Bible Study Romans Part 55-Letter or Love

Welcome to the program Study in the Chapel.

God's Word is supreme in chapel ministries.

We consider it absolutely essential to a proper relationship with God.

We study it, we love it, we rely on it every minute of every day.

The following program is an edited recording of the regular Bible studies we host, and we decided to share these with you in the hope that you too will be able to find inspiration, encouragement, and ultimately salvation through discovering Christ in Scripture.

Our intention is to travel all the way through the Bible.

It will be a challenging journey, but one that will undoubtedly bring you to a decision.

Through this study, you will be faced with either believing or rejecting what God has said to us.

It is our intention to provide you with enough knowledge to make an informed decision about God and his word.

We strongly encourage you to listen intently and diligently, because though at the moment you may not realize it, these things are truly a matter of life and death.

In fact, these are matters of eternal life and eternal death.

Never treat what God has said lightly.

There is truly nothing more important to you.

Now join us as we seek God's will through his inspired word.

We are deep into the Paul's letter to the Romans.

It has been extremely important to us in our path toward realizing the goal of our salvation.

God gave us this letter to teach us what He wants us to know, not only for the next life, but for this life.

In fact, it's more important for us to learn how to be good Christians here so that we can spread his glory and his gospel.

We are in the Paul's letter to the Romans.

We're in the second chapter.

We're actually going to finish the second chapter today.

So let me just finish that little bit out.

I'm going to start by reading verse 25.

Again, we're in the second chapter of Paul's letter to the Romans.

We read out of the King James Bible.

Please read along in the Bible in front of you.

If you notice there are any differences and it makes it confusing for you, just look up at the screen because we're always putting the verses up on the screen for you to see.

Here we go, Romans chapter 2, verse 25.

Romans 2:25

For circumcision verily profiteth if thou keep the law, but if thou be a breaker of the law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision.

Now, just a quick reminder.

Here Paul is using circumcision as a metaphor for two related subjects.

First of all, since in Paul's day circumcision was very rare and almost never done on a nation scale.

Therefore, it was something that marked the Jewish people out.

They did practice circumcision.

In fact, it was a requirement under their form of worship.

And remember, at that time they were a theocracy.

If their religion said to do something, it was literally law to them.

Again, because it was almost universally unique to the Jewish people, when one was considered of the circumcision or something similar, that's the same as saying they're Jewish.

Very often, when Paul refers to those of the circumcision or the circumcised, he's talking about the Jews.

Secondly, and relatedly, as I said, circumcision, because it was such an important part of their cultural and religious system, it was such an integral part of their law.

Saying someone was circumcised was analogous to saying that they were compliant with the law.

All right.

So back to Romans.

Again, we'll start with verse 25.

For circumcision verily profiteth if thou keep the law, but if thou be a breaker of the law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision.

Paul is here challenging the view that circumcision is all that it takes to be a follower of God.

It became such a symbol of their law that the Jews thought, well, I'm circumcised, therefore I'm compliant.

Well, there's following rules, and then there's following God.

As he's done throughout this letter, Paul is aiming at the heart, at the extent of obedience.

For circumcision verily profiteth if thou keep the law, but if thou be a breaker of the law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision.

Verse 26.

Therefore, if the uncircumcision keep the righteousness of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision?

And shall not uncircumcision, which is by nature, if it fulfilled the law, judge thee who by the letter and circumcision dost transgress the law?

The Gentile who is not chosen out, who has not been called into a special relationship with God.

The Gentile who is still in his so-called natural state, humans by nature are not in a relationship with God, as well as not circumcised.

That's what Paul is referring to when he uses the terms circumcision and uncircumcision.

Circumcision to God is a sign of a special relationship with him.

And those who are not circumcised do not have that unique status.

That is Paul's entire point here.

Those who are not circumcised are still, according to Paul, in their natural state.

Hopefully that helps.

Now let me read those two verses again.

Romans 2.26.

Therefore, if the uncircumcision, he's referring to the people who are not circumcised.

If this uncircumcision keep the righteousness of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision?

For those who are still in their natural state, those who are not in a relationship with God, those who have not been circumcised, and yet they follow the mandates of what God wants, shouldn't they be counted as in a special relationship with God?

That's a summary of verse 26, verse 27.

And shall not uncircumcision, which is by nature, shall not those who are not physically circumcised because they don't have a relationship with God?

If those fulfill the law, shall they not judge thee who by the letter and circumcision dost transgress the law?

In other words, shouldn't those who are not in a special relationship with God and yet keep God's standards because their heart is right, shouldn't they condemn those who are in a special relationship with God, but whose heart is dark and self-concerned?

I mean, it's axiomatic.

It's so obvious there can be no response.

The Gentiles who don't have the law, who don't have a covenant with God and yet live lives that God's law would approve of, aren't they in a better position with God judgment-wise than the Jews who do have a special relationship, who know what God expects, and yet ignore his standards?

Of course.

Disobedience is disobedience.

It's never, disobedience is never given a waiver by God, no matter who you are.

That is Paul's point.

Being a Jew, being in a special relationship with God, having the law doesn't exempt you from judgment.

And Paul expresses that point to his fellow Jews in the most uncomfortable way.

And he's doing so to wake them up to their dangerous miscalculation.

Listen, the time for molecoddling is over.

Hemming and hawing, as my mother would put it, is no longer effective.

It's getting us nowhere.

Directness has now become necessary.

This is as shocking a statement to his audience as any could be.

Verse 28, for he is not a Jew which is one outwardly, neither is that circumcision which is outward in the flesh, but he is a Jew which is one inwardly, and circumcision is that of the heart in the spirit, and not in the letter, whose praise is not of men, but of God.

You know, of poor, of course, Paul isn't simply referring to something as mundane and worldly as race.

You know that, right?

This is much deeper than that.

And the very reason why non-Jews like us, like most of us, must also look into our own hearts when we hear these things.

This is why we're spending so much time here.

For he is not a Jew or a Christian, which is one outwardly, neither is that circumcision or simply obedience, which is outward in the flesh.

But he is a Jew or a Christian, which is one inwardly, and circumcision, obedience, is that of the heart in the spirit, and not in the letter, whose praise is not of men, but of God.

These aren't physical matters, these aren't worldly matters, this isn't even really about circumcision.

Paul says, this is of the heart, this is of the spirit.

What are you deep down?

What is your motivation for following the rules?

Is it love or the letter?

One of the things I like to do when I teach is to find some historical event or story or person that will help me make my point.

Maybe a scene from a movie or a chapter from a well-known book.

It's a common tactic in teaching and preaching on any subject, actually.

Giving people a foundation or a contrast or a clear illustration will sometimes provide the right sort of context in order to make these things come alive.

Now, I was at first tempted to try and do something like that here, but there are times when that doesn't really help.

Occasionally using examples, especially the more dramatic ones, and almost everyone who tells a story for effect drifts towards the dramatic.

And the more dramatic the story, the more impact the story delivers, or as we storytellers assume.

But sometimes such things do more harm than help.

The drama often distracts from the message.

This is sort of the problem with the giving of personal testimony in church.

You've heard me come against this sort of thing before.

If you don't know what I'm talking about, it's very common in evangelical fundamentalist churches to have a presentation or two, either before or after the service, where some well-healed sinner gets up and tells the assembled about their past, what they did before Christ came into their life and how they eventually got saved.

Well, the truth is the congregation isn't really interested in the salvation part.

They want to hear the well-healed sin part.

Well, regardless of what they listen to, the depth of the presenter's prior sinfulness is assumed to be beyond the capacity for depravity of the typical church member.

So they just don't make the personal connection.

These are dramatic stories.

The connection to their own life isn't made.

What ends up happening, the high drama, ends up being 95% entertainment, 3% an excuse to get up and use the bathroom before the service, and maybe 2% inspiration.

But the biggest reason I'm against these sorts of activities is that they give the impression that the only kinds of sins I should be worried about in my own life are the ones that are salacious, dangerous, and otherwise outrageous.

All other sin is manageable on a personal level.

That becomes the message.

For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly, neither is that circumcision which is outward in the flesh.

But he is a Jew which is one inwardly, and circumcision is that of the heart in the spirit and not in the letter, whose praise is not of men, but of God.

In this circumstance, giving examples and illustrations, I think, is unnecessary and maybe a bit counterproductive.

This doesn't require any further explanation.

Listen, we all know it applies to us.

So often we're more interested in appearing to be Christians than actually being one.

The rituals, the candlelighting, praying the sinner's prayer loud, the hallelujahs, the glories, handing out gospel tracts in the bus station.

Those aren't the things that make you a child of God.

No more than circumcision makes a Jewish man a child of God.

The sad truth Paul is hinting at is that for most of us, we care much less about what God sees than how the ones we go to church see.

We don't mind if God is disappointed as long as Sister Mary up there in the front row doesn't see me dozing off during the sermon.

It doesn't matter if God sees me slipping into the strip club.

I just don't want Deacon Smith to walk by as I'm paying the cover at the door.

And listen, if your whole life and your whole status is wrapped up in the extent of your compliance with your religion, as it was for the Jews of Paul's day, as it is for so many of us in our own, then listen, you can't afford to be seen as anything other than a devoted adherent to the faith, to my fellow congregants.

I don't care what God thinks, as long as everyone else thinks I'm religious.

And the Bible tells us over and over that there are fewer human failures that God despises more than hypocrisy.

I know we keep saying that, but this is Paul's entire argument and the purpose for writing this section of his letter to the Jews.

Indeed, we actually have to assume that even the hypocrisy of the converted Jews at Rome was at least partially what prompted this severe rebuke from Paul.

He was primarily targeting Christian Jews, at least in this section.

For he is not a Jew which is one outwardly, neither is that circumcision which is outward in the flesh.

But he is a Jew which is one inwardly, and circumcision is that of the heart in the spirit and not in the letter, whose praise is not of men but of God.

Many of these Christian Jews, these converted Jews, were drifting back slowly to the showy rituals of Judaism.

The ones they knew had been fulfilled in Christ, in Christ and no longer necessary.

But they were falling to the pressure from the outside to return to these things.

And in many cases, they acquiesced just so that they could face their follow fellow Jews who had not yet been converted.

They didn't want to be shunned by their former community.

They wanted to be Christian, but look Jewish.

It was hypocrisy, dangerous, gospel-damaging hypocrisy.

Most of the time you see Paul referring to the letter, he's doing so to signify cold, heartless, thoughtless, robotic adherence to an impersonal set of rules.

And anyone who focuses on the letter is interested in only keeping his conscience clean or his reputation intact.

Listen, a clear conscience is a valuable thing, but it's no guarantee of a good relationship.

Listen to me.

Many a husband is caught off guard when his wife delivers to him a decree of divorce.

He's shocked when she said she's leaving him.

He can't figure out what happened.

He's never been one to hang out with the boys after work.

He deposits every dime of his paycheck in the family bank account, always does his fair share around the house and then some, helps out with the kids, takes them to soccer and art class and vacation Bible school.

He's never had an affair, never flirts with the young secretaries, never even looked at another woman lustfully.

He follows the letter of being a good husband.

What happened is his plea.

You never wanted for anything.

We raised our kids together.

I was home every night.

Yes.

But it felt like your heart was never in it.

I want a relationship and not just a marriage.

In Paul's day, it was undeniable that the Jews went to great lengths to comply with their religion.

They revered their temple, they faithfully observed their feast days.

They never rejected God's claim on the Sabbath.

They tithed and worshipped and offered their offerings with near complete compliance.

So much so, the letter of the law became their God.

They much preferred to risk offending the spirit than take their chances with the letter.

To them, it was far better to be accused of being a hypocrite than being accused of a rebel, as being accused of being a rebel.

And eventually their relationship with God became impersonal, distant, and mechanical.

The people on whom God set his affection returned his love with unthinking, unemotional ritual.

For he is not a Jew which is one outwardly, neither is that circumcision which is outward in the flesh.

But he is a Jew which is one inwardly, and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter, whose praise is not of men, but of God.

What God had given to show loving union.

Unity between himself and his people became nothing more than a superficial show of pride.

One more time, Paul is merely using circumcision as a symbol for the entire law.

The Jewish people complied with the letter of their religion.

They were careful to keep themselves free from the charge of disobedience, but their hearts were far from God, and their lifeless rule following was but a symptom.

Need I say it again?

Probably.

We're not just to sit back and nod our heads in smug agreements with Paul's rebuke of the Jews.

There is, this is here, this section is in the Bible to prompt us to do a little self-examination.

Nothing in the Bible is for anyone exclusively.

It is for all of us universally.

Do we simply go through the motions of our religion?

Are we proud of our rule following?

Is God lost in our drive to prove how holy we are?

I've spent most of my life in large northern U.S.

cities.

If you're not aware, that usually means there are lots of Roman Catholics about.

Almost everywhere I've lived in these big cities, I've had a lot of Catholic neighbors, and they're always sweet and loving people.

They're helpful and kind.

It's just the way Catholics are.

But, and I want to be careful, but I wouldn't characterize most Catholics as overly religious.

I don't like that word, as you know, but I have to use it.

American Catholics have changed a lot since I was a kid.

They don't go to church often anymore.

And when they do, they complain about it.

It takes too long, it starts too early, it's no fun, those sorts of things.

But there comes a time in every young Catholic parent's life that flips all of that on its end, albeit quite temporarily.

That time is as unusual as it is brief.

At least that's the way it seems to me.

Around the time their children start the second grade, so around seven, I guess, the Catholic households of my neighbors seem to change for a little while.

You see, it's at that age that the children begin preparation for what the Catholics call first communion.

As the name implies, this is when the church says young Catholics can start participating in the Eucharist.

Hundreds of years ago, especially among European Catholics, this was a very momentous event.

First communion was a major milestone in every churchgoer's life.

The communion, the Eucharist, the Mass was the central moment of every church gathering.

Therefore, being allowed to partake in this all-important activity meant you were a fully vested member of the community.

So, first communion has been of utmost importance to Catholic families down through the generations.

And as a result, it's become a highly celebrated event.

And this tradition made its way to America through its many European immigrants.

This is especially true in the Italian-American communities.

I've lived most of my life in these types of communities, so I'm reporting what I know to be true.

Let me raise to my point.

What has always intrigued me about the modern day celebrations of the first communion is that outside the actual taking of the communion in church, there's almost no spiritual, no religious, nor Christian connection whatsoever.

Oh, you'll be encouraged to congratulate the young second grader with religious themed greeting cards, stuffed with cash, of course.

Most of the time, the parents will give their child some appropriate gift, maybe a cross necklace or something like that.

But that's where it ends.

From then on, religion has almost nothing to do with the rest of the celebration.

And yet the facade of it being religious is maintained.

Almost always there's this monster bash in which you invite everyone in your family, everyone in your neighborhood to celebrate with you.

And can I say from experience, it's lavish, flashy, often decadent.

Drunkenness, gluttony, and other worldly expressions are to be expected.

And I really hate to say it, but sometimes even the church priest shows up.

He's among the crowd.

Now, let me be fair, I've never seen a parish priest get out of control or do anything inappropriate to his office, but he's among the celebrants.

Not saying there's anything wrong with that, but it still seems really out of place.

Within no more than 45 minutes following the end of the church ceremony, nothing resembling Christianity remains.

In fact, among all of the activities, Christian thought, ritual, and process probably makes up only 25% of the total effort.

And I may be a little generous.

The rest is centered on the party.

And once the party's over, the importance, the beauty, the significance of the table of the Lord is never discussed again.

Showy, empty, meaningless.

Friends, if you don't take your relationship with God seriously, how do you expect to convince the world they should?

This is Paul's point.

How you interact with God is a direct reflection of his importance in your life.

All right, I guess that's enough.

This is probably a good place to wrap up this chapter.

I'm sure I've lost whatever Catholic friends I had left.

Don't mess with the sacraments.

Probably no different than Paul among his Jewish friends.

Not that I could ever be as brave and brash as that man.

No wonder at the end of his life he had to exclaim, only Luke is with me.

From the day the sight of our Lord knocked him to the earth, all things from Paul's past became to him as dung, his words.

The gospel became his only goal and comfort.

By the end of his life, his reputation, his upbringing, his own people held an inferior position to his desire to glorify his savior.

It became his sole motivation, and everything he said and did was bent toward that goal, truly an example for all of us to follow.

So that does it for chapter two, a decidedly difficult chapter to get through.

Listen, as tough as it was to hear, it was doubly so to teach.

But there are few more important sections of scripture for those of us who grew up thinking we were simply born children of God, that God's judgment is not even a consideration for us, that God loves us too much to be angry with us.

Paul may have been talking to the Jews at the moment, but the message is universal.

God doesn't care if we think we deserve better treatment than the heathen that surround us.

He doesn't want us focusing on their status with him.

He wants us to look inwardly to see what sort of foundation our relationship with him stands on.

Are we obedient, faithful servants, or are we petulant, spoiled children who think our Father in heaven will do anything for us we ask, including looking the other way when we sin?

This chapter is about one thing, the fact that God judges according to truth.

And if we don't see that, then we are doomed to a fruitless, unproductive, and impotent redeemed life.

Listen, I know this hasn't been easy, but in order for us to achieve for God what our salvation was meant to achieve, in order for us to be useful in our calling to glorify God throughout the earth, we must make sure that we're following Him with the heart of a loving child.

Arrogance has no place in the conduct of one who's been snatched from destruction.

Hypocrisy is not the trait of someone who knows that God is a God of truth.

All right, it's time to move to chapter three, but might I suggest that you often return to chap.

I said it's time to move on to chapter three.

I'm trying to suggest, though, that you don't leave chapter two behind.

Return to it often.

Muse on its content.

Think of ways this message of Paul's can improve your relationship with God.

Use these admittedly harsh but realistic statements as checks on our attitude and conduct.

Never forget, God wrote these things down for all of us.

All right, next time, chapter three, and your mood is not going to improve.

See you then.

We hope this study has blessed you.

God's word is a great treasure, and it's our belief that a thorough, purposeful study of it will bring all of God's children to an understanding of his eternal plan of redemption.

It is our prayer that this will be so for all of our listeners.

Please join us again soon.

New content is being added all the time, so make sure you check back often.

For more information on Chapel Ministries, including our YouTube channel and podcasts, please visit www.chapelontheweb.com.

And if God has laid it upon your heart to share materially with us, we encourage you to follow the links to our secure giving page.

Please note, Chapel Ministries is not an IRS-registered nonprofit organization, and your donations to this program are not tax deductible.

It's our hope that you do not rely on taxing authorities to decide for you who is worthy of your generosity.