In my last post I inquired concerning the identity of the Gentiles of whom Paul wrote in Romans 2:14ff. In v. 13 he writes, "It is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the law will be justified." Now obviously if v. 13 is hypothetical and not normative, then the Gentiles mentioned immediately afterwards cannot be actual people by whom Paul intends to illustrate his point about the doers of the law. But if the Gentiles he describes are actual people, then it would seem to follow that v. 13 is not hypothetical at all, but rather highlights a normative state of affairs.Here's the text:
For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them on that day when, according to my gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus.
So, if a man who is uncircumcised keeps the precepts of the law, will not his uncircumcision be regarded as circumcision? Then he who is physically uncircumcised but keeps the law will condemn you who have the written code and circumcision but break the law (vv. 14-16, 26-27).
Now one way to determine whether the Gentiles of vv. 14ff are real people intended by Paul to furnish us with an illustration of the normative principle of v. 13 is by asking whether any specific examples of such Gentiles can be found in the pages of the New Testament. More specifically, would Acts 10 be such an example?
We read in vv. 1-6:
At Caesarea there was a man named Cornelius, a centurion of what was known as the Italian Cohort, a devout man who feared God with all his household, gave alms generously to the people, and prayed continually to God. About the ninth hour of the day he saw clearly in a vision an angel of God come in and say to him, "Cornelius." And he stared at him in terror and said, "What is it, Lord?" And he said to him, "Your prayers and your alms have ascended as a memorial before God. And now send men to Joppa and bring one Simon who is called Peter. He is lodging with one Simon, a tanner, whose house is by the sea."
When Peter finally arrives at Cornelius's house, the apostle says:
"Truly I understand that God shows no partiality, but in every nation anyone who fears him and does what is right is acceptable to him" (vv. 34-35).
He then preaches Jesus to Cornelius and his house, after which
the Holy Spirit fell on all who heard the word. And the believers from among the circumcised who had come with Peter were amazed, because the gift of the Holy Spirit was poured out even on the Gentiles (vv. 44-45).
I'll just highlight some of the textual connections between Acts 10 and Romans 2, and then let the discussion lead whithersoever it listeth: (1) Cornelius is a Gentile; (2) His good works are said to have gotten God's attention. Specifically, he is described as an upright man whose fear of God, prayers, and alms-giving have "been remembered by God." This seems consistent with those Gentiles who "by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, [God] will give eternal life" (Rom. 2:7); (3) Both Paul and Peter use the exact same phrase, "God shows no partiality"; (4) The Gentiles of Rom. 2 are described as those whose circumcision is "a matter of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter" (v. 29), while the household of Cornelius is said to have experienced the baptism of the Spirit, with Peter asking, "Can anyone withhold water for baptizing these people, who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?" (v. 47); (5) The work of God in the lives of the Gentiles in Acts 10 is explicitly tied to the New Covenant promise of the Spirit falling upon all flesh, while the Gentiles in Romans 2 are said to "show the works of the law written upon their hearts" (v. 15), which is also similar to the language used in the OT to describe the age of the New Covenant.
.
It would seem legitimate, therefore, to say that Cornelius is himself an example of those Gentiles of whom Paul speaks in Romans 2, whose natural uncircumcision is overcome by supernatural circumcision.
Thoughts?
15 comments: