“for when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do the things in the law, these, although not having the law, are a law to themselves” (Romans 2:14).
The Old Testament book of Psalms contains a verse that relates to the passage quoted above: “God gave his laws and teachings to the descendants of Jacob, the nation of Israel. But he has not given his laws to any other nation” (Psalm 147:19-20 CEV). Our text from Romans 2:14 thus offers some insight into God’s judgment of those who have not had access to those “laws and teachings.” But to establish that connection, we must lay some groundwork first.
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…
Statement: “There is no such thing as right and wrong.”
Response: “Is that right?”
This hypothetical exchange highlights an important point: while we may debate the meaning of “right” and “wrong,” the self-evident nature of those concepts is undeniable. Therefore, when those who have never had access to God’s Law abstain from theft, lying, adultery, and other such behaviors, their actions align with the Law despite their lack of exposure to it.
In a similar manner, societies and individuals generally recognize that “justice” is right, and “injustice” is wrong. While the definitions of justice and injustice may vary, these recognitions are “laws unto themselves,” to borrow a phrase from Romans 2:14.
So, even though “…no one does good, not even one” as we’ll read later in Romans 3:12, this does not mean that human beings are incapable of recognizing and performing good deeds. As Jesus Himself once said, “If you do good to those who do good to you, what benefit is that to you? For even sinners do the same” (Luke 6:33). In light of this, we can say that everyone recognizes that some things are good (or right) and some things aren’t. The criteria may change, but the principle remains the same.
Thus, everyone possesses a set of standards that informs their decision-making processes. Those standards determine right and wrong behaviors and enable us to make moral and ethical judgments. We can turn once again to the observations of Dr. Norman Geisler for some additional insight on this topic…
“What person does not expect to be treated as a person? Who ever actually believed that it was right to take what belonged to anyone at any time? Who ever truly believed that murder, rape, or cruelty to children was morally right? To be sure, mankind has not always lived up to its moral ideals—this is an indication of our depravity and need for Christ’s redemption…” (1)
(1) Geisler, N. L., & Feinberg, P. D. (1980). Introduction to Philosophy: A Christian Perspective. Baker Publishing Group (MI).
Image Attribution: Tumisu, CC0, via Wikimedia Commons, public domain, via Wikimedia Commons
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.
Romans 2:12 marks the first of seventy-eight appearances of the word “law” in the New King James Version of this epistle. An excerpt from the following commentary will serve as our introduction to this important concept…
Romans 2:11 presents a characteristic that is easily discerned, yet rarely practiced: impartiality. For instance, most of us have likely encountered the adverse effects of partiality at various points throughout our lives. Much like the Biblical example of 
Next, God’s judgment will be rooted in truth according to Romans 2:2. In other words, God will assess our thoughts and behaviors on the basis of reality and not appearance. While human beings are occasionally shocked to discover that others are not what they seem, God is never surprised by such revelations, and He will judge accordingly.
Another commentary likens God’s wrath to a large repository…
Paul then followed with a rhetorical question that assumes a negative response: “Do you really think God won’t punish you, when you behave exactly like the people you accuse?” (CEV). When faced with that uncomfortable reality, some may attempt to shift the blame for their shortcomings to someone or something else. While that approach may work with other human beings, it is wholly ineffective with the God who knows all.
The main point is this: the very act of creating this internal courtroom validates the practice of judging others. The problem comes when we fail to apply our personal judicial standards to our own thoughts, acts, and behaviors. It is often easy to exempt ourselves from the standards we apply to others, but in doing so, we establish two sets of rules: one for ourselves and one for others.
Do Scriptures such as Romans 2:1 and James 4:12 prohibit us from judging others? Do these passages forbid us from judging ideas and opinions that are evil, unfair, or unjust? Do they mean we should never speak the truth to others because doing so might involve “judging” them? We can answer such questions with an unqualified “no.”