13 (for not the hearers of the law are just in the sight of God, but the doers of the law will be justified;
13 (for
The word “for” explains the difference between those with negative and those with positive volition toward God’s revelation.
not the hearers of the law
“Hearer” here is not the usual Greek word for hear. The Greek uses this word for those whose business it is to listen; it is their characteristic to hear. The Jew often heard the Old Testament read in their synagogues in the first century. There is no virtue in listening without applying to experience.
are just in the sight of God,
The word “just” means acquitted. It is the state of being right with God on the basis of responding positively to revelation. The word “just” fulfills all claims that are right and becoming, a right state (of which God and His Word are the standard). Those who hear but do not apply what they hear are not becoming to God, but God will not charge a fault against the person who hears and applies.
but [strong contrast] the doers [appliers] of the law will be justified [vindicated];
The doer of the law is a person who puts his will in a positive attitude toward God’s revelation. It is not enough to hear God’s Word, we must believe it. Those who listen to revelation but do not apply it are not just or right before God in their response to revelation.
Those who engage with revelation get God’s approval. Justification here does not refer to the justification of salvation but simply to God’s vindication of their positive volition toward revelation. There is nothing about justification by works in this verse. If there were, it would contradict passages that deal with justification by faith.
PRINCIPLE:
It is the business of the believer to engage with the Word of God in an active sense.
APPLICATION:
It is not enough that we have a clear understanding of justification by faith, we must embrace it with engaging belief. Correct doctrine does not equate with active volition. There is a difference between a mechanical belief and active, dynamic belief. There is no virtue in simply listening to God’s Word; the virtue lies in accepting it as true and acting upon it. There is a participatory aspect to belief.
It is the student’s business to listen in class. The student who takes the course for credit will take a test on what he hears. This is his business. The person who audits the course is not responsible for what he hears and will take no test on what he hears. It is the business of the believer to put to test what he knows about the Word of God. The Word of God should bring conviction and confession of sin.
Excellent! It is so good to 'hear' your teaching, Grant. You put it into words that is clear to understand.
Elma, you are a blessing as well.
The law Paul references in Rom. 2:13 is not the written code of OT law. The law Paul references was added after the ascension of Jesus Christ and put into effect at Pentecost. Heb. 7:12, Acts 2, Acts 7:53, Gal. 3:19. If it is assumed that the word law in Paul’s writings is always referencing OT law any interpretation of his writings on that basis is always an incorrect interpretation of Paul’s writings.
Theodore, note the contrast to Gentiles who did not have the law in the next verse. Any interpretation of the law in this and the next chapter other than the Mosaic law, the onus is upon them to make the assertion. Paul clearly is referencing the Jews according to 2:17ff.
There is not a law for the Jews to obey whereby they would be declared righteous by God and none also for a gentile. God is not a respecter of persons.
Theodore, would you be more specific about what you mean by “law.” Sometimes law is used in the sense of principle. Are you using law in that sense?
Sorry for not replying to your question. Your question needs to read “Why in the world does Paul unequivocally insist that it necessary to obey a law or not be declared righteous by God?” Therefore it is not me who is using law. Clear?
Have you ever read Heb. 7:12? What does the statement say?
Theodore, I had hoped you were not referring to convenantal nomism. That position is both an extrapolation from culture imposed on Scripture and uses “law” in a reductionistic sense. Be careful not to impose systems that do not allow for the extant statements in Scripture.