Romans 2

For as many as have sinned without the law will also perish without the law. As many as have sinned under the law will be judged by the law. The ’for’ grounds the impartiality of vv. 6–11. Lack of Moses is not innocence; possession of Moses is not shelter. Wesley will soon say the doers shall be justified—a truth that respects Gentiles also, though principally the Jews.

Classical Arminians take both perishing and being judged as honest. The Gentile without the written code is not safe by ignorance; the Jew under the law is not safe by hearing it. God has not two bars. The pastoral point is simple: sin is judged, whether or not the tablet was in the hand.

All who have sinned without the law perish without it; many as have sinned under the law are judged by it. Calvin’s later word fits: perfect righteousness is prescribed in the law, and transgression brings a curse. No one slips the bar by lacking a scroll, or by owning one.

There are two administrations, but one judgment. The lawless Gentile is not excused; the instructed Jew is not exempt. God shows no partiality (v. 11) precisely here. What follows will prove that another righteousness must be sought, because this bar condemns both.

For it isn’t the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the law will be justified. Wesley: not the hearers are, even now, just before God, but the doers shall be justified—finally acquitted and rewarded: a most sure and important truth, which respects the Gentiles also, though principally the Jews. Hearing is not doing; a seat in the synagogue is not righteousness.

Arminian interpreters hear a final acquittal of doers, not a Pelagian first pardon earned by the law. The doers are those who, by grace, actually walk in what they heard. This verse will not save a mere auditor, and it will not found a wage-system against 3:20. It names the life God will publicly own, Jew and Gentile.

It isn’t the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the law will be justified. Calvin: they who pervert this passage for justification by works deserve most fully to be laughed at even by children. Paul urges on the Jews that by the law they could not be justified except they fulfilled it; if they transgressed, a curse was instantly pronounced. Perfect righteousness is prescribed; as all are convicted of transgression, another righteousness must be sought. If they alone are justified by the law who fulfill it, it follows that no one is justified; for no one can boast of having fulfilled the law.

’doers who will be justified’ is the law’s own term, and it shuts the mouth. No one has fulfilled it. The verse is not a ladder into life; it is the proof that life will have to come another way. Hearing without doing is empty; doing as merit is a children’s mistake.

For when Gentiles who don’t have the law do by nature the things of the law, these, not having the law, are a law to themselves. Wesley: do by nature—that is, without an outward rule; though this also, strictly speaking, is by preventing grace. The things contained in the law are the substance of the law of nature. Not having the written law, they are a law unto themselves: what the law is to the Jews, they are, by the grace of God, to themselves; namely, a rule of life.

Classical Arminians hear preventing grace in the phrase ’by nature.’ The Gentile is not a self-made lawgiver. Without an outward rule, and yet not without God’s grace, some do what the law requires and become a rule of life to themselves. This is pastoral, not a culture speech: God has not left the nations without a witness, and that witness is grace, not bare independency.

When Gentiles who don’t have the law do by nature the things of the law, these, not having the law, are a law to themselves. Calvin: he sets nature in opposition to a written law, meaning that the Gentiles had the natural light of righteousness, which supplied the place of that law by which the Jews were instructed, so that they were a law to themselves.

’by nature’ is nature set against a scroll, not a claim of prevenient grace in the wording itself. Natural light supplies the place of Moses enough to leave the Gentile without excuse and, at times, to do what the law requires. The point is accountability, not a second gospel. The same light will not justify; it will witness (v. 15) on the day God judges secrets.

They show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience testifying with them, and their thoughts among themselves accusing or else excusing them. Wesley’s law-unto-themselves is here inward: a written-on-the-heart work, a conscience that testifies, thoughts that do not sit still. Accusing and even excusing are both movements of that inner witness.

Arminians hear preventing grace in this writing, not a leftover Pelagian spark. Conscience is a gift that actually accuses and sometimes excuses; it is not a private idol. The pastoral use is humility: the Gentile’s inner life is already in court. Do not treat this verse as a modern identity claim. It is a heart on trial before God.

They show the work of the law written in their hearts; conscience bears witness; thoughts among themselves accusing or else excusing. Calvin’s natural light of righteousness is not silence. It writes, it witnesses, it argues. The Gentile is not a blank; he is already in a kind of court.

Written on the heart here is the work of the law as inner testimony, not yet the new-covenant gift of 2:29. Accusing and excusing prove that light is authentic and that it does not amount to justification. The secrets will be judged (v. 16). Conscience is a witness, not an advocate who can acquit at God’s bar.

In the day when God will judge the secrets of men, according to my Good News, by Jesus Christ Jesus. The inner accusing and excusing of v. 15 come to a public day. Wesley’s doers finally acquitted is this day’s verdict, not a hidden self-estimate. Secrets are judged by Christ, according to the gospel Paul preaches—not according to badges.

One hears a pastoral gospel: the same Christ who is offered as Savior will judge secrets. Nothing inward stays private. Kindness meant to lead to repentance (v. 4) and a law written on the heart both run toward this day. Live toward the Judge who already knows the recesses of the soul.

On that day God will judge the secrets of men, according to my Good News, by Jesus Christ Jesus, according to Paul’s gospel. Calvin’s bar is not a human court of kindred and country. Secrets—what the letter cannot display—are judged by Christ. The gospel includes this judgment; it does not undo it.

’my gospel’ is not a softer law. It is the announcement that God will judge secrets by Christ. The inward Jew of v. 29 will have praise from God on this day; the mere hearer will not. Christ the Judge is the same Lord the letter is about to preach as the righteousness of God for those who believe.

But if you bear the name of a Jew, rest on the law, glory in God. The address turns from the Gentile conscience to the named Jew. Wesley: he is not a Jew, in the most important sense, who is one in outward show only. Relying on the law and boasting in God can be true worship; here they are a shelter for the man who will not do what he teaches.

Arminians detect a pastoral warning, not a quarrel with Jewish people as such. The danger is relying on the name and the boast while the life contradicts them. God is worth boasting in; the law is worth knowing. Neither is a mask. The gospel honors Israel’s gifts and refuses a bare label.

If you bear the name of a Jew, rest on the law, glory in God. Calvin: a true Jew is not ascertained by natural descent, or by profession, or by an external symbol. The name, the reliance, and the boast can all be outward. They are not yet the thing.

Paul is not sneering at Israel. He is unmasking a reliance that treats gifts as a shield. Boast in God is right when the heart is circumcised (v. 29); it is hollow when it is only a call one gives oneself. Descent and profession will not constitute the Jew God praises.

Know his will, and approve the things that are excellent, being instructed out of the law. Instruction is a gift. Wesley never despises knowing God’s will. The tragedy is a knowledge that stops at approval—taste for what is excellent without the doing of v. 13.

Arminian readers honor the law’s instruction as grace, not as a problem. Approving what is excellent is not the same as walking in it. The pastoral question is whether the instructed heart has been led to repentance, or whether it has presumed on the riches of having the law.

Know his will, and approve the things that are excellent, being instructed out of the law. Calvin does not deny the Jew’s advantage of instruction. The written law teaches. Knowledge and approval, however, are not fulfillment. The curse still falls on transgression.

Instruction from the law is a gift that increases accountability, not a substitute for the righteousness another must supply. Approving the excellent while breaking the law (vv. 21–23) is the hearer’s religion. God will judge the secrets, not the syllabus.

And are confident that you yourself are a guide of the blind, a light to those who are in darkness. Confidence in the role is the next step of the boast. Wesley’s outward-show Jew can be very sure. Guiding the blind is a holy calling; being sure you are the guide while you do not teach yourself (v. 21) is a wound to the name of God.

Classical Arminians refuse to sneer at teaching. Israel was called to be a light. The pastoral grief is a sure guide who will not walk. Light to those in darkness is the vocation; hypocrisy is the abuse. Do not turn this into a modern identity quarrel. It is a teacher’s heart before God.

If you are confident that you yourself are a guide of the blind, a light to those in darkness. Calvin’s profession and external symbol can carry just this confidence. The sure guide may still be uncircumcised in heart. Light is a true Jewish calling; surety without inward integrity is not.

Confidence in the role differs from the Spirit’s circumcision. God regards purity of heart, not the office of guide. The man sure he is light may still be storing wrath. The gospel will make true lights; it will not baptize a boast.

The law is that embodiment. Wesley honors the ten commandments as the substance of the law of nature, here given in written fullness. Having the form of knowledge is not yet the renewed inmost soul.

Classical Arminians will not despise catechesis. Teaching children and instructing the foolish are holy works. The ’if’ of v. 17 still hangs: if you have all this and do not do it, the form of knowledge becomes a boast. The Spirit must renew the teacher, or the embodiment in the book never becomes circumcision of the heart.

Calvin does not deny that the law contains that embodiment. The written code is knowledge and truth in form. Form is not the inward Jew.

The law’s embodiment of truth makes the hypocrite more, not less, accountable. Teaching children while breaking the law (v. 21) is not a small inconsistency; it is dishonor to God (v. 23). Another righteousness must still be sought. The book in the hand is not the Spirit in the heart.

You therefore who teach another, don’t you teach yourself? You who preach that a man shouldn’t steal, do you steal? Paul’s long “if” finally lands. Wesley’s doers, not hearers, are the point in teacher’s clothes. Preaching against stealing while stealing is the same self-condemnation as 2:1, now in the synagogue.

Classical Arminians take the questions as pastoral, not theatrical. The teacher must be a doer. Grace that leads to repentance will teach the teacher. A pulpit against theft that pockets what it condemns is not a light to the nations; it is a cause for the name to be blasphemed (v. 24).

You who teach another, don’t you teach yourself? You who preach that a man shouldn’t steal, do you steal? Calvin’s point stands: if they transgress, a curse is pronounced. The instructor who steals is not justified by the law he teaches. Hearing and preaching are not doing.

The questions are a court, not a joke. Teaching without self-teaching is the hearer’s religion. God regards inward integrity. The steal under the sermon proves that another righteousness must be sought, because this one has not fulfilled the law he recites.

You who say a man shouldn’t commit adultery, do you commit adultery? You who abhor idols, do you rob temples? The catalog matches the teacher’s own preaching. Wesley’s acceptable circumcision puts away inward impurity; here the impurity is still housed under abhorrence of idols and a rule against adultery.

This is a call to the inmost soul, not a public scandal sheet. Saying and abhorring are cheap if the life contradicts them. The pastoral aim is repentance—the kindness of v. 4 still in view—not a modern culture speech about other people’s identities. God wants the teacher clean.

You who say a man shouldn’t commit adultery, do you commit adultery? You who abhor idols, do you rob temples? Calvin: transgression brings the curse instantly. Abhorrence of idols with temple-robbery is the outward symbol without the inward thing. The law’s perfection is not met by slogans.

The questions strip profession down to practice. God hath no respect for the things men value—including a reputation for abhorring idols. Secrets will be judged by Christ. The man who says and does not do is the man for whom another righteousness must be sought.

You who glory in the law, do you dishonor God by disobeying the law. The boast was named in v. 17; the breaking now names its fruit. Wesley: the true, acceptable circumcision is not apparent in the flesh. Boasting in the law while breaking it is outward show, and it dishonors the God in whom one boasted.

Classical Arminians take dishonor as the wound. The law is good; breaking it under a boast makes the goodness a cloak. This is pastoral grief over a holy gift misused, not a sneer at a people. God’s name is at stake in the life of those who teach His law.

You who glory in the law, do you dishonor God by disobeying the law. Calvin’s true Jew is not profession. A boast in the law that accompanies transgression is the hearer’s religion, and it dishonors God. The curse the law pronounces has already fallen on the breaker.

Dishonor is not a small public-relations problem. It is the theological fruit of using the law as a badge. God will not be honored by a broken law plus a loud boast. Inward circumcision will honor Him; the letter without the Spirit will not.

As Scripture says, “Because of you the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles.” Isaiah’s grief (Isa. 52:5) is now Paul’s. Wesley’s outward-show Jew becomes a cause of blasphemy among the nations he was meant to light. The scandal is not Jewishness; it is hypocrisy wearing holy gifts.

Wesleyans hear a missionary wound. Gentiles already have a law to themselves (v. 14); they also watch the people of the written law. When teachers steal and break, the nations blaspheme the Name. The pastoral remedy is the heart circumcised by the Spirit (v. 29), so that the Name is honored rather than used.

The name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you. Calvin’s external symbol, when it covers transgression, does not protect the Name; it exposes it to scorn. Scripture already said this. Paul is not inventing a charge; he is reading the prophets over the boast.

God’s name among the nations is holy. Hypocrisy in the instructed people hands the Gentiles a reason to blaspheme. The answer is not to hide the law; it is the inward Jew whose praise is from God. Christ will judge these secrets. The gospel that follows will yet honor the Name the boast has stained.

For circumcision indeed profits, if you are a doer of the law, but if you are a transgressor of the law, your circumcision has become uncircumcision. Wesley: that is not the true, acceptable circumcision which is apparent in the flesh. The rite is not nothing; it is of value with obedience. Broken law turns the sign into its opposite.

Wesleyan Arminians refuse two equal errors: treating the sign as magic, and sneering at the sign as if God never gave it. Value is tied to obeying. This is pastoral, not a modern identity debate. The question is whether the life matches the seal, and whether the heart will be renewed by the Spirit.

Circumcision is of value if you are a doer of the law; if you are a transgressor of the law, it becomes uncircumcision. Calvin: the circumcision which constitutes a Jew does not consist in an outward sign only. Break the law and the sign is not a shield. Transgression has already invoked the curse.

The value of the rite is the value of a seal in its proper use, not an independent charm. Obedience here still means the fulfillment no one can boast (v. 13). The verse strips confidence in the flesh so that another righteousness may be sought. Outward circumcision without inward integrity is, at the bar, uncircumcision.

So, if therefore the uncircumcised keep the ordinances of the law, won’t his uncircumcision be accounted as circumcision? Wesley’s truth respects the Gentiles also. By preventing grace a man without the outward rule may keep what the law requires, and God regards the heart as the seal. The question expects yes.

Those in Wesley’s line hear God’s regard, not man’s. This is not a culture claim that badges do not matter in human politics; it is the bar of God counting a life He has enabled. The uncircumcised keeper is not a self-savior. He is the surprise of grace that shames the breaker who had the sign.

If therefore the uncircumcised keep the ordinances of the law, won’t his uncircumcision be accounted as circumcision? Calvin: a true Jew is not ascertained by an external symbol. God can regard as circumcision what men would never count. The question unmasks the sign as insufficient without the thing it signified.

’regarded’ is God’s counting, on the day He judges secrets. The verse is still not a ladder of works-justification; it is the reversal that leaves the law-breaker with the sign no refuge. If keeping is the term, no one boasts of having fulfilled it. The inward thing is what God regards.

Won’t those who are physically uncircumcised, but fulfill the law, judge you, who with the letter and circumcision are a transgressor of the law. The Gentile doer becomes a witness against the instructed breaker. Wesley: a most sure truth which respects the Gentiles also. Physical uncircumcision plus keeping outweighs code plus breaking.

Arminian interpreters hear a pastoral sting, not a racial taunt. The condemning is the life God can use as evidence at the bar. Having the written code is a gift; breaking it under that gift is worse. Preventing grace among the nations will not flatter the hypocrite at home.

Those who are physically uncircumcised, but fulfill the law, judge you, who with the letter and circumcision are a transgressor of the law. Calvin: natural descent, profession, and the external symbol do not constitute the true Jew. The keeper without the sign condemns the breaker with it. The written code is not a shelter.

Condemn here is courtroom language, the surprise witness. God hath no respect for kindred and the sign when the law is broken. The point is still that another righteousness must be sought, because the man with code and circumcision has not fulfilled what he holds. The letter without the Spirit will not save him.

For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, neither is that circumcision which is outward in the flesh. Wesley: he is not a Jew, in the most important sense—one of God’s beloved people—who is one in outward show only; neither is that the true, acceptable circumcision which is apparent in the flesh. Outward is not nothing; it is not the thing.

The note struck is a definition of the people God owns, not a modern identity argument. The beloved people are not a costume. Circumcision apparent in the flesh is not the acceptable circumcision. The next verse will name the Spirit. Until then, refuse both contempt for Israel’s gifts and confidence in the mere show of them.

He is not a Jew who is one outwardly, neither is that circumcision which is outward in the flesh. Calvin: a true Jew is not to be ascertained by natural descent, or by profession, or by an external symbol; the circumcision which constitutes a Jew does not consist in an outward sign only; both are inward.

Merely outward is not the Jew God means. Descent, profession, and the sign can all be present and the thing still absent. This is not a sneer; it is mercy that tells the truth so that inward circumcision can be sought from the Lord who promises to do it (v. 29).

But he is a Jew who is one inwardly, and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, not in the letter; whose praise is not from men, but from God. Wesley: he is a Jew—one of God’s people—who is one inwardly, in the secret recesses of his soul. The acceptable circumcision is that of the heart, referring to Deut. 30:6: the putting away all inward impurity. This is seated in the spirit, the inmost soul, renewed by the Spirit of God.

Listen here for the Spirit renewing the inmost soul, not a human self-circumcision. The letter without that renewal is the hearer’s religion. Praise from God, not from man, is the only verdict that will stand on the day secrets are judged. Preventing grace already taught that ’by nature’ was not bare nature; here the Spirit’s circumcision is the full inward gift. Live for that praise.

He is a Jew who is one inwardly, and circumcision is of the heart, in the spirit, not in the letter; whose praise is not from men, but from God. Calvin: both are inward. The people are everywhere commanded to circumcise their hearts, and it is what the Lord promises to do. Command and promise meet: God requires the inward thing and undertakes it.

The Spirit’s circumcision is the Lord’s promised work, not a cooperative trim of the letter. The true Jew and the seal are inward because God makes them so. Praise from God is the only praise that counts; man’s praise of an outward Jew is the very partiality v. 11 denied. The gospel that follows will show how God justifies the ungodly and how the Spirit writes what the letter could only require.