In Romans chapter two, the Apostle Paul dealt with a variety of topics related to hypocritical spirituality. He first confronted those who claimed a position of moral superiority by saying: “You, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgment on someone else, for at whatever point you judge the other, you are condemning yourself, because you who pass judgment do the same things” (Romans 2:1 NIV).
He then addressed those whose behavior failed to reflect their external profession of spiritual belief: “You who boast in the law, do you dishonor God by breaking the law?” (Romans 2:23 CSB). Finally, Paul turned his attention to the consequences of spiritual hypocrisy by saying: “No wonder the Scriptures say that the world speaks evil of God because of you” (Romans 2:24 TLB).
Here now in Romans chapter three, Paul will hold something of a “Question and Answer” session to help address some inquiries that might arise in the minds of his audience. To do so, Paul will structure portions of Romans chapter three as a dialog with a hypothetical opponent. This approach should come as no surprise given what we know of Paul’s time in the ancient city of Athens…
“Therefore [Paul] reasoned in the synagogue with the Jews and with the Gentile worshipers, and in the marketplace daily with those who happened to be there” (Acts 17:17).
Those who confronted Paul in these venues undoubtedly influenced this approach…
“Some of the Epicurean and Stoic philosophers also conversed with him. And some said, ‘What does this babbler wish to say?’ Others said, ‘He seems to be a preacher of foreign divinities’–because he was preaching Jesus and the resurrection'” (Acts 17:18 ESV and following).
Thus, in the words of one source…
“It often becomes easier to follow Paul’s arguments if the reader imagines the apostle face to face with a heckler, who makes interjections and receives replies which sometimes are withering and brusque. It is by no means impossible that some of the arguments in Romans first took shape in this way, in the course of debates in synagogue or market place.” (1)
Finally, the prolific 17th-century commentator Matthew Henry offers a brief, verse-by-verse outline of this chapter that will help us follow along with the flow of these arguments…
- (1–8) Objections answered.
- (9–18) All mankind are sinners.
- (19, 20) Both Jews and Gentiles cannot be justified by their own deeds.
- (21–31) It is owing to the free grace of God, through faith in the righteousness of Christ, yet the law is not done away. (2)
Image Attribution: Question and answer icons created by Anggara – Flaticon
(1) Barrett, C. K. A Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans. Harper’s New Testament Commentaries series. New York: Harper & Row Publishers, 1957 [ p. 43]. Quoted in Notes on Romans 2025 Edition Dr. Thomas L. Constable https://soniclight.com/tcon/notes/html/romans/romans.htm Accessed 5 December, 2025.
(2) Matthew Henry’s Concise Commentary on the Bible – Christian Classics Ethereal Library. (n.d.). https://ccel.org/ccel/henry/mhcc/mhcc.xxxvii.iii.html
All nations feature roadways that limit the maximum speed of the motor vehicles that travel those roads. However, every nation also features its share of motor vehicle drivers who routinely ignore those limits. If law enforcement apprehends any of those speeding drivers, their knowledge of the posted speed limit offers no value in itself. In fact, their knowledge of the speed limit only serves to increase their guilt, for they knew the law, but failed to keep it.
It may be said that everyone functions as a teacher in some way. Some teach us what to do, while others teach us what not to do.
Much like a professional boxer, the Apostle Paul skillfully prepared his audience with a flurry of quick jabs in 
Despite being entrusted with the responsibility of representing the Almighty to those who were spiritually blind, the weight of that obligation did little to humble these people. Instead, their privilege led to an attitude of moral superiority. Ironically, Jesus characterized these supposedly enlightened ones as “the blind leading the blind” in 
Our perception of others is often based on what we can observe. However, those external observations may not prove accurate in every instance. If our perceptions of others fail to meet reality, we may be shocked to discover a moral failing, a character flaw, or some other shortcoming in the lives of those we thought we knew. Yet even though such areas may remain hidden from us, nothing is hidden from God (
Much like an umpire, judge, or referee at a sporting event, the conscience serves as an arbiter of right and wrong. When those without access to God’s Word do what is right, the conscience judges accordingly and excuses their behavior. When they violate their consciences by engaging in inappropriate thoughts or behaviors, the conscience plays an accusatory role.
” Our moral inclinations are manifested in our reactions when others violate our rights; we don’t see the moral law nearly as clearly when we violate others’ rights… But again our sinfulness is not found in our inability to know what the moral duty is but in our unwillingness to do it to others.” (2)
First, we can say that no one (including those who do not possess the Old Testament Law) can deny the self-evident existence of “right” and “wrong.” A simple dialogue with someone who does not believe the concepts of “right” and “wrong” exist help demonstrate that reality…
However, that does not make someone innocent. Consider the preceding portion of that reference from Romans 5:13…
Let’s say person number one is a professional electrician who possesses a thorough understanding of electrical theory. Person number two does not know how electricity works. However, person number two has seen electrical appliances in use and is aware that something causes them to operate when they are plugged into an electrical outlet.
Another transcendent moral law states, it is wrong to be unjust. While injustice may take different forms, there is cross-cultural agreement on this general principle. In fact, we can find an ancient expression of this idea in the Biblical book of Proverbs: “The Lord detests the use of dishonest scales, but he delights in accurate weights” (Proverbs 11:1 NLT).
This approach argues for the existence of universal moral statutes that transcend time and culture. It also asserts that all laws have authors who create them. In order to prescribe those transcendent moral absolutes, our law source must also transcend time and culture as well. If we can document the existence of transcendent moral laws that every culture, tribe, and society recognizes and accepts, then it means that such laws must also derive from a transcendent source as well.
This approach builds on the cosmological argument for God’s existence in an important way. It states that the things that have been made serve to reveal the existence of a designer. Several analogies have been developed to illustrate this concept over the years. For example…
The field of archaeology offers another example. An archaeologist on a dig is not surprised to uncover a natural stone from an earlier era, for it is nothing more than a feature of the surrounding landscape. However, when that archaeologist uncovers a natural stone from an earlier era that has been fashioned into a tool, he or she knows that an intelligent entity modified that stone for a reason. The archaeologist thus finds a level of complexity in that discovery that natural processes cannot explain.