ROMANS 2:5-16

A Paper

Presented to

Dr. Curt Horn

North Greenville University

In Partial Fulfillment

of the Requirements for CHST 2390

by

Konrad D. Schimmel

December 3, 2009

INTRODUCTION

Paul’s letter to the Roman church contains many great

theological truths that apply both to believers then and now.

Rom 2:5-16 contains such an important theological truth that

applies to believers of both the past and present. The purpose

of this paper is to complete a verse-by-verse exposition of Rom

2:5-16 and apply its message to modern Christians and churches.

This exposition will be carried out in several steps.

First, the historical-cultural background of Romans will be

examined to raise awareness of the circumstances surrounding the

writing of Romans and the relationship that Paul had with the

church at Rome. Second, the literary context will examine the

structure of Romans as a whole and how Rom 2:5-16 fits into the

immediate context of chapters one through three. Third, a verse-

by-verse exegesis will reveal the meaning of the text to the

Roman church. Lastly, an application section will state the

theological principle of Rom 2:5-16 and give specific

applications of this principle for the modern believers and

Churches.

1

Historical-Cultural Context

Paul wrote Romans in A.D. 57.1 No scholarly debate exist

concerning the Pauline authorship of Romans. Paul addresses his

letter to all the believers in Rome (Rom 1:7). He wrote Romans

at the end of his third missionary journey while he spent the

winter in Corinth (Acts 20:2-3). Paul, while in Corinth,

prepared to deliver to the church at Jerusalem the offering he

had been collecting during his third missionary journey and then

heading to Rome (Rom 15:25-28). Also, Paul prepares to enter his

next phase of missions to Spain and beyond, which he tells the

Roman church about (Rom 15:17-28).2 Paul spent three months in

Corinth which would have given him the time he needed to write

such an extensive letter as Romans.3

Paul’s relationship to the Roman church is unique because

Paul was not the founder of the church of Rome. Christianity

came to Rome through Romans that were saved on the day of

2

1Moo J. Douglas, “Romans,” Zondervan Illustrated Bible Backgrounds Commentary. (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2002), 3:3.

2Ibid., 3:5.

3J.D.G. Dunn, “Romans, Letter To The,” Dictionary of Paul and His Letters 238.

Pentecost in Acts 2.4 Thus Paul does not write to the Romans as

a founding father like he did in other epistles. Romans acts as

more of Paul’s first formal communication to the Roman Church as

he seeks to gain the Church’s support for his missions work to

unreached people like those in Spain (Rom 15:20-24), to spread

the Gospel even further among the Gentiles in Rome (Rom 1:13),

to encourage and clarify the gospel to the believers in Rome

(Rom 1:8-12; 15:15), and to address the tension between the Jew

and Gentile believers in Rome. Paul did know many Christians in

Rome, as evidenced by his personal address to many of them in

chapter 16. These relationships would have made him aware of any

problems in the church of Rome, and would allow him to know what

he needed to tell the church at Rome.5

The church at Rome experienced a very significant event in

A.D. 49 when Emperor Claudius exiled all Jews from Rome. The

reason for this expulsion came from Jews arguing about Christ.6

3

4Acts 2:10 says that “visitors from Rome” were present on the day of Pentecost. All Bible references hereafter will be from the ESV.

5Walter A. Elwell and Robert W. Yarbrough, Encountering The New Testament: A Historical and Theological Survey, 2nd ed.(Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2005), 276.

6R.B. Edwards, “Rome,” Dictionary of New Testament Background, (Downers Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press, 2000), 1014.

The Jews were allowed back into Rome in A.D. 54, when Claudius

died. When the Jewish Christians returned to Rome, they were the

minorities in the church and the sudden influx of Jewish

believers created tension between the Gentile and Jewish

believers. Paul writes Romans to help reconcile the tension

between the Gentile and Jewish believers.

Literary Context

The Structure of Romans

Romans literary form fits that of an epistle, but the exact

genre of the letter does not fit into a neat category. Scholars

throughout the ages have tried classify Romans into a genre, but

the unique nature of the letter is the only defining factor. The

letter of Romans does hold similarities to the diatribe style of

argument that Stoic philosophers used.7 The use of rhetorical

questions and dialogue directed toward an imaginary person that

participates in the dialogue defines the diatribe style.8 Recent

scholarship also suggests that diatribes specific purpose was to

4

7Moo, “Romans,” Zondervan Illustrated Bible Backgrounds Commentary 8.

8J.D.G. Dunn, “Romans, Letter To The.” Dictionary of Paul and His Letters. (Downers Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press, 1993), 241.

clarify truth to converts and followers.9 This purpose fits

Paul’s use of diatribe as he seeks to clarify the truths of the

Gospel to the tense church at Rome. Paul’s argument and the

issues that he seeks to clarify through this diatribe can be

seen in an outline of the book.

1. God’s Righteousness (1-3)

a) God’s hatred of Unrighteousness (1)

b) God’s righteous judgement (2-3)

2. Man’s need of faith in order to be righteous (4-7)

a) Abraham’s example (4)

b) Christ makes righteousness possible for sinners (5-6)

c) The law’s role in salvation (7)

3. The results of salvation (8)

4. Summary of salvation history (9-11)

5. The fruit of a redeemed Life (12-15)

6. Paul’s future plans and final greeting (15-16)

Paul begins Romans with an introduction where he explains

his longing to come and see the believers in Rome. He proclaims

the power of the Gospel (Rom 1:16) and clarifies how this

powerful Gospel works throughout the rest of the letter. He

5

9Moo, “Romans,” Zondervan Illustrated Bible Backgrounds Commentary 8.

begins with the righteousness of God and how this righteousness

rightly condemns both the unrighteous Jew and Gentile(1-3) Paul

goes on to explain that the unrighteous can be saved and he

gives the example of Abraham’s saving faith and how Christ’s

sacrifice overcomes the death that Adam’s sin brought to all

mankind (4-6). Christ death also overcomes sins use of the law

to condemn humanity (7). The salvation that Christ brings to the

unrighteous gives new life, makes believers God’s children,

gives believers hope for the future, and power over condemnation

(8). Paul outlines how God began his plan of salvation back in

the days of the patriarchs and he now offers salvation to all

(9-11). Paul clarifies for his Jewish audience that the fact

that God has offered salvation to all does not mean that God has

reject Israel (Rom 11:11). He then clarifies how believers

should act in their attitude (12), their respect of authority

(13), and their actions (14).10 Paul then moves on to discuss how

he plans to spread the Gospel he just eloquently explained to

the unreached people of the world, and he wants the Romans

support behind him as he moves into this new mission field (15).

He ends the letter with warnings against false teaching and

divisions.

6

10Specifically in respect to eating food offered to idols.

The Immediate Context of Romans 2:5-16

When Paul begins his clarification of the Gospel, he starts

with the fact that God is righteous (Rom 1:17) and how God has

given people over to their sinful desires because they rejected

His kindness (Rom 1:24,26,28;2:4). Rom 2:5-16 comes after these

verses on man’s rejection of God and before Paul deals with

Jewish hypocrisy in the second part of chapter 2.

Exegesis

Paul saw a clear need in the Roman church to clarify the

truths of the Gospel to a church that consisted of two very

distinct groups that had been separated for years before being

reunited. Paul discusses significantly in Rom 2:5-16 about the

relationship that Jews and Gentiles have before God.

5) Paul begins with the conjunction “but.” This conjunction

sets God’s kindness that should lead people to repentance (Rom

2:4) in contrast with the response of the hard, unrepentant

hearts of the unrighteous (Rom 2:5). The unrepentant heart

results in God’s wrath being built up (“storing up) until the

day of judgment. Jews commonly held the idea of God judging

people by there works on the “day of wrath.”11 Paul and the other

7

11see Isa 2:11-12; Amos 5:18; Mal 3:2.

apostles also spoke frequently of the “day of wrath,” “that

day,”or the “day of the Lord.”12 The Old Testament also refers to

God judging people by their works, and Paul and the Jews in the

Church of Rome would have been aware of verses like Psalms 62:12

and Proverbs 24:12, which Paul may have been directly

referencing when he speaks of the day of wrath here.13

6) On this day of judgment God will look at the works that

each person has done and give them what they rightly deserve.

This verse does not teach works based salvation. Paul clearly

teaches in his whole body of work that, “For by grace you have

been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is

the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may

boast.”14 Paul also mentions grace repeatedly throughout Romans

as being the means by which believers are justified.15 Paul also

does not teach that God ignores works.16 If he ignored what

people did, then there would be no need for a day of judgment.

8

12see Matt 7:22; 1 Cor 5:5; 1 Thess 5:2; 2 Tim 4:8.

13Craig S. Keener, The IVP Bible Background Commentary: New Testament (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1993), 417.

14Ephesians 2:8-9 (English Standard Version).

15see Rom 1:5, 3:20,24,28, 5:15,17, 6:14-15, 11:5-6.

16See 1 Cor 5:10.

Paul’s thought that God judges fairly according to what people

have done begins a chiastic structure that continues through to

the repetition of this point.17 the first point in this chiasm’s

argument is that God judges all equally based on what they have

done.

7) The second point in Paul’s chiasm says God rewards those

that seek the things of God with eternal life. Paul expands the

first point of the chiasm by giving a specific example of God

rendering fairly to those that do good a proper reward. Paul

mentions three things that are sought: glory, honor, and

immortality. All four are not physical actions of good, like

helping, but spiritual. Thus they deserve a spiritual reward

like eternal life. The reward matches the works that Paul

mentions.

8) Point three in the chiasm says God punishes those that

sought their own will (“self-seeking”) above Gods. Since these

people did not seek what was right they receive the proper

punishment of “wrath and furry.”

9) Paul immediately repeats this point in the chiasm as the

next point in the chiasm. Paul’s point again stands that evil

9

17See Appendix 1 for the English Standard version of the text set in a mechanical layout format. The parallelism in the chiastic structure can be seen in verses 6-11.

will be punished harshly on the day of judgment. He also adds

that the punishment for the above actions will be given to the

Jew first and then to the Gentiles. Paul used this phrase at the

beginning of Romans to refer to salvation as being to the Jews

and then to the Gentiles (1:16). Paul carries this thought

further to apply to the Jews also getting punished first on the

day of Judgement.18 Paul addresses here both key groups in the

church of Rome: Jews and Gentiles.19

10) Point two in the chiasm repeats here. Paul again states

that God will reward good. He also repeats the parallel

statement that he stated at the end of his last statement. He

repeats the Jew first and Gentile next thought, except he now

applies it to rewards. God gives the Jews priority in both

punishment and rewards.

11) The last point of the chiasm says that God does not show

favoritism (“no partiality”) to anyone. Chiastic structures

usually emphasize the middle point as the main point of the

10

18Douglas J. Moo, Romans, The NIV Application Commentary, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2000), 75.

19Paul will continue to mention both Jew and Gentile throughout Romans and this passage as he clarifies issues between these two groups.

chiasm’s argument.20 In this passage, the outer points (Rom

2:6,11) contain the main point.21 The middle point (Rom 2:8-9)

does not capture the overarching argument of Paul in the first

part of Romans. Paul means to emphasize that God judges both

evil and good fairly, and not that God punishes evil. Paul does

teach that God punishes evil, but Paul also states repeatedly in

this passage that God rewards good. For every statement that

Paul makes on God punishing evil (Rom 2:8-9), he also states

that God rewards good (Rom 2:7,10). This chiastic structure

holds both God’s punishment of sin and rewarding of good in

equal standing. Thus the main point of the chiasm must be the

logical conclusion of God both punishing evil and rewarding

good: God shows no partiality to either Jew or Gentile.

12) Paul further elaborates on God’s impartiality in judgment

with the conjunction “for” at the beginning of the next three

sentences which justify the impartiality claim of the chiastic

structure that Paul just completed.

11

20The simplified version of the chiasm looks like this:A. God judges fairly (6)

B. God rewards good (7)C. God punishes evil (8)D. God punishes evil. (9)

E. God rewards good (10)F. God show no partiality (11)

21Moo, Illustrated Bible Background Commentary 3:16.

First, God shows impartiality by judging both the Jews

(“sinned under the law”) and Gentiles (“sinned without the law”)

based on their sins in respect to what they knew about God’s

standards. The law in this verse refers to the Mosaic law that

the Jews received from God. Jews in Rome would have grown up

learning this law and taking pride in the fact that God had

given this law to the Jews alone. The Jews looked down on the

Gentiles because they had been given the Mosaic Law and the

Gentiles had not.22 Paul references both the Jew’s and Gentile’s

knowledge of the Mosaic law here and says that God judges both.

Neither Jew not Gentile escapes judgment, which shows again

God’s fairness, and it defeats one reason that Jews believed

made them superior to Gentiles.

13) The second “for” sentence shows God’s impartiality by

saying that only those that keep the law will be justified by

it. God can judge those that have the Mosaic law the same as

those that do not have the Mosaic law because hearing the law

does not equate to obeying the law. God justifies those that

keep the Mosaic law and not just know it(“the doers of the law

will be justified”). Therefore God shows no favoritism because

12

22Grant R. Osborne, Romans, The IVP New Testament Commentary Series, (Downers Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press, 2004), 67.

he holds the Jews whom he told his law to directly and set apart

as his special people to the same standard as the Gentiles. Both

groups must obey the law in order to be justified.23

To the Gentiles obeying the law probably seemed unfair.

Since God judges based on people keeping the law, the Jews seem

to be at an extreme advantage over the Gentiles because God

directly told the Jews what he wanted them to do. So even if the

Jews did not always obey the law they at least knew what God

expected from them. The Gentiles seem to have no hope of keeping

the law unless they accidentally obey the law without knowing

they had obeyed it.

14) Paul clarifies this confusion by stating that Gentiles know

the law, the general requirements of God, “by nature.” The Greek

word used here for “by nature” is phusis.24 In this context

Phusis refers to Gentile’s being born with a natural

understanding of right and wrong. Thus, Gentiles can obey the

law because they naturally know the basic requirements of God.

The Gentiles may lack knowledge of the formal statement of the

law in the form of the Mosaic law, but they do know the basics

13

23Paul makes clear that keeping the law is impossible in Romans 3.

24See Appendix 2 for a full word study of phusis.

of what God requires from people. Since both the Jews and

Gentiles know what God expects from them, he can judge both

fairly and neither group has an advantage over the other.

Paul talks about two kinds of law in concerns to the

Gentiles. The first reference to the law in this sentence means

the Mosaic law. The law that Paul refers to when he say the

Gentiles “by nature do what the law requires” means they know

the expectations of God but not the law of Moses. This makes

sense because Paul says in the same sentence that the Gentiles

“do not have the law.” Paul would contradict himself if he was

referring to the Mosaic law every time the law was mentioned in

this sentence.

15) Paul then states the conclusion of the Gentiles knowing

what the law requires: the Gentiles show evidence that they know

the requirements of the law (“the law is written on their

hearts”). Some believe that Paul refers to Gentile Christians

here and throughout Romans 2 because Paul would be contradicting

his later teaching on those with saving faith being the only

ones that can do works that justify them before God (Rom 3:24)

and can have the law written on their heart (Jer 31:33).

Three possibilities exist to explain this contradiction:

the Gentiles are saved by their works, the Gentiles are not

14

Christians, or the Gentiles are Christians.25 The Gentiles cannot

be saved by works because then Paul would be teaching heresy.

The Bible nowhere says that works outside of faith saves, and

Paul teaches consistently that faith justifies not works,

especially in Romans.26 Therefore explanation two or three must

be correct.

The explanation that Paul is referring to unregenerate

Gentiles fits the context if taken to be hypothetical. Paul

would thus be saying that Gentiles and Jews could be saved if

they kept the law. This explanation fits Paul’s wording in this

section as Moo points out in his commentary that Paul does not

mention faith or Christians in this passage.27 Thus the Jews and

Gentiles in Romans 2 are not saved by faith at all but

hypothetically justified by keeping the law if they could (Rom

3:23). This explanation fits the overall context of Paul’s

argument as a whole as well. Paul moves his argument in Romans

from his hypothetical musings on what one must do to be judged

rightly before God (Romans 2) to laying out his case that no one

15

25Adrio Kömig, "Gentiles or Gentile Christians? On the meaning of Romans 2:12-16." Journal of Theology for Southern Africa, no. 15 (June 1976): 53.

26Rom 3:27-28,30; 5:1; Gal 2:16; 5:6.

27Moo, Romans, NIV Application Commentary, 81.

can keep the law (Rom 3:9-20,23).28 This explanation resolves the

conflict of Paul seemingly contradicting his teaching on

salvation by grace. Commentator Thomas Schreiner agrees with

this position, and he cites numerous other commentators that

uphold this view.29

The third possibility of the Gentiles being Christians has

also been held by many. There however exist numerous problems

with this possibility. First, as mentioned earlier, Paul does

not mention anywhere in this passage either faith or Christians.

Second, the appeal to Paul referencing Jer 31:33 in verse 15 as

proof for the Gentile Christian argument does not agree with the

meaning of Rom 2:15. Jer 31:33 prophesies the new covenant in

which God will write His law on the hearts of those under the

new covenant. If Paul happens to be referencing this verse in

Rom 2:15, then the Gentile Christian argument stands as a likely

explanation to Paul’s seeming contradiction. The wording of

Jeremiah 31:33 matches the wording of Rom 2:15 which also says

that the law is written on the Gentile’s heart; however, these

verses only match in lettering and not in meaning. Rom 2:15

16

28 Moo, “Romans,” The NIV Life Application Commentary, 80-81.

29Schreiner, Romans, 114.

relates back to the natural law that the Gentiles know from

birth and not to a law that was written on their heart due to

saving faith.30 Also, Jeremiah clearly states that God’s law will

be written on the hearts of the new covenant believers. Paul

instead speaks of the “works of the law” being written on the

hearts of the Gentiles in Rom 2:15 and not the law itself.31

Thus, Rom 2:15 lacks proof for the Gentile Christian

explanation.32

Paul also point out that the Gentile’s conscience also

helped the Gentiles know whether they were following the law

(“bears witness”). The conscience here refers to the Greek idea

that the conscience is an inner awareness of right and wrong.33

Paul uses conscience in this sense repeatedly through out his

letters.34 Gentile’s thoughts also can be “conflicting” when they

17

30See again the word study in appendix 2 and the explanation of verse 14 on page 13-14.

31Kömig, "Gentiles or Gentile Christians?”, 59.

32More than three possible explanations for the seeming contradiction in Paul’s teaching exist, but only the three most significant have been discussed here.

33Grant R. Osborne,, Romans, The IVP New Testament Commentary Series, (Downers Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press, 2004), 69-70.

34See 1 Cor 10:27; 2 Cor 4:2; 1 Tim 3:9.

try to keep the law. Gentiles thought process can either

“accuse” them of their disobedience, or it justifies their wrong

doing (“excuse”).

16) Whatever reasoning Gentiles use will not matter, because

God knows all their reasons for why they did everything they

ever did (“the secrets of man”). God will discern these reasons

and will judge accordingly on the day of the Lord. He will not

only look at the secrets motives of the Gentiles but also of the

Jews. Paul uses the generic term “men” instead of a more

specific word because Paul will be discussing the “secret”

motives of the Jews next and thus uses this to transition from

Gentiles to Jews. Paul fittingly ends this section (Rom 2:16) of

scripture the same way he began it (Rom 2:5) by mentioning the

day of the Lord. The idea of the day of the Lord incapsulates

the whole of what Paul has discussed.

In Conclusion, Paul discuses God’s impartial judgement on

the day of the Lord in Rom 2:5-16. Paul specifically relates

God’s impartial judgement to the two distinct groups of the

Roman church: Jew and Gentiles. He shows how neither on will be

treated any differently on the day of the Lord. They will both

be rewarded for good and punished for evil.

18

Application

Paul’s teaching in Rom 2:5-16 gives no specific

application; however, it does give powerful truth about God. The

particular situation to which Paul writes does not exist in

churches today. Churches do not have a group of people exiled

and then brought back in after years, especially two such

distinct groups as the Jews and Gentiles; however, the truth

that this passage teaches about God still has profound impact

today. Thus, the purpose of this application will be to state

the theological principle of Rom 2:5-16 in light of the exegesis

and the other teachings of Paul, and to make a relevant

application of this principle for the Church today.

In Paul’s day, this passage taught a church with two very

distinct groups within it that they were both sinners and would

both be judged on the day of the Lord based on their works. More

importantly, Rom 2:5-16 taught them about how God will judge

both Jews and Gentiles on that day and through this knowledge

showed the Jews in Rome that they were not superior to Gentiles

because they knew the standards by which God would judge. Thus,

a careful examination of Rom 2:5-16 renders the following

theological principle: God is completely impartial in his

judgment of sin on the day of judgment.

19

This theological principle greatly effects how believers

should view others. Since God shows no favoritism in his

judgment on the last day, no one has a reason to think of

themselves more highly than others like the Jews did to the

Gentiles. No matter what race, age, gender, religion, heritage,

or material wealth defines a person, God will judge all these

people the same, and he has made his law known to all so that no

one has an unfair advantage in knowing what they should do.

This principle should result in praise in the believers

life because they have been saved from the punishment of God’s

judgement when they have to give their account on the day of

judgement (2 Cor 5:10; Rev 20:12-13). Unbelievers should respond

in fear and repentance as they will rightly be judged and

punished as sinners should be with eternity in Hell (Rev 20:15).

20

APPENDIX 1

Mechanical Layout of Romans 2:5-16

(5) But because of your hard and impenitent heart you are storing up wrath for yourself on the day of wrath -when God’s righteous judgment will be revealed.

(6) He will render to each one according to his works:(7) to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life;

(8) but for those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, there will be wrath and fury.

(9) There will be tribulation and distress for every human being who does evil, the Jew first and

21

also the Greek,

(10) but (There will be) glory And honor and peace for everyone who does good, the Jew first and also the Greek.

(11) For God shows no partiality.

(12) For All who have sinned without the law will also perish without the law, and all who have sinned under the law will be judged by the law. (13) For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the law who will be justified. (14) For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves,

22

even though35 they do not have the law. (15) They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, While their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them (16) on that day when, -according to my gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus.

23

35This is not a formal coordinating conjunction but it is acting like one here.

APPENDIX 2

Word Study of Physis

In Romans 2:14, Paul says, “For when Gentiles, who do not

have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law

to themselves, even though they do not have the law.” The Greek

word φυσισ (“nature”) holds significance to the meaning of verse

14 and to chapter two. Φυσισ is a noun that occurs only a few

times in the Νew Testament. To gain a better understanding of

φυσισ this study will examine φυσισ’s use in classical Greek,

the LXX, other writings, and the New Testament.

In classical Greek, φυσισ could refer to lineage, created

things, the power of growth, appearance, and the natural order.

This word also held philosophical significance to the Stoics and

Aristotle. Aristotle used φυσισ to refer to humans as being

naturally political beings. The stoics used φυσισ to refer to

the god of nature. The Stoics also saw nature(φυσισ) as the way

one should live, and they distinguished nature from the law.

Nature, to the Stoics, was good.36

24

36G. Harper, “φυσισ,” The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, 2:657-58.

In the LXX φυσισ only occurs in the Apocrypha. The Hebrews

had no equivalent to φυσισ because they perceived everything as

being created by God, not by nature. In the Apocrypha it is used

to mean a characteristic, like someone having the characteristic

of being good or loving. Φυσισ can also be used to say that the

law does what is best for people’s nature. Φυσισ also refers to

the natural order of creation.37

Other writers like Philo and Josephus used the word φυσισ

in their writings. One of the first Jewish writers to adopt

φυσισ was Philo. He altered φυσισ to agree with Jewish thought.

To Philo φυσισ meant the work of God, and this work creates

things like humanity. In relation to the law, Philo saw the law

as being “the true word of nature(φυσισ),” and nature supports

the law. Philo also used φυσισ to speak of the nature of man,

creation, and the natural order of something.38

Josephus used φυσισ in three ways. First, He used φυσισ to

mean character, like the Apocrypha did. Also, φυσισ can mean all

of creation. Third, Josephus used φυσισ to mean the natural

25

37Ibid,. 658-59.

38 Verlyn D. Verbrugge, ed.,“φυσισ,” The NIV Theological Dictionary of New Testament Words, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 200) 1318.

order of the world. Things can be considered part of the natural

order or not part of the natural order.

Φυσισ, in the New Testament, occurs mostly in Romans39 and

the other letters of Paul. The semantic range is as follows.

1. Φυσισ most commonly means what naturally occurs, like the

qualities that people are born with. In Galatians 2:15 Φυσισ

refers to Paul and others as being Jews by birth/nature.

Similarly, in Romans 11 Paul uses the picture of an olive

tree that possesses its natural branches and has grafted

branches that are wild by nature.

2. Φυσισ can also mean kind or species. James 3:7 uses Φυσισ in

this sense to refer to kinds of animals that can be tamed.

3. Another meaning of Φυσισ is nature of God. In 1 Peter 1:14

Peter uses the Greek θειασ φυσεως to refer to the divine

nature of God.

The use of Φυσισ in Rom 2:14 agrees with first use of Φυσισ

to mean what occurs naturally. Rom 2:14 uses Φυσισ to say that

gentiles naturally know the law. This use of Φυσισ makes sense

in light of the use of Φυσισ by Philo and the Stoics. To the

Stoics and Philo nature was good, and the Stoics believed that

26

39Occurs seven times as a noun and two more times as an adjective. Harper, “φυσισ,” The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, 2:660.

by following nature one would do what is right. Philo used Φυσισ

to say that the true words of nature were law. Thus φυσισ means,

in verse 14, that the gentiles knew the law naturally because

people can know right and wrong through nature. God made

everything so it is not preposterous to think that God could

make his law known to people “by nature.” This use of φυσισ also

makes the most sense in the context of Rom 2:5-16. The other two

New Testament uses of φυσισ, kind and nature of God, do not fit

the context. Paul uses φυσισ in his letters to usually refer to

what naturally occurs. Therefore, Paul taught the Roman church

that Gentiles knew naturally what was right to do, and thus they

obeyed parts of the law even though they did not know the Mosaic

law.

27

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Brown, Colin, ed. The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology. 4 vols. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1984.

Danker, Frederick William, ed. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and other Early Christian Literature. 3rd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000.

Dunn, J.D.G. “Romans, Letter To The.” Pages 838-56. Dictionary of Paul and His Letters. ed. Gerald F. Hawthorne and Ralph P. Martin. Downers Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press, 1993.

Elwell, Walter A., Robert W. Yarbrough. Encountering The New Testament: A Historical and Theological Survey. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2005.

Keener, Craig S. The IVP Bible Background Commentary: New Testament. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1993.

Kömig, Adrio. "Gentiles or Gentile Christians? On the meaning of Romans 2:12-16." Journal of Theology for Southern Africa, no. 15 (June 1976): 53-60.

Moo, Douglas J. Romans. The NIV Application Commentary. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2000.

Moo, Douglas J. “Romans.” Zondervan Illustrated Bible Backgrounds Commentary. ed. Clinton E. Arnold. 4 vols. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2002.

Osborne, Grant R. Romans. The IVP New Testament Commentary Series. Downers Grove, IL: Intervarsity Press, 2004.

Schreiner, Thomas R. Romans. Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1998.

28

CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Historical-Cultural Context. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Literary Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

The Structure of ROMANS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

The Immediate Context of ROMANS 2:5-16 . . . . . . . . 7

Exegesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Application. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

APPENDIX

1. Mechanical Layout . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

2. Word Study of Physis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

iii