Condemned by the Law
Sermon • Submitted
0 ratings
· 10 viewsNotes
Transcript
Handout
Sermon Tone Analysis
A
D
F
J
S
Emotion
A
C
T
Language
O
C
E
A
E
Social
We will now bring chapter 2 to a close, please open your bibles to Romans Chapter 2: 17-29
Pray
Like I said, we now bring this chapter to a close. There is a debate that I want to discuss with you all. And this debate may shed light on Pauls writings in general, but it will help with todays text with out a doubt.
We have these words in theology to discuss what salvation is and how it is done. The question is, does God save us or do we help God save us?
The two words used in this debate is synergism and monergism. Monergism means to work alone while synergism means to work together, we use the word synergy for that.
I was on Facebook this week and a seen a guy that I used to work with post something that made me cringe.
These are two seperate teachings that cut to the core of salvation. The Monergistic view is that God brings about salvation without help. He is the author and finisher of salvation. Synergism teaches that God and man work together to bring about salvation.
In our culture, it snot hard to make me do that. This man was, I dont even know where to begin to describe him, he was wild and careless. He was married, back when I worked with but his marriage was struggling because they both had a drinking problem.
He came to me for advice and I told him that they needed to surrender all to God. The man, at the time, really wanted to save his marriage. But he was not willing to do what it takes.
This debate has been going on since Jesus ascended into heaven.
They split up, he begins to run around with a bunch of other women and got himself fired due to his destructive behavior. And I have not heard from the guy in years. And then we get in contact through facebook and he told me;
That he did not appricate the words I had for him then, but he does now. I was so happy to see this guy I worked with sharing scripture and watching a faith grow, or at least, that is how it seemed.
His first problem is that he never got himself with a good church, see if you do not get yourself in a good church, you fall for so many lies and you tend to look up to the wrong person. In this guys case, that person was his own father.
Who is a hippy. I notice that this person was now combining marijana and his faith, then foul language and his faith, and he is on this slide backwords.
He fashoned and made a Jesus that best suits him and he cannot seem to understand why every church he has walked into is wrong. There has to be a point where we stop and go, okey, everyone is wrong and i am the only one who is right, or I am wrong and to stubborn to see it.
Well the man posted on facebook this week telling people to believe in Jesus, however, in his little “evangelical rant” he was cussing up a storm and actually was teaching easy believism.
Easy believism is what we talked about a few weeks ago, it is the movement that claims if you accept one time, you can live your life in utter sin including never believing, and still be saved.
And only one person commenet on that post, his dad, agreeing with him, what a shock.
But this is what happens, and it is happening more often. I do not think he generates any feed back because even the unbelieving world is going, ok, I know enough to know that is not right.
Here is a man who wants to be a light to a fallen world but fails in his own falleness. While many within the church are not like this man, many in the church do fail at being a light to a fallen world.
Isreal was guilty of the same. Todays sermon can be broken into two parts. Verses 17-24 on being condemned by the law, and the last half the mark of the covenant. so lets look to our text for today and see what we should take away from having an attitude like that.
Not set on this intro
But if you bear the name “Jew” and rely upon the Law and boast in God,
and know His will and approve the things that are essential, being instructed out of the Law,
This is how we know that Paul has been trying to appeal to the Jewish people in this church in Rome. It is hear he calls them out directly. Paul says but if you bear the name Jew.
The word jew comes from the people of Judah, but over time described all of Isreal and not just those with Judah.
The sentence is better translated as if you call yourself a jew. Some make it passive and say, if you are called a jew but the langauge is not passive so cannot be translated that way.
It is the claim to be jew not what others say about you. What comes next? and rely upon the law, rely is an interesting word, it means to rest. In the case to rest upon the law, and Boast in God.
There was comfort for the jewish man, because he had the law, he rested in the fact that he had the law. he never seen the law as his accuser, he never seen the law as something against him.
This is the way many of us still talk about our jewish friends. We think the same thing about the jewish people and Paul is coming in and tearing that down. And he is setting it up here, as you are seeing and will see.
After mentioning their rest upon the law, paul adds and Boast in God. Some translations say something along the lines about boasting about their relationship with God.
That is not what is being communicated here. It literlally means proud of your God. It is God where this pride is in not the relatiionship. And its fitting that this is what Paul is saying based on the set up he is about to do.
You can see that Paul is asking questions to get the readers mind going, get their mind turing, its rehtorical in a sense because the writing style is that of a mocked debate.
We talked about this a few weeks back, that Paul was not directly calling anyone out but was being rhetorical because he knows some are guitly of what he is talking about.
And you see that in the languge here, But if you bear the name jew, and rely upon the law, and boast in God. Which is soemthing they, its a good thing to do. Paul is not trying to cut that down.
He is trying to get their attention because Paul is saying, you thing you know God, You have this Pride in God and you think you know God. Paul is man who also though he knew God.
Thought he knew God and thought he was doing Gods work, by killing Gods people. Paul is man who is peaking fro experiance.
Paul continues with the set up, he describes this person in more detail, he adds and knows His will. This is very interesting, Paul is not saying and claims to know His will, but knows it. And they do, and it is a high privilage to have the knowledge.
just as it is for us today, it is a great privalidge to know Gods redemptive purposes and his will, that is his will that he revealed to us.
They know his will, and approve the things that are essential, that word approves means to put to the test and that was something Jewish people were known for doing, they tested and questioned before they would be willing to affirm of something was right or not.
And they are able to do that because they were intruscted in the law, they had a standard to determine if something was right or not.
and are confident that you yourself are a guide to the blind, a light to those who are in darkness,
a corrector of the foolish, a teacher of the immature, having in the Law the embodiment of knowledge and of the truth,
It has always been the role of the Hebrew people to bring the good news of God to others, something that they failed to do. By the time Jesus came on to the scene in flesh, they had this wall up against anyone who was not jewish.
When we read about Jonah, we are reading an example of where God wanted someone with Isreal to take the message of repentence to a group who were not Isreal. It was something that Jonah did not want.
Wit one historical narritive we see that this message and offer has always been there and Isreals protest has always been there.
That does not change the fact that they were chosen to give this message, which is why Paul uses thos phrase, a guide to the blind, a light to those in darkness.
They had a role to play, and they failed at it, we talked about Adam and Isreals failure and bit last week. Paul calls the a corrector of the foolish a teacher of the immature. You cannot get a better Greek to english translation than what I just said there.
I only know of three english translations that say immature and not children, babes, or ignorant. But this was why the jewish people were chosen for a task, because the rest of us were in a spot of foolishness and if it was not foolishness it was immature in the faith.
They had the law, which the ten commandments alone allow us to see who God is, and through that law was the knowledge of truth. They had the truth that we so desperatly crave, and they kept it for themselves.
And Paul is now going to show their error.
you, therefore, who teach another, do you not teach yourself? You who preach that one shall not steal, do you steal?
You who say that one should not commit adultery, do you commit adultery? You who abhor idols, do you rob temples?
You who boast in the Law, through your breaking the Law, do you dishonor God?
For “the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you,” just as it is written.
You who say that one should not commit adultery, do you commit adultery? You who abhor idols, do you rob temples?
Romans 2:21
The Jewish people had this revelation from God and they were obligated to share that with others, and now Paul goes through a series of biting questions. Because their attitudes were not leading people to God but were actually causing people to blaspheme God.
You that teaches another, do you not teach yourself? These sermons impact me before they impact you. Because Its not just my job and its just soemthing I got to do, but because I am called to this, and God looks after me too.
And does so by preaching and teaching to my heart, impact me onthe subject, so i can be usefull in sharing that with others.
You that preach that one shall not steal, do you steal? This word makes us think of taking an item but it actaully means gain trough dishonesty which is a form of theft.
But Isreal was not known for this
We call it fraud today. One should not commit adultery, do you? Adultery was a well accepted thing in the gentile world of Pauls day, The jews however were not known for this yet, are they guilty?
Yes, not only does God accuse Israel of loving adulterers more than him, but accuses them of adultery when they are not fully commited to him. Do you think God has changed his defination on adultery?
he moves on to idols, we discussed Israels position on idols. They detested idols and were not known for worshipping idols, and Paul does not accuse them of that.
Rather he asks, do you rob temples? Some commentators think that some jewish people would rob pagan temples and keep that wealth or put that wealth into their temple or synogouge.
There is nothing to support that view. There is no historical evidence of that. Does not mean it did not happen, just means this view has not backup.
Others think it was Jewish people withholding temple tax or lying about temple tax. Also, nothing to back that up with. We are not sure exactly what paul means here.
There is historical evidence that some, and this seems rare, would sell idols to gentiles while claiming it was false, they were not afraid to make a profit off of it but in words saying they were against it.
It would be like me owning a marijauna shop, selling the stuff and telling the customers, I’m against this, you really should rethink your life. But what paul is actually asking we are not sure?
But after that he moves on to the law, the law is coming back into the conversation. The jewish people always boasted that they had the law and that God gave it to them.
But here he is cutting right to their heart. They hated the idea of dishonoring God, but if they practiced the jewish tradition, they patted eachothers backs, they wouldnt accuse anyone of this unless you went against their good ol boy club.
And when put under the light of the law, they know they have failed and now paul is going to draw their attention to the fact that they do dishonor God. And he says it with such authorty in that this is not just his opinion but he uses scripture to back the claim up.
For “the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you,” just as it is written.
Romans 2:
Paul is probably paraphrasing but it also echos Ezekial 36:20 through 23.
Now he has their attention, If he already has not grasped it.
For indeed circumcision is of value if you practice the Law; but if you are a transgressor of the Law, your circumcision has become uncircumcision.
Paul now goes after another Jewish comfort. It was taught in Pauls day that Abraham would be at the gates of heaven checking every Jewish male and if one was uncercumsized, he would not get into to heaven.
They had that much faith in circumcision. Paul is now informing them that to be circumcised only has value if you keep the law. Other than that, it is worthless.
By now the jewish reader is probably really sad. Because Paul just informed them that they do not keep the law. Circumcison was the covenant sign for the jewish people.
They were not the first to practice this act, though, it was not common and they are the first people, as in a group that practiced this.
I do cannot get into this subject today, we just do not have the time and I know we will eventually cover this in more detail in our Sunday School class, but Baptisim is the New covenant sign. A new public display that says we belong to God.
This time it does not require blood, because blood was already shed for us. This is why some denominations still do infant baptism today. They know that baptism is the replacement mark and they take the teaching of having your child circumsized withing 8 days of being born.
I agree that people should be baptized shortly after they are born but the doctrine our pedobaptist friends forget, is one must be born again.
as we move through these last verse, have baptism in mind as well.
So if the uncircumcised man keeps the requirements of the Law, will not his uncircumcision be regarded as circumcision?
And he who is physically uncircumcised, if he keeps the Law, will he not judge you who though having the letter of the Law and circumcision are a transgressor of the Law?
So if the uncircumcised man keeps the requirements of the Law, will not his uncircumcision be regarded as circumcision?
Romans 2:
Paul is being retorical, he is making an argument. If an uncircumsized man keeps the law then he would be circumsized. He is not arguing for a works based salvation at all, the exact opposite as we will see.
The text really expalins itself, Paul is trying to get the jewish readers to abandon their rest on the law, and their rest on circumcision. When we evangelize, we need to get people to lay down their effort.
We hear it all the time. If you do not have Jesus Christ, you will not get to heaven when you die. And people go, even if i do good. even if I am a good person. What if i dedicated my life to caring for orphans in a third world country, will I still not get into heaven?
First off, that type of person is not dedicating a long period of time to anyone for any good. They naturally want to get into heaven based on their good deeds. We do not teach salvation by works, you cannot earn your way into heaven.
Is is by the shedding of our savors blood that we get their and it is for those of us who trust that he shed that blood for us, for our sins. And we now live a life devoted to him.
Second, I am baffled at all these people who want heaven apart from Jesus. Heaven is the supreme communion with our Lord and it will never end. If you want heaven apart from Jesus, then heaven is not for you.
We need to abanded that we can earn our way into heaven. and here is that point in the last two verses
For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh.
But he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that which is of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter; and his praise is not from men, but from God.
Foundation laid. Salvation has always been an issue of the heart. We discussed this a bit in Sunday School, circumcision is covenant langauge. When ever you see the words cut or divide, that was ancient covenant language.
So it made sense that cutting was the people covenant sign. But paul is saying that it is not the outward cutting that counts it is the cutting of the heart.
Peeling away that old heart, exposing a new. now that is new covenant language. Who new that this outward bloody act pointed to what was to come.
Three points we should make based on three questions.
Isreal had the responsibilty of being a leader with the light they were given. The same responsibilty has been given to us. Turn to
“Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit,
teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.”
Are you being a leader in sharing this light that you have been given? If you are saved, you have been called, end of debate. There is no, well i just do not feel called. Forget your feelings, what does the scriptures say?
Or are you guilty like Israel and you must reflect on these words by paul untl you are convicted.
2. Do you commit Adultry like Isreal. Is God truly the center of your life, or is there something else pulling you away. how often in a week do you take in the word of God.
3. Are you baptizied inwardly.
Now to Him who is able to keep you from stumbling, and to make you stand in the presence of His glory blameless with great joy,
to the only God our Savior, through Jesus Christ our Lord, be glory, majesty, dominion and authority, before all time and now and forever. Amen.