DISCOURSE 2 ROMANS 9:30 – 10:21
THESIS: Some Gentiles received righteousness but some Jews did not (9:30-31)
9:30-33
‘What then shall we say? That the Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, have obtained it, a righteousness that is by faith; but the people of Israel, who pursued the law as the way of righteousness, have not attained their goal. Why not? Because they pursued it not by faith but as if it were by works. They stumbled over the stumbling stone. As it is written: “See, I lay in Zion a stone that causes people to stumble and a rock that makes them fall, and the one who believes in him will never be put to shame.” Rom 9:30-33 (NIV)
Paul now moves on from divine sovereignty to talk about human responsibility and addresses objections to the fact that God has chosen to save many Gentiles but only some Jews. This is clearly the beginning of a new section as he uses the expression; ‘What then shall we say?’ which often introduces a change of focus in Romans (4:1; 6:1; 7:7; 8:31) and here prompts the audience to think about Israel’s disobedience (10:21). The key word is this discourse is ‘righteousness’ (dikaiosynē) which occurs ten times.
He first mentions the Gentiles who, he says, did not pursue righteousness. How then did some of them ‘obtain’ this status (right standing with God) without having sought it?
Moo (1996, p.619) explains:
‘Paul returns (after using the term to refer to moral righteousness in chaps. 6-8) to the forensic meaning of righteousness that he established in chaps. 1-4: the “right” standing with God that is the product of God’s justifying work in Christ.’
Paul emphasises that this righteousness is ‘by faith’ (9:30), a fact that he has already made clear in 1:16-17 and in 3:21-4:25. Faith is possible on the part of the Gentle as well as the Jew (1:16) and this is why so many Gentiles are being saved.
In v.31 Paul then speaks of the Jews, who pursued a ‘law of righteousness’ but have not attained it. Unlike the Gentiles who ‘obtained’ (katelaben, lay hold of) righteousness, the Jews did not ‘attain’ (efthasen, reach) the goal. The reason Paul gives (v.32) was that they ‘pursued it not by faith but as if it were by works’ and thus ‘stumbled over the “stumbling-stone”.
He quotes from Isaiah 8:14 and 28:16, two passages that mention a ‘stone’, which he conflates to emphasize the negative point about Israel’s fall (he takes up the last part of the quotation again in 10:11 to make the positive point that Christ is the stone). By means of this composite quotation from Isaiah Paul stresses that Israel’s problem is failure to believe on Jesus Christ. He is their obstacle. The image is that of a race in which a runner is so preoccupied with the finishing line that he stumbles over a rock and falls.
10:1-4
‘Brothers and sisters, my heart’s desire and prayer to God for the Israelites is that they may be saved. For I can testify about them that they are zealous for God, but their zeal is not based on knowledge. Since they did not know the righteousness of God and sought to establish their own, they did not submit to God’s righteousness. Christ is the culmination of the law so that there may be righteousness for everyone who believes.’ Rom 10:1-4 (NIV)
Having explained in chapter 9 that not all of ethnic Israel will be saved, Paul expresses to the Christians (‘brothers’ 10:1) to whom he is writing his desire that ethnic Israel might be saved. He wants the Christian church to know that he takes no pleasure in the failure of ethnic Israel to attain salvation and stresses his sincerity with a statement of his petition on Israel’s behalf. He did not seem to sense any tension between his teaching on predestination in chapter 9 and his passionate prayer for Israel’s salvation. Divine election does not mean that prayer is neither necessary nor important. That Paul was continuing to pray for the salvation of Israel suggests that he did not accept that their present state of rejection was final.
He begins v.2 with the word ‘for’, thus indicating that he is going to give the reason for his prayer. He says: ‘I can testify about them’, which suggests that he can accurately comment on the matter as a result of his own personal experience. It is because they are ‘zealous for God, but their zeal is not based on knowledge.’ Their dedication was not in doubt but zeal (fervent devotion and passion) without knowledge is only fanaticism. Zeal alone does not bring salvation. Paul sums up the defectiveness of their understanding in v.3:
‘Since they did not know the righteousness that comes from God and sought to establish their own, they did not submit to God’s righteousness.’
The term ‘God’s righteousness’’ occurs twice in 10:3 and also in 1:17 and in 3:5; 21; 22 (along with references to ‘his righteousness’ in 3:25 and 26). Elsewhere in Paul it occurs only in 2 Corinthians 5:21 although there is a similar expression ‘the righteousness that comes from God’ in Philippians 3:9. Paul links ‘God’s righteousness’ with justification (3:21-26) and views it as God’s gift (5:17). The Jews, however, did not understand that the correct way to attain a righteous
standing before God was to ‘submit’ (10:3). Instead they sought to establish their own righteousness by practising good works. Schreiner (1998, p.544) concludes:
‘The reason, then, that the Jews did not subject themselves to the saving righteousness of God is because they were ignorant of the fact that righteousness was a gift of God’s grace and they mistakenly thought that they could secure their own righteousness by observing the Torah.’
In Romans 10:4 Paul makes an important and much debated statement: ‘Christ is the end of the law so that there might be righteousness for everyone who believes.’ The key terms are: ‘End,’ ‘Law,’ and ‘Righteousness.’ In any discussion of this verse one must try to explain the significance of these terms and identify the relationship of Christ to the law.
END
‘End’ (telos) may refer to a’ termination’/ ‘cessation’ or to a ‘purpose’/’goal.’ It may also refer to an ‘outcome’ (6:21). The three main views of its meaning in 10:4 are:
1) ‘Fulfilment’- All the OT institutions, types and rituals pointed to Christ and were fulfilled in him.
2) ‘Termination’ – The Mosaic Law as a covenant is finished. God’s people today are not bound to it. This view stresses the discontinuity between Christ and the law and is attractive because it bears in mind 7:6 where a release from the law has already been declared, and also the additional statement of 8:1 that all who are in Christ Jesus are no longer under condemnation.
3) ‘Goal’ – The purpose of the law was not to save, but to lead people to faith in Christ.
This does not mean that there was a full revelation of Christ throughout history but rather that God provided some details at various times about the one who would come and, based on the believing response to these revelations about Christ, righteousness was credited (10:6-9). These OT events and prophecies pointed to the coming of the Messiah and all the predictions culminated in him; the one whom Paul referred to as the ‘stone’ (9:33), called ‘Christ’ (10:4) and identified as ‘the Lord Jesus’ (10:9).
LAW
‘Law’ in 10:4 is sometimes taken to refer to law in its general sense but most scholars take it to mean the Law of Moses. The other two verses in the immediate context which mention ‘law’ (9:31; 10:5) would support this interpretation.
It is likely that Paul has in mind the Old Testament (which includes the Mosaic Law), a view which would better suit the idea that telos means ‘goal’. Paul does not distinguish between the Law of Moses and the rest of the OT in chapters 9-11. When, in each of the three chapters he speaks of his hope for the salvation of Israel (9:1-3; 10:1; 11:26), he supports his argument for salvation through faith with quotations from throughout the OT. Just before making the statement of 10:4 he has quoted from Isaiah (9:27; 28; 29; 33) rather than from the Pentateuch which suggests that in Paul’s view there is full agreement between all of the OT and the gospel that he preaches. He is contrasting two views regarding the function of the law. Non-elect Israelites thought of the law as a means of salvation; which was conditional on compliance with its demands (9:31-32). Paul saw the law rather as a body of truth which had to be believed for salvation. For him, Christ was the embodiment of that truth and was its goal.
RIGHTEOUSNESS
‘Righteousness’ is a characteristic of a person. Ziesler (1972, pp.7-8) explains what it might mean:
‘There are two main conceptions of the meaning of the noun. It is usually assumed without argument by Roman Catholic exegetes that it means “justice” in the sense of uprightness, rather than strict distributive justice or even forensic justice in general…The usual Protestant position however has been that righteousness as imputed in justification is real righteousness, which comes from God to man, but for forensic purposes only. Man is not righteous, but he is treated by God as if he were, because he stands clothed in the righteousness of Christ…Thus righteousness from God and justification are the same thing. Both are to do with the granting of a status before God, an undeserved status which in itself is not concerned with ethics, but which has ethical consequences.’
Paul has already taught (Rom. 4:4-5) that righteousness is not based on human effort but is a gift obtained by faith. He shows in 9:30 -10:4 that the Jews viewed the law as a goal in itself rather than realising that the OT pointed to Christ. He uses the OT to show that Christ was, and is, the necessary object of faith for salvation and stresses in 10:4 that the OT law fulfilled its revelatory function until the appearance of Christ, its end goal. He is the focus of salvation history. Moo (1996, p. 640) views v.4 as:
‘The hinge on which the entire section 9:30-10:13 turns. It justifies Paul’s claim that the Jews, by their preoccupation with the law, have missed God’s righteousness (9:30-10:3); for righteousness is now found only in Christ and only through faith in Christ, the one who has brought the law to its climax and thereby ended its reign. It also announces the theme that Paul will expound in 10: 5-13: righteousness by faith in Christ for all who believe.’
10:5-8
‘Moses writes this about the righteousness that is by the law: “The person who does these things will live by them.” But the righteousness that is by faith says: “Do not say in your heart, ‘Who will ascend into heaven?’” (that is, to bring Christ down) “or ‘Who will descend into the deep?’” (that is, to bring Christ up from the dead). But what does it say? “The word is near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart,” that is, the message concerning faith that we proclaim:’ Rom 10:5-8 (NIV)
In vv. 5-7 Paul contrasts righteousness ‘by faith’ with righteousness ‘by the law’ and uses two OT verses to argue against attempting to establish righteousness by means of the Mosaic Law. In v. 5 he writes: ‘Moses describes in this way the righteousness that is by the law’ and gives a quotation from Leviticus 18:5: ‘The Man who does these things will live by them.’
‘The verse is not speaking about the attainment of eternal life; and Paul clearly does not believe that the OT teaches that righteousness is based on the law (see Rom 4). Paul is not, therefore, claiming that Christ has replaced the old way of salvation – by obedience to the law- with a new one- by faith in Christ.’ Schreiner (1993, p.125) points out that:
This is a righteousness based on works. Many interpret Leviticus 18:5 as promising eternal life, if the standard is met. If one performs the
righteousness of the law he will live. The context of Lev. 18:5, however, has to do with Israel’s obedience to God’s commands in order to prolong their blessings in the Promised Land. Nehemiah used this verse (9:29-30) to explain that their disobedience to the law resulted in their subjugation by hostile nations. Ezekiel (18: 9; 13) refers to the verse when discussing the execution of those who violate certain commandments. Leviticus 18:5 does not therefore refer to eternal life but to obedience to God’s commands in order to stay alive. Moo (1996, p.648) observes:
‘Paul’s statement in v.5 only makes sense if it is assumed that no one can perfectly obey the law. The attempt to gain righteousness by the law is excluded precisely because no one has the ability to put into effect what the law demands.’
Paul does not deal at all here with the impossibility of keeping the law as he has already covered the topic in 3:9-20. He is arguing that the perfect keeping of the law is to be rejected as a viable method of obtaining righteousness because Christ has accomplished all that is required for salvation.
Having stated (10:5) that Moses spoke of ‘righteousness by the law,’ Paul introduces a different and opposing voice in v.6. This is the personified voice of ‘the righteousness that is by faith’ speaking words from Deuteronomy 9:4 and 30:11-14. It seems that Paul has come close to setting up one scripture in opposition to another (since Deuteronomy was also written by Moses).
In his discussion of this controversial use of scripture Schreiner (2002, pp.133-134) quotes Silva who:
‘… notes it is uncommon for NT writers to call into question the interpretation of opponents by setting forth an opposing contextual argument of the text in question. He goes on to say, “Jewish literature contemporary to the New Testament shows a similar hesitation to score points by refuting the opponent’s use of Scripture. And the later rabbinic scholars, as a rule, refuted an argument based on Scripture by counteracting with a different passage, not by demonstrating faulty hermeneutics.” In other words, Paul cites the OT in Rom 10:6-8 to show that obeying the law is not the means of righteousness.’
Paul is explaining that God will not be impressed with human good works when his way of salvation is belief in the gospel. Just as the people to whom Moses spoke (Deut 30:11) had a message that was accessible to them, and not too difficult for them to understand, the same was true of the Israelites of Paul’s generation. They were not required to do the impossible. They did not need to ‘ascend into heaven’ in order to bring Christ down, or to ‘descend into the deep’ (since Christ was already resurrected from the dead). Just as the law had been brought down to the Israelites by Moses so also Jesus, the Messiah, had come down to earth. The message of righteousness by faith was ‘near’ Israel and this was the ‘word of faith’ that Paul was proclaiming.
10:9-10
‘If you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you profess your faith and are saved.’ Rom 10:9-10 (NIV)
In 10:9 Paul explains what it is that he preaches and the simplicity of the response that it demands. It has to do with the certainty of salvation through faith in Jesus Christ. Consistent with the order of his quotation from Deuteronomy (‘the word is near you: it is in your mouth and in your heart’) he first mentions confession with the mouth about who Jesus is and then belief in the heart about what God has done.
Hoeksema (2002, p.461) maintains:
‘The resurrection was an act of God. The text does not say, “If you believe that Christ is risen.” Emphatically, the apostle states, “he who believes that God raised Jesus from the dead.” It was an act of God. God did something. And our faith clings ultimately to that act of God…The act of God whereby He raised Jesus from the dead was the act by which he declared us righteous.’
Just as in v.9 the result of belief and confession is salvation so it is likewise in v.10. Here Paul reverses the order of the salvation process (‘it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved.’) forming a chiasm. This general statement in v.10 which again underscores that the key element is faith, not works, is a transition leading to Paul’s taking up again the idea of universality mentioned at the end of v.4 ( ‘for everyone who believes’). Since justification and salvation are as a result of faith then one must logically conclude that anyone who exercises faith in Christ will be saved, regardless of ethnicity.
10:11-13
‘As Scripture says, “Anyone who believes in him will never be put to shame.” For there is no difference between Jew and Gentile —the same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on him, for, “Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.” Rom 10:11-13 (NIV)
In vv. 11-13 Paul takes up the aforementioned idea of universality and (v.11) quotes Isaiah 28:16, which also underscores the connection between faith and salvation, but adds the words pas ho (everyone) to emphasise the universal nature of the gospel. Everyone who believes in the Lord ‘will not be put to shame’, i.e. deliverance at the time of judgement.’
In v.12 Paul concludes that since salvation is available by faith to all who call on the Lord for help then there is no difference between Jew and Gentile; they all have the same Lord.
In v. 13 he quotes from Joel 2:32 (a verse that in its original context refers to the remnant of Israel); ‘For, everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved’, thus supporting his statement in v.12 by sandwiching it between two OT quotations. The ‘everyone’ of v. 11 and that of v. 13 together back up the expression in v.12 that ‘there is no difference between Jew and Gentile.’ Regardless of race or culture anyone can call in faith upon the Lord for salvation. Upon reading these verses one recalls Paul’s earlier statement of ‘no distinction’ (3:23) in sin and judgment but, as Bassler (1984, p.56) notes, now ‘the emphasis of “no distinction” or impartiality has shifted’.
She continues:
‘In chaps.1-3 it was used as a warrant for the inclusion of Gentiles. Here it supports an argument for the ultimate inclusion of the recalcitrant Jews within the community of faith, so that the total scheme of salvation corresponds to the basic axiom of divine impartiality: “For God has consigned all men to disobedience so that he may have mercy on all” (11:32).
Salvation can be for everyone so how could someone know the gospel without it being preached to them? Although from vv. 14-21 Paul again takes up the situation of Israel and investigates Jewish rejection of the gospel he first speaks of the practicalities involved in a person’s salvation: a preacher must be sent and the message must be preached, heard, and believed.
10:14-17
‘How, then, can they call on the one they have not believed in? And how can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them? And how can anyone preach unless they are sent? As it is written: “How beautiful are the feet of those who bring good news!” But not all the Israelites accepted the good news. For Isaiah says, “Lord, who has believed our message?” Consequently, faith comes from hearing the message, and the message is heard through the word about Christ.’ Rom 10:14-17 (NIV)
In vv.14-15 he poses a series of four rhetorical questions beginning with ‘How?’ These build upon one another by repetition of the verb at the end of one question at the beginning of the next question. In light of God’s promise that whoever calls on the name of the Lord will be saved(10:13):
1) ‘How then can they call on Him they have not believed in?’
2) ‘How can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard?’
3) ‘How can they hear without someone preaching to them?’
4) ‘How can they preach unless they are sent?’
In these four questions Paul sets out the conditions necessary for calling on the name of the Lord and presents the five essential links in the chain of evangelism. These are the basic elements of Christian mission: Sending, Preaching, Hearing, Believing, and Calling. If one of the previous links is missing, Calling does not occur and there is no salvation.
Who is to be evangelized? In 1:16 Paul made it clear that both Jews and Gentiles were to be evangelized. In the context of chapters 9-11 he is
speaking specifically of the evangelism of Jewish people, the priority of which he inferred in 1:16. It is as if he is emphasizing to the believers at Rome (where there were possibly some tensions between Jewish and Gentile Christians) that they ought to be involving themselves in the evangelism of Jews as well as of Gentiles. He quotes loosely (v.15) from Isaiah 52:7 (with perhaps an allusion to Nahum 1:15) noting the beauty of the feet of those who ‘bring good news’. This verse, in its original setting, prophesied the certainty of Israel’s return from Captivity in Babylon. Jews, in spite of their rejection of Christ, still needed to hear the message about Jesus the Messiah. Since Paul is analyzing Jewish rejection of the gospel up to that point in time he goes on to show that in their case all the conditions for salvation have been met; except one.
V.16 points out that even though the gospel is good news, not everyone believes. It says: ‘But not all the Israelites responded to the good news.’ This is an understatement as, in comparison to the Gentles, very few Jews accepted Christ. It does, however, reiterate the concept of the remnant introduced in 9:6; while not all believed, some did. In the case of Israel, this was nothing new. Paul quotes Isaiah 53:1 (‘Lord, who has believed our message?) in support of this and thus identifies the missing link in the chain. Faith was missing.
V.17 is a transitional verse in that it summarizes the argument thus far. It starts with ‘consequently’ or ‘as a result,’ pointing the reader back to 10:8-9 about the expression of faith but also picks up the idea of ‘hearing’ implied in the ‘message’ of Isaiah 53:1 and moves on to the next stage of Paul’s argument.
10:18-21
‘But I ask: Did they not hear? Of course they did: “Their voice has gone out into all the earth, their words to the ends of the world.” Again I ask: Did Israel not understand? First, Moses says, “I will make you envious by those who are not a nation; I will make you angry by a nation that has no understanding.” And Isaiah boldly says, “I was found by those who did not seek me; I revealed myself to those who did not ask for me.” But concerning Israel he says, “All day long I have held out my hands to a disobedient and obstinate people.” Rom 10:18-21 (NIV)
In vv.18-21 Paul entertains and then dismisses two possible reasons for Israel’s rejection of the gospel. He asks two rhetorical questions which expect a positive answer. They thus become an assertion. ‘Did they not hear?’ and ‘Did Israel not understand?’ They had both heard and understood the message. In v18 Paul queries if the problem might be that the Jews had not heard the gospel: ‘But I ask, did they not hear?’ It must be because they have not heard. He answers ‘Of course they did!’ and quotes Psalm 19: 4: ‘their voice has gone out into all the earth and their words to the ends of the world.’ Paul lifts this verse from its original context which speaks of natural revelation and applies it to the special revelation of the gospel. The idea here may be what Bruce (1963, p. 223) terms ‘representative universalism’, meaning that just as the knowledge of God is said to be universal in Psalm 19 so, in Paul’s day, wherever there were communities of Jews in the known world, it could be said that the gospel had been preached. Paul contends that Israel had definitely heard the
gospel.
V.19 begins with a repetition of the ‘I ask’ of v.18 and moves from the possibility that Israel had not heard the message to the possibility that the message had not been understood. Paul quotes this time from both the Law and the prophets, using Moses and Isaiah as representative of each. The quotation from Moses in v.19 is from Deuteronomy 32:21b. The point being made is that historically Israel knew the Commandments, yet their practice did not match their understanding. They had hardly left Egypt and the experience of the power of God when they made a golden calf and worshipped it. Along the way they complained against God and longed for their former life of slavery. Having reached the Promised Land they pursued false gods. It was not a matter of not understanding God’s law. They acted in wilful disobedience to what they knew. As a result God promised to use people who were not a nation, people who did not have understanding, to make Israel envious.
In v.20 Paul, citing Isaiah 65:1, turns to the prophets: ‘Then Isaiah boldly says, “I was found by those who did not seek Me, I revealed myself to those who did not ask for me”.’ The Gentiles were not pursuing God. They were idolaters who did not seek God; rather he made himself known to them in the gospel. This highlights God’s grace in pursuing the Gentiles rather than Gentiles pursuing Him. Those who did not look for God found him; he took the initiative and revealed himself in the gospel. In v.21 Paul comments: ‘But concerning Israel he says’ and continues the quotation from Isaiah (65:2), ‘All day long have I held out my hands to a disobedient and obstinate people.’ The second discourse closes with this thought of a gracious God actively stretching out his hands to the Jews, wanting them to come to him.
In chapter nine Paul attributed Israelite unbelief to God’s election, in chapter ten he attributes it to their own wilful rejection of the gospel message that they had both heard and understood.
View my posts:
Written Exposition 
6 thoughts on “ROMANS 9:30 -10:21”
Comments are closed.