Gentiles in Paul’s Argument in Romans 2: Their Praise Is Not from Man but from God

by Ardel Caneday

That Romans 2 should figure prominently within disagreements among contemporary Christian scholars about how to understand Paul’s reasoning concerning the gospel in relation to the law of Moses is no surprise, for this chapter has always posed exegetical difficulties, especially since the Reformation. Two contrasting interpretations of the passage dominate discussions. The one that dominated until the past twenty years is that Paul, in portions if not the whole of Romans 2, argues against his presumptuous and censorious but rhetorical or imaginary Jewish dialog partner by positing equally imaginary Gentiles whose salvation by keeping the law is only theoretical because sin renders every human helpless and incapable of doing good. The second interpretation, which has gained much greater acceptance in recent years, is that Paul is depicting Christians generally in 2:7 and 10 but particularly Christian Gentiles in 2:12ff and 2:25-29, by their conduct, the obedience of faith, in contrast to others whose evil deeds manifest unbelief.

Disagreement among exegetes centers upon four positive and unequivocal assertions: (1) God will grant eternal life to everyone who does good (2:7, 10), (2) the doers of the law will be justified (2:13), (3) if the uncircumcised keep the law’s righteous requirements, that one’s uncircumcision will be reckoned as circumcision (2:25), and (4) the one who is a Jew inwardly, whose circumcision is not of the flesh but of the Spirit receives praise from God (2:29). Because in Romans 2 Paul nowhere uses either the noun “faith” or the verb “believe” with humans as the actors, some commentators are convinced that the silence is deafening. For example, Douglas Moo argues, “Like the bark of the dog in the Sherlock Holmes story ‘Silver Blaze,’ the word ‘faith,’ introduced in 1:17 as the way in which God’s righteousness can be appropriated, is conspicuous in 2:1-3:8 by its absence” (Romans, NICNT, 126).

Are we correct to infer that the absence of “faith” and of “believe” as explicitly stated human actions within Romans 2:1-3:8 confirms that Paul is depicting only a theoretical category of people not an actual set of individuals with his four positive assertions? Who are these individuals whose behavior is pleasing to God of whom Paul repeatedly speaks in Romans 2? Is it necessary for Paul to use either “faith” or “believe” to depict belief or believing?

At first blush the absence of “faith” and of “believe” may pose as silence that is deafening. The silence may be as convincing as the silent dog in “Silver Blaze,” until the same silence elsewhere in Scripture compels one to reconsider the reason for such silence in Romans 2.

Within the entirety of the Book of Genesis, in both the Hebrew and Greek Old Testaments, the only explicit mention of a human who exercises faith toward God that readers encounter is in 15:6, where it says that Abraham “believed the Lord, and he counted it to him as righteousness” (esv). That Genesis elsewhere never uses “faith” or “believe” of humans with God as the object of belief is significant. Is it not? Does not this “silence” feature Abraham as the father of faith, though mentioned explicitly of him only once? Is this not why Genesis 15:6 caught Paul’s attentive exegetical eye? Is this not why Abraham figures so prominently in Paul’s arguments in Galatians and Romans?

Consider, from out of the silence of Genesis, where no other uses of “faith” or “believe” are attributed to humans, someone somewhere concludes,

By faith Abel offered to God a more acceptable sacrifice than Cain, through which he was commended as righteous. By faith Enoch was taken up so that he should not see death, and he was not found because God had taken him. Now before he was taken he was commended as having pleased God. . . . By faith Noah, being warned by God concerning events as yet unseen, in referent fear constructed an ark for the saving of his household. By this he condemned the world and became an heir of righteousness that comes by faith (Hebrews 11:4, 5, 7; esv).

It is instructive to note that after the author of Hebrews cites the examples of Abel and Enoch he pauses. He realizes the silence of Genesis concerning “faith” and “believe” with regard to both Abel and Enoch. He understands that he needs to explain how he knows that Abel and Enoch received God’s approval “by faith” since the biblical text is “silent” and does not expressly state what he is explaining from his exegesis of the text. So, he explains the basis of his exegetical reasoning: “And without faith it is impossible to please him, for whoever would draw near to God must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who seek him” (11:6, esv). He reasons that it is entirely proper to infer from Genesis that Abel and Enoch believed God, even though unstated, because the biblical text does indicate that they pleased God, and pleasing God is impossible apart from faith. On the same premise the writer to the Hebrews proceeds to tell how Noah also pleased God though, again, Genesis does not say that he believed God but only that he “found favor in the eyes of the Lord” (Gen 6:8, esv).[1] The author of Hebrews insists that because Abel, Enoch, and Noah received God’s commendation, these men acted “by faith” since this is the only way anyone can receive God’s praise. The same reasoning exegetically infers from Genesis that “by faith” Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Moses’ parents, Moses, and others all received God’s commendation, even though the text of Genesis does not expressly state that any of them believed God. Of Abraham alone the text of Genesis expressly states that “he believed God” and that his faith was reckoned for righteousness (Gen 15:6).[2]

So, what does this have to do with Paul’s argument in Romans 2? With apologies to Paul, “Much in every way!” The fact that he uses neither “faith” nor “believe” with God as the object and humans as actors throughout Rom 2:1-3:8 is hardly “the dog that did not bark.” Why should anyone take the argument from silence as convincing that when Paul affirmatively announces that in the Day of Judgment God will recompense everyone who does good with eternal life (2:7, 10) and that doers of the law will be justified (2:13), he is referring not to actual but to theoretical people? If, as Paul argues, Gentiles are obedient to God and pleasing to him, does not he imply that they do so “by faith”? Does not the fact that Paul speaks of “those who do good” (2:7, 10) instead of “those who believe,” or that he does not write “the believers will be justified” but rather “the doers will be justified” (2:13), or that there are Gentiles “who do the things required by the law” (2:14) and that “they show the engraved work of the law in their hearts” (2:15) require his readers to infer that such behavior is impossible apart from faith in God who rewards those who seek him? More emphatically than this, when Paul positively and unequivocally asserts that (1) God will grant eternal life to everyone who does good, that (2) the doers of the law will be justified, that (3) if the uncircumcised keep the law’s righteous requirements, that one’s uncircumcision will be reckoned as circumcision, and that (4) the one who is a Jew inwardly, whose circumcision is not of the flesh but of the Spirit will receive praise from God, does Paul not require readers to infer that praise from God comes to these “by faith,” just as the writer to the Hebrews exegetically infers faith’s activity from the portrayals throughout Genesis of the patriarchs whom God commends? On solid biblical-exegetical reasoning do we not correctly infer that Gentiles, of whom Paul writes in Romans 2, behave by faith in God given their receipt of eternal life, of justification, and of God’s praise? Does not the apostle Paul agree with the writer to the Hebrews that God commends none apart from faith?

In Romans 2, Paul’s silence concerning “faith” and “believe” certainly is conspicuous, but its conspicuousness calls for much greater attention than it receives. Why does Paul avoid using “faith” and “believe” in his argument within Romans 2? What if he designs his text to imitate the text of Genesis? What if, like Genesis, he wants to draw attention to Abraham as the father of all who “believe” (Rom. 4:16), including the Gentiles of whom he speaks in Romans 2? Does this not account for the conspicuous absence of “faith” and “believe”? Would any exegete, who contends that Paul’s argument in Romans 2 which indicts his imaginary Jewish dialog partner as it tells of obedience by Gentiles that is perfect but only theoretical, expound the text of Genesis in the same way when it repeatedly indicates that the Lord approves of Abel, Enoch, Noah and many others with explicit mention of “faith” or “believe” conspicuously absent throughout Genesis? Surely none of them would suggest that the writer to the Hebrews drew an unwarranted exegetical inference that “by faith” Abel and Enoch received God’s approval. Paul’s reasoning in Romans 2 follows the same pattern. Just as Genesis ably portrays the activity of human faith without explicit use of either “faith” or “believe” but by way of God’s approval of individuals, the apostle Paul argues that there are Gentiles who “receive praise not from man but from God” (Rom. 2:29). Consequently, Paul’s reasoning requires readers to draw the proper inference, namely, that God’s praise comes to these Gentiles “by faith,” even though he suppresses explicit uses of “faith” and “believe.”[3]

[1] See Schreiner and Caneday, The Race Set Before Us (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 2001), 89-91.

[2] Hebrews 11 correlates well with James 2:14-26, including concerning Abraham (11:11-12, 17-19) and Rahab (11:31). Like James 2, Hebrews 11 does not paradigmatically feature Genesis 15:6 as Paul does concerning God’s commendation of Abraham. Genesis features the singularity of Abraham as the patriarch of whom two things are explicitly stated, “He believed the Lord” and “he reckoned it to him for righteousness.” For this reason Paul uses Abraham especially in Galatians and Romans.

[3] This blog entry is adapted from “Judgment, Behavior and Justification according to Paul’s Gospel in Romans 2,” an essay that is forthcoming in the Journal for the Study of Paul & His Letters.

 

Ardel Caneday (Ph.D., Trinity Evangelical Divinity School) is Professor of New Testament Studies and Biblical Studies at Northwestern College in St. Paul, Minnesota. He has served churches in various pastoral roles, including senior pastor. He has authored numerous journal articles, many essays in books, and has co-authored with Thomas Schreiner the book The Race Set Before Us: A Biblical Theology of Perseverance and Assurance(Inter-Varsity, 2001).