated in 1 Thessalonians 5:12:
Now we ask you, brothers, to respect those who work hard among you, who are over you in the Lord and who admonish you.
The verbal phrase to respect those who work hard among you is literally to know those laboring among you, which does not make much sense unless it is understood either to mean to respect or honor such individuals since believers would have known such persons. The Greek word may mean “to know” in the sense of being intimately acquainted with or stand in close relationship to someone so that it is used to know God, not merely to know theoretically of God’s existence, but to have a positive relationship with Him as in the claim in Titus 1:16:
They claim to know God, but by their actions they deny him. They are detestable, disobedient and unfit for doing anything good.
In our passage of Romans 2:2, the sense of the word is that of having knowledge about something or being aware of a fact.
Apostle Paul wrote in Romans 2:2 we know that is a declaration that appears sixteen times in the epistles of Apostles Paul and John: ten times in Paul’s and six times in John’s. Apostle Paul used it six times in his epistle to the Romans and often in reference to the knowledge of what is in the law, as for example, in indicating the content of the law that brings every human being liable to God as in Romans 3:19:
Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be silenced and the whole world held accountable to God.
Often in his use of the sentence we know, he does not immediately specify how the knowledge he has in mind is obtained except that a person’s experience is involved. Take the case, where the apostle used it negatively, regarding our inability to know what to pray in Romans 8:26:
In the same way, the Spirit helps us in our weakness. We do not know what we ought to pray for, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with groans that words cannot express.
He used the sentence twice in his first epistle to the Corinthians in the context of food sacrificed to idols as, for example, in 1 Corinthians 8:4:
So then, about eating food sacrificed to idols: We know that an idol is nothing at all in the world and that there is no God but one.
He used it once in his second epistle to the Corinthians in connection with the death of believers as stated in 2 Corinthians 5:1:
Now we know that if the earthly tent we live in is destroyed, we have a building from God, an eternal house in heaven, not built by human hands.
Apostle John used the sentence six times in his epistle in such a way that conveys assurance of salvation or knowledge that is obtained through experience as, for example, we know by experience that God answers our prayers as recorded in 1 John 5:15:
And if we know that he hears us—whatever we ask—we know that we have what we asked of him.
In another usage, the knowledge the apostle used it is through experience but of mostly those who were eyewitnesses to Jesus’ earthly ministry as stated in 1 John 5:20:
We know also that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we may know him who is true. And we are in him who is true—even in his Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life.
In any case, the various usages of the sentence we know the apostle wrote presents two general problems. The first is the identification of those meant whenever the sentence is used and the second involves the source of knowledge. Thus, when Apostle Paul wrote in Romans 2:2 we know that God’s judgment against those who do such things is based on truth, the first question is to determine whom the apostle meant in the use of the word “we” and how the knowledge about God’s judgment is arrived at.
The first problem of “we” refers to the apostle and the recipients of his epistle. This is because only the apostle and the recipients of his epistle would know of God’s judgment in the way described in the passage we are considering since the apostle wrote we know that God’s judgment against those who do such things is based on truth. The word “judgment” is translated from a Greek word (krima) that may mean “judgment, judging” as the action/function of a judge as it is used of what God does, as stated in 1 Peter 4:17:
For it is time for judgment to begin with the family of God; and if it begins with us, what will the outcome be for those who do not obey the gospel of God?
The word may refer to legal decision rendered by a judge, that is, “judicial verdict” thus the word may be used for a condemnatory verdict so may mean “condemnation” as the word is used to describe fate of false teachers in 2 Peter 2:3:
In their greed these teachers will exploit you with stories they have made up. Their condemnation has long been hanging over them, and their destruction has not been sleeping.
The word may mean “punishment” as it is used for the prostitute in Revelation 17:1:
One of the seven angels who had the seven bowls came and said to me, “Come, I will show you the punishment of the great prostitute, who sits on many waters.
In our passage of Romans 2:2, it means “divine judgment,” that is, “decision of God conceived of in the legal domain.” This divine judgment directed to those who disregard His righteous commands is in accordance with truth as the apostle stated in the clause that God’s judgment against those who do such things is based on truth.
The phrase of the NIV based on truth is literally according to truth because the apostle used a Greek preposition (kata) with several usages. For example, it may be used as a marker of opposition so that it may be translated “against.” However, in our passage, it is used to introduce the norm which governs something so that it is used to describe the norm according to which God’s judgment is rendered and so may be translated “according to.”
The norm according to which God’s judgment is rendered is described as “truth.” The word “truth” is translated from a Greek word (alētheia) with a range of meanings. It may mean the quality of being in accord with what is true hence means “truthfulness, dependability, uprightness in thought and deed”, as it is used for God in Romans 3:7:
Someone might argue, “If my falsehood enhances God’s truthfulness and so increases his glory, why am I still condemned as a sinner?”
It is in this sense of being in accord with what is truth that Apostle Paul used it in his commendation of the Corinthians for not letting his boasting about them to Titus to turn out to be empty so that he was not put to shame as stated in 2 Corinthians 7:14:
I had boasted to him about you, and you have not embarrassed me. But just as everything we said to you was true, so our boasting about you to Titus has proved to be true as well.
The verbal phrase has proved to be true is more literally has become truth. The Greek word may mean “reality” as opposed to mere appearance, as it is used in Colossians 1:6:
that has come to you. All over the world this gospel is bearing fruit and growing, just as it has been doing among you since the day you heard it and understood God’s grace in all its truth.
“Truth” here has the sense of “reality” as opposed to mere appearance. It is for this reason that the translators of the TEV rendered the phrase in all its truth of the NIV as, as it really is. The Greek word that is translated “truth” may mean the content of what is truth and so means “truth.” It is in this sense that the apostle used it to encourage the Ephesians not to be involved with falsehood as they interacted with each other in Ephesians 4:25:
Therefore each of you must put off falsehood and speak truthfully to his neighbor, for we are all members of one body.
The command speak truthfully is literally speak truth. The word is used then especially of the content of Christianity as the ultimate truth. It is in this sense Apostle Paul used it in connection with the gospel in Colossians 1:5:
the faith and love that spring from the hope that is stored up for you in heaven and that you have already heard about in the word of truth, the gospel
The phrase the word of truth, the gospel is literally the word of truth of the gospel. The rendering of the NIV is quite good because of the Greek syntax of this phrase. In fact, to communicate fully the idea of the Greek construction we could translate the Greek phrase as the word of truth, that is, the gospel; in this way, it is clearer that the word of truth here is a reference to the gospel message. The apostle used the Greek word to refer to the Christian message that includes doctrine and the gospel message in Galatians 5:7:
You were running a good race. Who cut in on you and kept you from obeying the truth?
Truth here in Galatians 5:7 refers to the Christian message the apostle delivered to the Galatians that includes the gospel message, the doctrine of justification by faith, and the doctrine that the filling of the Spirit is by faith. The apostle used the Greek word rendered “truth” as a reference to the body of accepted Christian doctrines that the church is the custodian in 1 Timothy 3:15:
if I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God’s household, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth.
In our passage of Romans 2:2, the word means “truth” in the sense of “conformity to reality” that belongs to God. In a sense the word here means “right” or “just.”
Be that as it may, we return to the question of how the apostle and the recipients knew that God’s judgment is according to truth, that is, the source of their knowledge. It is through the OT Scripture. The Scripture severally declares that God’s judgment is in accordance with truth in that there is no partiality with His judgment as stated, for example, in Psalm 98:9:
let them sing before the LORD, for he comes to judge the earth. He will judge the world in righteousness and the peoples with equity.
Furthermore, those who preached the gospel to Roman believers would have made them aware of the fact that God’s judgment is coming but that it would be in accordance with His justice. We say this because we know that Apostle Paul brought the subject of judgment in his defense before Governor Felix as we read in Acts 24:25:
As Paul discoursed on righteousness, self-control and the judgment to come, Felix was afraid and said, “That’s enough for now! You may leave. When I find it convenient, I will send for you.”
The point is that the knowledge that God’s judgment is according to truth or rightness is something the apostle and the recipients of his epistle would have known from the OT Scripture. Anyway, the second introductory remark of Apostle Paul regarding judgment as it pertains to God is that His judgment is just and in accordance with His righteousness or justice. So, let me end by reminding you of the message we have expounded which is You should be careful in judging others since you have the tendency for hypocrisy, and you are not God whose judgment of people is always correct.
09/27/24