Steven E. Runge, High Definition Commentary: Romans
(Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2014), 51-52

Romans 2:26–29

The big idea for the remaining verses of Romans 2 is drawn from the supporting statement of 2:25. Some versions have verse 25 as the beginning of a paragraph, but it is marked in Greek as supporting verse 24. Nevertheless, it provides the jumping off point for the next part of Paul’s argument, which begins in 2:26. Here Paul resumes the “equal opportunity” theme from 2:11–15 by contrasting the value of the inward change with outward appearance. In 2:17–25, he already clarified the gravity of hypocrisy. Now he turns to a related idea. What if someone has truly experienced a change of heart but without adopting the outward sign—they fulfill the requirements of the law but remain uncircumcised? What would God think of such a situation? Paul explains that God would view it just as He views the Gentiles who respond obediently to the law that was written on their hearts (2:13b–15).

Paul contrasts two paths with two results. If you have the outward signs without the inward obedience, the outward signs are meaningless; if you are inwardly obedient, then it will be credited to you as if you had adopted the outward signs. God gave circumcision as an outward sign and seal to Abraham in response to Abraham’s faith in His promises. But at some point, the sign of circumcision became more important than the decision to believe God and obediently follow Him. What matters to God is not knowing the right thing or having the right marks, but doing the right things for the right reasons.

Knowing vs. Doing: Paul makes a “for sake of argument” case that circumcision and possession of the law don’t matter to God as much as obedience. Therefore, Gentiles who are obedient to the law written on their hearts will be more highly regarded than circumcised Jews who possess the law but do not obey it. Paul makes clear in Romans 3:9 that all are guilty of sin, but here he highlights that the outward trappings of Judaism matter little unless accompanied by inward obedience.

Paul’s point here is not some new revelation about what makes a Jew a Jew. Rather he reiterates God’s original intention. He challenges folks to go retro, to rediscover what their covenant faith was originally all about. Just as God places higher value on obedience than on knowledge, He values faith and obedience more than circumcision. Paul drives this point home in verses 28–29. What is the defining characteristic of a God-pleasing Jew? The heart. The internal work done by the Spirit means more than the external marking of the flesh. If you want to please God, you can’t let the external distract you from the internal.

So if all God really cares about is the heart, why even bother with the external? Is there any value in circumcision? And if Gentiles can please God through obedience to a law of their own, is there even any value in being a Jew? Paul addresses these issues as the big idea for Romans 3.