Romans Chapter Two Lesson 26
Intro
2:3-4:
How
can the “good” people, those considered the moral paragons of society who are
not idolaters come under the sweeping thesis that all have sinned and that they
too are going to have to come to grips with the issue of the righteousness of
God?
PRINCIPLES
RELATED TO JUDGING - IS IT SIN OR DISCERNMENT?
1. Judging may be a sin of the tongue. Mt 7:1-5
2.
The problem needed to be resolved is to determine when judging is a sin
of the tongue and when is it the bonifide result of discernment?
3. Some examples of the call to judge - to
exercise discernment.
a. Christ reproves the multitude
for failing to judge what is right. Lk 12:57
b. Christ gives us the mechanics
for legitimate judging. John 7:24
c. Paul instructs Timothy to
reprove and rebuke. 2 Tim 4:2
d. The
senses of the advancing believer are to be trained to discern between good and
evil. Heb 5:14
e.
There are certain categories of people that as believers we are to separate
from.
- 2 Tim
3:1-5; Rom
4.
Conclusion: There is a legitimate form of judging. Key then is to
determine what is legitimate and what is a S/O/T.
5. QUESTIONS that must be asked to correctly
evaluate this:
a. Does it stem from a Menatal Attitude Sin? [MAS]
Ps 5:9
b. What is the motivation? Jude 16 [is it personal gain; to gain power
or advantage over someone]
c. What is the criteria? What is the standard
of measurement?
Needs to be DVPT Jn 7:54; When it is it results in a righteous
judgment.
d. Is it based on the facts of the case and not speculation or rumor?
e. Right motivation +
Right criteria = Bonifide statement based on the facts
f. Conclusion:
Judging becomes a sin of the tongue when a statement is
made flowing out of a mental attitude sin or is a decision based on false
criteria that is not consistent with the Word of God.
6. Control of the tongue is a sign of one's
maturity. Jas 3:2
** There is a principle or an
insight that we should gain an understanding of from this section.
The Self-Righteous have an intrinsic blindness to their own faults.
They do not see that in reality they are doing the same things for which
they condemn others.
- Good
example of this is found in the life of David
2 Sam 12
2:3-4
Man’s Delusions [2 areas]
#1 About the
judgment of God. v:3
#2 About the
goodness of God. v:4
1. Man’s delusions about the judgment of God. v:3
They
are deluded that they will escape God’s judgment by taking God’s side in
condemning the unrighteous. Read vs:3
Paul
points out that their sin is identical in that they both, the one of chapter
one and of chapter 2,
fail to meet God’s standards.
How?
The heathen in chapter one does so by rejecting them;
While the S/R moral man of chapter 2 by affirming them and
then not abiding by them.
Human
judgment must be seen to differ from God’s in the following ways:
#1 Man’s judgment is avoidable.
#2 Man’s judgment cannot be perfect
because all of the facts can never be known.
#3 Man’s
judgment is fallible.
Addendum from last weeks
study that was not in the notes:
Ø
Observations:
1. Paul is not saying that they
had practiced all of the same things detailed in ch.1. where the focus is
primarily the vice list;
• One may have not bowed his knee to
some idol but who has not been guilty of envy, greed or slander?
• The point is that to do the same
things is to operate in the same rejection of truth pursuing the desires of
one's sin nature.
2. In the wider focus, Paul is
going to say they had not done all of the same things outwardly.
• with vs:16 Paul intimates that God is
going to judge the secret, the hidden things of man through Christ!
• Is it not common to have someone who
is outwardly good, but inwardly bad condemn another who is outwardly bad?
3. What Paul is doing here, I believe, is viewing
the sins of chapter 1 in a summary fashion.
The fundamental sin is sin against the light they
had. Thus the moral critic may have not
been guilty of committing all of the same sins, but he has committed the same sin, the sin against the
light they had. The light of their conscience.