Romans 2:13

{5} (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be {h} justified. (5) He prevents an objection which might be made by the Jews whom the law does not excuse, but condemn, because it is not the hearing of the law that justifies, but rather the keeping of it. (h) Will be pronounced just before God's judgment seat: which is true indeed if any one could be found that had fulfilled the law: but seeing that Abraham was not justified by the law, but by faith, it follows that no man can be justified by works.

This and the two following verses are included in a parenthesis, and they serve to obviate an objection against what was said, Romans 2:12 . The Jews might plead, that they were superior to the Gentiles, and should be exempted or privileged, in judgment, forasmuch as they knew and professed the law of God, which the Gentiles did not. To this he says, that to know and learn the law was not sufficient, unless in all things they yielded obedience to it, which they neither did nor could. The scope of the apostle is not simply to show how sinners are now justified in the sight of God; but to show what is requisite to justification according to the tenor of the law, and that is, to do all that is written therein, and to continue so to do. And if there be any man that can bring such perfect and constant obedience of his own performing, he shall be justified by God; but inasmuch as no man, neither natural nor regenerate, can so fulfil the law, he must seek for justification in some other way. The text, thus expounded, doth no way militate with Romans 3:30 , and Galatians 3:11 , which at first reading it seems to do. And it further shows, that the Jews are comprehended under the general curse, as well as the Gentiles, and are bound to have recourse to the righteousness of God by faith.

(13) For not the hearers of the law. —The parenthesis should not be placed here (as usually in the Authorised version), but at the beginning of the next verse. The present verse is explanatory of that which precedes. “Judged, I say, by the Law; for they must not suppose that the mere fact of their being under the Law will exempt them from this judgment. The only exemption will be that which is given to those who have kept the Law, and not merely had the privilege of hearing it. And,” the argument follows—the Apostle digressing for a moment to pursue this point to its conclusion—“this exemption, may apply quite as much to Gentile as to Jew.” Hearers of the law.—Strictly (as above), hearers of law—i.e., those who have a law to which they can listen, and by which they may be guided. (Comp. Acts 13:27; Acts 15:21, “Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every Sabbath”; and for the opposition between hearing and doing, James 1:22-23; James 1:25.)

Romans 2:13 . For not the hearers of the law — Those who are only hearers; are — Even now; just — δικαιοι , righteous, that is, accounted and dealt with as righteous persons; before God — Here the apostle condemns the folly of the Jews, who thought themselves sure of eternal life, because God had favoured them with a revelation of his will: as Dr. Whitby has shown by many important quotations, in a note on this verse. But the doers of the law — Whether natural or revealed, that is, they who walk according to the light of the dispensation they are under, “who steadily and universally, in the tenor of their lives, act agreeably to its precepts; they, and they only, shall be justified [acquitted and rewarded] — In the day of final audit and account; whether their knowledge of it were more or less express.” So Doddridge. A most sure and important truth this, which respects the Gentiles also, though principally the Jews. The apostle speaks of the former, Romans 2:14 , &c.; of the latter, Romans 2:17 , &c.

It must be observed, however, that the apostle does not speak of a perfect, unsinning obedience, either to the law of nature, or to any revealed law, whether patriarchal, Jewish, or Christian; but of that obedience of faith, productive of holiness, or that sincere obedience to the dispensation men are under, which, on the ground of the covenant of grace, established for all mankind immediately after the fall, God is pleased graciously to accept instead of that unsinning obedience, which to man, in his fallen state, is impossible. This obedience of faith, with regard to the heathen, implies their believing that God is, and that he is the rewarder of them that diligently seek him; and on the ground of this faith, coming to him in prayer for his favour and blessing, and with praise for his benefits, and diligently seeking an acquaintance with him, and with his will concerning them. And with respect to Jews and Christians, it implies a true and lively faith in, and sincere obedience to, the truths, precepts, and promises of the dispensation they are under.

Romans 2:13 . This is the principle of judgment, for not the hearers of law (the Mosaic or any other) are just with God, but the law doers shall be justified. ἀκροαταὶ tends to mean “pupils,” constant hearers, who are educated in the law: see Romans 2:10 . But no degree of familiarity with the law avails if it is not done. The forensic sense of δικαιοῦσθαι is apparent in this verse, where it is synonymous with δίκαιοι εἶναι παρὰ τῷ θεῷ : the latter obviously being the opposite of “to be condemned”. Whether there are persons who perfectly keep the law, is a question not raised here. The futures ἀπολοῦνται , κριθήσονται , δικαιωθήσονται all refer to the day of final judgment.

Verse 13. - For not the hearers of Law are just before God, but the doers of Law shall be justified ; In this verse, as in the previous one, νόμου is anarthrous according to the best-supported readings, though the Textus Receptus has τοῦ before it. It has, therefore, been rendered above simply as Law, not as either the law , or a law , as the same word will be below, whenever it stands by itself without either the article or any modifying genitive. Much has been written by commentators on the senses in which this word νόμος is to be understood, as used by St. Paul with or without the article. In an Appendix to the Introduction to the Epistle to the Romans in the 'Speaker's Commentary' will be found a summary of the views taken by critics of repute, with exhaustive references to the usage of the word in the Septuagint, in the New Testament generally, and in the writings of St. Paul. It has not been thought necessary in this Commentary to discuss further what has been so amply discussed already. It may suffice to state certain principles for the reader's guidance, which appear plainly to commend themselves to acceptance. (1) Ὁ νόμος , with the article prefixed, always means the Mosaic Law. (2) Νόμος , without the article, may have, and often has, specific reference to the Mosaic Law; but, if so, the emission of the article is not arbitrary, but involves a difference of meaning.

The article in Greek is prefixed to a word when the latter is intended to convey some definite idea already familiarized to the mind, and "the natural effect of its presence is to divert the thoughts from dwelling on the peculiar import of the word, and is adverse to its inherent notion standing out as a prominent point in the sense of the passage" (quoted from 'Grammar of the New Testament Dialect,' by T. S. Green, in Appendix to Introduction to Romans in the 'Speaker's Commentary '). Hence the omission of the article, where it might have been used, before a word has often the effect of emphasizing and drawing attention to the inherent notion of the word. We may take as an instance ver. 17 in this chapter, where the Textus Receptus has ἐπαναπαύῃ τῷ νόμῳ but where the preferable reading omits the article. In either case the Mosaic Law is referred to; but the omission of the article brings into prominence the principle of justification on which the Jew rested - viz. Law , which exacts entire obedience. In the following verse (the eighteenth), in the phrase, κατηχούμενος ἐκ τοῦ νόμου the article is inserted, the intention being simply to say that the Jew was instructed in the well-known Law of Moses. The same difference of meaning is intimated by the omission or insertion of the article in ver. 23 and elsewhere in other parts of the chapter and of the whole Epistle (see especially ch. 7.).