• About
  • Contact
  • RSS
  • Audio
The Doctor's Office
Banner
  • Home
  • Old Testament Book Studies
    • The Book Of Genesis
    • The Book of Ruth
    • The Book of Nehemiah
    • The Book Of Esther
    • The Book Of Ecclesiastes
  • New Testament Book Studies
    • The Gospel Of Mark
    • The Book Of Romans
    • The Book Of 1 Corinthians
    • The Book Of 2 Corinthians
    • The Book Of Galatians
    • The Book Of Ephesians
    • The Book Of Philippians
    • The Book Of 1 Timothy
    • The Book Of Colossians
    • The Book Of 1 Thessalonians
    • The Book Of 2 Thessalonians
    • The Book Of 2 Timothy
    • The Book of Titus
    • The Book Of Philemon
    • The Book Of Hebrews
    • The Book Of 1 Peter
    • The Book Of 2 Peter
    • The Book Of James
    • The Book Of 1 John
    • The Books Of 2 John / 3 John
    • The Book Of Revelation

Romans – Chapter Two XV

by Ed Urzi April 10, 2026

“He will render to each one according to his works” (Romans 2:6).

Some may erroneously believe they can defy God without repercussion, for they presume He is either ignorant or indifferent to their conduct. Then there are those who seem to believe they can disregard this portion of Scripture and adopt an attitude of disrespect towards God without consequence. While some may seemingly avoid accountability for their actions (at least in the short-term), everyone will eventually have to deal with the ramifications of their conduct according to Romans 2:6.

The Gospel of John touches upon this theme as well…

“This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but men loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that his deeds will be exposed. But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what he has done has been done through God” (John 3:19-21 NIV).

While Jesus is the light of the world, there are some who prefer to remain in darkness. But as Jesus Himself warned us, “There is nothing hidden that will not be revealed. There is nothing kept secret that will not come to light” (Mark 4:22 GW). The Psalmist expressed this sentiment as well…

“Where could I go to escape from you? Where could I get away from your presence? If I went up to heaven, you would be there; if I lay down in the world of the dead, you would be there… I could ask the darkness to hide me or the light around me to turn into night, but even darkness is not dark for you, and the night is as bright as the day. Darkness and light are the same to you” (Psalms 139:7-8, 11-12 GNB).

So, while some may be highly skilled in masking their actions or motives, nothing is concealed from God. Therefore, we would do well to contemplate the sobering message given to us in the Biblical book of Hebrews…

“Nothing in all creation is hidden from God’s sight. Everything is uncovered and laid bare before the eyes of him to whom we must give account” (Hebrews 4:13 NIV).

Nevertheless, we find a far more encouraging motivation in Jesus’ message from Matthew 5:8: “Blessed are the pure in heart, For they shall see God.” In light of these things, the New Testament book of 1 Corinthians offers the following counsel…

“…do not judge anything before the time. Wait until the Lord comes. He will bring to light the hidden things of darkness and reveal the motives of hearts. Then each will receive recognition from God” (1 Corinthians 4:5 NET).

0 FacebookTwitterEmail

Romans – Chapter Two XIV

by Ed Urzi April 9, 2026

“He will give each one whatever his deeds deserve” (Romans 2:6 TLB).

Romans 2:6 is one of the shortest verses in this book and one of the most sobering. While some may pile layer upon layer of explanations, justifications, obfuscations, and/or rationalizations to explain their behavior, God will eventually penetrate those layers to give us whatever our deeds deserve. Whether we seek to offer a legitimate justification for our actions or cover the motivations we wish to conceal, we can be assured that God knows the difference.

There are several key principles we can draw from this passage and the verses that precede it. First, God will not permit us to make exceptions for ourselves when it comes to the standards we impose on others (Romans 2:1). Again, if we judge a certain behavior to be wrong, then it is wrong for everyone, including ourselves. Thus, we can say that God will not show favoritism in giving us what we deserve.

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.

Romans 2:6 also tells us that God’s judgment is based on “deeds” and not intent. For instance, we may desire to fulfill various ambitions, but there is a difference between the things we aspire to do, and the things we actually do. God’s judgment will be based on what we do and not what we intended to do, no matter how noble those aspirations may be. Therefore, a statement such as, “I meant to do it“ will hold no value as God makes His assessment of our lives.

In addition to what we read here in Romans 2:6, the Old Testament reiterates these concepts as well. Consider the following passage from the Biblical book of Ecclesiastes…

“God will judge us for everything we do, including every secret thing, whether good or bad” (Ecclesiastes 12:14 NLT).

The book of the prophet Jeremiah adds…

“I, the Lord, probe into people’s minds. I examine people’s hearts. I deal with each person according to how he has behaved. I give them what they deserve based on what they have done” (Jeremiah 17:10 NET).

So while salvation is solely by God’s grace through faith in Christ, we should seek to apply Jesus’ counsel from the Gospel of Matthew…

“Do not lay up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy and where thieves break in and steal; but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust destroys and where thieves do not break in and steal. For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also” (Matthew 6:19-21).

Image Attribution: kai Stachowiak, “Lie Truth” via Public Domain Pictures.net

0 FacebookTwitterEmail

Romans – Chapter Two XIII

by Ed Urzi April 8, 2026

“But because of your hardness and impenitent heart, you are storing up treasures of wrath against yourself on the day of wrath when the righteous judgment of God will be revealed, and He ‘will render to every man according to his deeds'” (Romans 2:5-6 MEV).

Commentators have developed several illustrations that can help us visualize the “treasury of wrath” mentioned in these verses. For instance, we might compare this treasury to the act of hoarding. A hoarder is “…one who accumulates, collects, and stores, especially one who does so to excess” (1) or, “a person who accumulates things and hides them away for future use.” (2)

One commentator applies these definitions to the idea of “treasuring up” wrath for ourselves…

“There will be tribulation and distress for every human being who does evil. (Rom. 2:4–9) That’s a scary thing, because what Paul is describing is a hoarder, someone who amasses a supply of something.” (3)

That same author also employs a financial analogy to illustrate this idea…

“In explaining our sin in relation to God’s wrath, Paul uses a banking metaphor: If we begin to save our money, taking a small portion of each paycheck and putting it in the bank, we are building up, slowly but surely, a treasure… Just so, every time we sin, we add an indictment against ourselves, treasuring up wrath against the day of wrath.

Do we really believe that? I do not think the world believes it. Every day that we sin without repenting, we are depositing future wrath into the account of God’s judgment.” (4)

Another commentary likens God’s wrath to a large repository…

“God s wrath against people’s sins is being stored up like a great reservoir until the day when it will all be poured forth in His righteous judgment. On that day God will give to each person according to what He has done…” (5)

Our final source illustrates the danger of treasuring up God’s wrath with a look at Jesus’ experience as He faced His impending death…

“Do we doubt that God’s wrath is real and threatening? If we do, we need only look at Jesus in the hours preceding his crucifixion. He was not like Socrates who calmly quaffed the hemlock that was to end his life. Jesus’ soul was ‘troubled’ (John 12:27), and he agonized in the Garden of Gethsemane, asking that the ‘cup’ God had prepared for him might be taken away (Matt. 26:36-44)…

The reason Jesus trembled before death is that his death was not to be like the death of mere mortals. Jesus was not going to die for himself. He was going to die for others. He was going to take upon himself the full measure of the wrath of God that they deserved. He was to drink the cup of wrath to the very dregs—in order that the justice of God might be satisfied and sinners might be spared.” (6)

Image Attribution: Road on dam”  Public Domain, CC0, via rawpixel

(1) Hoarder in Thesaurus: All Synonyms & Antonyms, www.powerthesaurus.org/hoarder/definitions. Accessed 06 Oct. 2025.

(2) Hoarder. (n.d.) WordNet 3.0, (2003-2008). Retrieved October 6 2025 from https://www.thefreedictionary.com/hoarder

(3) Sproul, R. C. What Comes after This Life? Ligonier Ministries, 2023. p. 57

(4) Sproul, R. C. The Power of the Gospel: A Year in Romans. Ligonier Ministries, 2024. p. 51

(5) John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck, Bible Knowledge Commentary (1983), David C Cook. p. 445

(6) Boice, J. M. (2005). Romans: Justification by Faith (Romans 1-4). Baker Books. p.222

0 FacebookTwitterEmail

Romans – Chapter Two XII

by Ed Urzi April 7, 2026

“But in accordance with your hardness and your impenitent heart you are treasuring up for yourself wrath in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God, who ‘will render to each one according to his deeds’” (Romans 2:5-6).

While certain portions of Scripture may present us with some interpretive difficulties, nearly everyone can relate to the mindset depicted here within this passage. For instance, most of us know what it’s like to interact with those who are stubborn, obstinate, or callous. That represents the type of attitude portrayed by the use of the word “hardness” here in Romans 2:5-6. (1) That unyielding mindset defines the way some respond to God’s kindness (which is intended to lead them to repentance according to Romans 2:4).

That brings us to this reference to “impenitence,” a word that makes its only Biblical appearance here in Romans 2:5. This word conveys a sense of resistance or unwillingness to repent. For instance, “repentance” speaks of a change of mind that leads to a change in behavior. However, “impenitence” is just the opposite. It identifies someone who “admits no change of mind” (2) and thus brings insult upon God’s mercy.

These references communicate an ingrained, deep-rooted mindset as evidenced by the use of the word “heart, ” “Heart” is represented by the word kardia in the original language of this passage. As you might expect, it also forms the basis for our modern-day word “cardiac.” “Kardia” refers to our innermost person in a physical, emotional, intellectual, or spiritual sense.

One source alerts us to an important distinction in considering this reference: “A person’s habitual conduct, whether good or evil, reveals the condition of his heart.” (3) A person with a “hardened and unrepentant heart” (CSB) is not someone who makes an isolated mistake, delivers an ill-advised comment, or suffers from a momentary lapse in judgment. Instead, he or she consistently and obstinately resists God’s “kindness, tolerance, and patience” (GNB) as He seeks to lead that person to repentance.

These verses offer another word-picture that helps to illustrate the cost of that response: “you are treasuring up for yourself wrath.” This serves to warn us concerning the accumulated guilt we incur from an impenitent attitude and its resultant behaviors. While the Biblical epistle of James tells us that one sin is a violation against the entire law (James 2:10), Romans 2:5 tells us that each sinful act adds to the repository of wrath that awaits the unrepentant.

We’ll consider this reference to “treasuring up wrath” at greater length next.

(1) G4643 – sklerotes – Strong’s Greek Lexicon (kjv). (n.d.). Blue Letter Bible. https://www.blueletterbible.org/lexicon/g4643/kjv/tr/0-1/

(2) G279 – ametanoetos – Strong’s Greek Lexicon (kjv). (n.d.). Blue Letter Bible. https://www.blueletterbible.org/lexicon/g279/kjv/tr/0-1/

(3) John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck, Bible Knowledge Commentary (1983), David C Cook. p. 445

0 FacebookTwitterEmail

Romans – Chapter Two XI

by Ed Urzi April 6, 2026

“Or perhaps you despise his great kindness, tolerance, and patience. Surely you know that God is kind, because he is trying to lead you to repent” (Romans 2:4 GNB).

Romans 2:4 is a verse that requires a thoughtful approach that accounts for several factors that influence the way we interpret this verse. For instance, it’s important to acknowledge that “repentance” may present itself in forms that are authentic or inauthentic. The New Testament book of 2 Corinthians illustrates that difference…

“For godly sorrow produces repentance leading to salvation, not to be regretted; but the sorrow of the world produces death” (2 Corinthians 7:10).

While it’s not unusual to hear others voice their sorrow over an inappropriate action or behavior, it may help to clarify the source of their distress. For instance, consider the difference in the following statements:

  • “I’m sorry; I did something wrong.”
  • “I’m sorry; I got caught doing something wrong.”

You see, a person who apologizes for doing something wrong may not actually regret his or her behavior. In fact, he or she might even repeat that same behavior if given the opportunity. Instead, that person may simply regret the consequences of getting caught. We can associate that response with “the sorrow of the world” mentioned in 2 Corinthians 7:10.

That type of sorrow fails to lead us to authentic repentance because it simply flows from the negative consequences of a behavior. On the other hand, “godly sorrow” produces a God-honoring response that reflects a change of mind that leads to a change of behavior.

When God demonstrates “kindness, tolerance, and patience” towards those who engage in various forms of immoral conduct, those individuals may feel as if they have successfully evaded the repercussions of their behavior. In fact, the Old Testament book of Ecclesiastes spotlights that very attitude when it says, “Because God does not punish sinners instantly, people feel it is safe to do wrong” (Ecclesiastes 8:11 TLB). However, God may be expressing His kindness in providing an opportunity to repent according to our text from Romans 2:4.

In addition, we should also recognize that every genuine Christian is a “work in progress” to a greater or lesser extent. Because God is patient, merciful, and benevolent, He may graciously permit us to overcome our sinful inclinations quietly, without the discomfort of public disclosure. But those who decline that opportunity should pay careful attention to the message given to us in Numbers 32:23: “…take note, you have sinned against the LORD; and be sure your sin will find you out.”

0 FacebookTwitterEmail

Romans – Chapter Two X

by Ed Urzi April 3, 2026

“Or do you have contempt for the wealth of his kindness, forbearance, and patience, and yet do not know that God’s kindness leads you to repentance?” (Romans 2:4 NET).

Authentic repentance comprises a prayerful commitment to abstain from sinful or inappropriate behaviors in favor of choices that are virtuous and pleasing to God.

To illustrate this idea, let’s take the example of a motorist who discovers that he or she is traveling in the wrong direction. Once our hypothetical driver realizes that he or she has made a navigational error, the best course of action is to stop, change direction, and return to the correct route.

In a similar manner, genuine repentance is best demonstrated through action, much like a motorist might execute a U-turn in order to change course. Jesus once used two real-world examples to underscore the importance of this idea…

“Now there were some present at that time who told Jesus about the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mixed with their sacrifices. Jesus answered, ‘Do you think that these Galileans were worse sinners than all the other Galileans because they suffered this way? I tell you, no! But unless you repent, you too will all perish.

Or those eighteen who died when the tower in Siloam fell on them — do you think they were more guilty than all the others living in Jerusalem? I tell you, no! But unless you repent, you too will all perish'” (Luke 13:1-5 NIV).

From the dawn of humanity, God’s kindness, forbearance, and patience have characterized His means of interacting with sinful human beings in seeking to lead them to repentance. For instance, consider the sequence of events that occurred in the Garden of Eden. Following Adam’s creation, God spoke to him and said, “…Of every tree of the garden you may freely eat; but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die” (Genesis 2:16-17).

Even though Adam’s transgression resulted in immediate spiritual death in the form of his separation from God, his physical life continued for many centuries. In fact, God was gracious enough to clothe Adam and his wife following their expulsion from the Garden of Eden (Genesis 3:21). These events thus serve as an object lesson: “…God’s goodness, which is not to show approval of people’s sins, but to extend to them further opportunities of repentance, and to persuade them by means of such goodness.” (1)

Image Attribution: Indian Roads Congress, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

(1) Coffman, James Burton. “Commentary on Romans 2”. “Coffman’s Commentaries on the Bible”. https://studylight.org/commentaries/eng/bcc/romans-2.html. Abilene Christian University Press, Abilene, Texas, USA. 1983-1999.

0 FacebookTwitterEmail

Romans – Chapter Two IX

by Ed Urzi April 2, 2026

“Or do you presume on the riches of his kindness and forbearance and patience, not knowing that God’s kindness is meant to lead you to repentance?” (Romans 2:4).

A look at the original language of this passage defines longsuffering (or forbearance) in the following manner: “Longsuffering is that quality of self restraint in the face of provocation which does not hastily retaliate or promptly punish; it is the opposite of anger, and is associated with mercy, and is used of God…” (1) Another source associates longsuffering with the idea of patience under provocation…

“This denotes restraint which enables one to bear injury and insult without resorting to retaliation. It accepts the wrong without complaint. Long-suffering is an attribute of God (Rom 2:4) and a fruit of the Holy Spirit (Gal 5:22).” (2)

These definitions enable us to make some important observations…

  • This quality is reflective of a person who holds the power to strike back against others but chooses not to do so.
  • It serves to identify someone who does not seek to get even or take revenge upon those who have done them wrong.
  • It also describes a person who maintains his or her composure and bears patiently with those who are difficult, argumentative, ill-tempered, or easily offended.

This type of person is someone who models his or her behavior after God’s example as seen here in Romans 2:4. Since God is patient and forbearing, we should emulate those attributes as well.

This quality also aligns with the counsel given to us in the Biblical epistle of James: “Know this, my dear brothers and sisters: everyone should be quick to listen, slow to speak, and slow to grow angry” (James 1:19 CEB). These passages should prompt us to seek God’s empowerment to reflect those characteristics in our relationships with others, even those who are hard to deal with.

Finally, one source issues a cautionary reminder that bears repeating. We should not fall into the mistaken belief that God’s forbearance and patience means that He approves of unjust behaviors…

“Do not think that the fact that God does not punish you is a sign that he cannot punish you. The fact that his punishment does not immediately follow sin is not a proof of his powerlessness; it is a proof of his patience. You owe your lives to the patience of God. One great commentator has said that almost everyone has ‘a vague and undefined hope of impunity,’ a kind of feeling that this cannot happen to me. …there are many who to this day seek to do the same.” (3)

Portions of this message originally appeared here

(1) makrothumia (G3115) Vine’s Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words with Topical Index, W.E. Vine, © 1996, Thomas Nelson, Nashville, Tennessee. All rights reserved.

(2) Hindson, E. E., & Kroll, W. M. (Eds.). (1994). KJV Bible Commentary (p. 2464). Nashville: Thomas Nelson.

(3) Barclay, William. “Commentary on Romans 2”. “William Barclay’s Daily Study Bible”. https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/eng/dsb/romans-2.html. 1956-1959.

0 FacebookTwitterEmail

Romans – Chapter Two VIII

by Ed Urzi April 1, 2026

“Or do you despise the riches of His goodness, forbearance, and longsuffering, not knowing that the goodness of God leads you to repentance?” (Romans 2:4).

Our text from Romans 2:4 tells us that God is “forbearing” and “longsuffering” with us. These relational qualities convey a sense of mercy, patience, and endurance as God interacts with the members of the human family. God exhibits those characteristics toward those who are in rebellion toward Him for the purpose of leading them to repentance.

However, we should not mistake God’s graciousness in demonstrating these qualities as a sign of weakness or an inability to act. For instance, some might assume that just because God has not acted in a situation, it must mean that He is incapable of acting or is disinterested in doing so. Since God is patient and longsuffering toward us, it is not unusual to encounter those who take advantage of those qualities. But those who make continual withdrawals on God’s forbearance with no corresponding change in attitude or behavior will eventually discover that there is nothing left to withdraw other than His judgment.

As Paul the Apostle will go on to say in the following verse, such individuals are treasuring up wrath for themselves. In other words, they have not “spent” God’s grace in pursuit of repentance, as He intended. Instead, those expenditures were made in pursuit of ungodliness. This idea is not unique to the book of Romans, for “The Old Testament and Judaism agreed that only God’s grace made repentance possible (e.g., Deu_30:6). This principle never denied a person’s responsibility to respond to that grace once it was offered (e.g., Deu_5:29; Deu_10:16).” (1)

So, Paul cautioned the self-righteous to avoid misinterpreting God’s mercy in the absence of immediate judgment. For example, those who follow that path may fall victim to confirmation bias. This refers to the act of interpreting information in a way that is consistent with our existing beliefs. (2) In this context, confirmation bias is expressed in the following manner: our desire to distance ourselves from God leads us to mistake His forbearance as a sign of His approval or acceptance.

However, those who wrongly interpret God’s patience as a sign of His approval do not escape His judgment. One Biblical scholar summarizes that idea by saying, “God treats the wicked with loving kindness. However, He never condones their wickedness. As Paul points out in Romans, the goodness of God is not a sign of His approval of their actions. Rather, the goodness of God is designed to lead to repentance (Rom. 2:4).” (3)

(1) Keener, C. S. (1993). The IVP Bible background commentary : New Testament (Romans 2:1-11). Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press.

(2) Casad, J, B., Luebering, & J.E. (2025, September 22). Confirmation bias | Definition, Examples, Psychology, & Facts. Encyclopedia Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/science/confirmation-bias

(3) Geisler, N. L., & Howe, T. A. (1992). When critics ask : a popular handbook on Bible difficulties. Wheaton, Ill.: Victor Books. Page 173

0 FacebookTwitterEmail

Romans – Chapter Two VII

by Ed Urzi March 31, 2026

“But we know that the judgment of God is according to truth against those who practice such things. And do you think this, O man, you who judge those practicing such things, and doing the same, that you will escape the judgment of God?” (Romans 2:2-3).

In contrast to those who are blind to their own judgmental inconsistencies, Paul the Apostle assured his readers that “…we know that the judgment of God is according to truth.” Because of this, God’s judgment always corresponds to reality, for He will not only assess our actions, but our underlying motives- the truth behind our actions. This is something that lies beyond human capability.

For example, we may place others on trial in our personal mental courtrooms for the wrongs (real or imagined) we feel they have committed. The problem is that it’s virtually impossible to know another person’s motive with absolute, 100% certainty. Since human beings lack that ability, we are inevitably left to render judgments based on the evidence we possess. That evidence may, or may not, be truthful or accurate.

This does not mean we should refrain from making judgments based on the available evidence. However, it’s important to recognize that human beings are limited in this area while God is not. This is why legal convictions are sometimes overturned as new evidence comes to light. In addition, our ability to render accurate judgments may be affected by our emotions, life experiences, and personal biases.

Taken together, this often makes it easy for us to sentence others for “crimes” they did not commit. Another source offers something else to consider…

“The first principle by which God judges is that He judges righteously (v 2). He judges on the basis of what really exists, not what merely appears to be. For example, someone might assume that since his immoral thoughts are not observable, he is free of guilt. But God looks at the heart. Consequently those who have practiced the same sins as those listed previously, though perhaps not in the same way, should not think they will escape judgment (v. 3).” (1)

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.

This builds on the foundation Paul established earlier in verse one: “… if you feel inclined to set yourself up as a judge of those who sin, let me assure you, whoever you are, that you are in no position to do so” (Phillips). In the words of one ancient commentator, “If what they do is displeasing to us, how much more will it be so to God, who is truly just?” (2)

Image Attribution: “Pointing Hand” Public Domain, CC0, via rawpixel

(1) Dr. Thomas L. Constable, Notes on Romans 2025 Edition https://soniclight.com/tcon/notes/html/romans/romans.htm

(2) Ambrosiaster, Commentaries on Romans-2 Corinthians quoted in ESV Church History Study Bible: Voices from the Past, Wisdom for the Present. (2023). Crossway. p.1696

0 FacebookTwitterEmail

Romans – Chapter Two VI

by Ed Urzi March 30, 2026

“You, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgment on someone else, for at whatever point you judge another, you are condemning yourself, because you who pass judgment do the same things” (Romans 2:1 NIV).

This passage will likely prove challenging for those who prefers to isolate themselves from the uncomfortable realities that are presented within this text. But a person who is prepared to follow the truth where it leads will reap the benefit associated with this portion of Scripture.

This passage first establishes a condition: “you who pass judgment on someone else.” So, we begin with those who possess (or believe they possess) enough information to render a judgment upon someone else. We then move to create an internal courtroom where others are subjected to own judicial standard (“…at whatever point you judge another“). As mentioned earlier, this is not inherently wrong if we judge with righteous judgment (John 7:24).

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.

If we judge a certain behavior to be wrong, then it is wrong for everyone, including ourselves. One Biblical scholar summarizes this concept with a brief but insightful comment…

“This seems so obvious that we might be tempted to pass over it quickly. But think about it for a moment. If I pronounce a judgment against another person, I am announcing that I believe his behavior is wrong. If I condemn others for it, I must also condemn it in myself. It seems to be a universal human failing to see others more clearly than we see ourselves.” (1)

Another source highlights the self-deceptive methods we often use to evade this obligation….

“…[Another] way we try to elude the fact that we are guilty of the very things we accuse others of doing is by cleverly renaming things. Other people lie and cheat; we simply stretch the truth a little. Others betray; we simply are protecting our rights. Others steal; we borrow. Others have prejudices; we have convictions.” (2)

We typically refer to this practice as a double standard. We can define a double standard as, “the habit of treating one group differently than another when both groups should be treated the same.” (3) Our text from Romans 2:1 thus cautions us against engaging is this practice whenever we evaluate the ideas, ethics, behaviors, and practices of others.

Image Attribution: “Judge Gavel” George Hodan, CC0, via Public Domain Pictures.net

(1) Sproul, R. C. (1992). Before the face of God: Book 1: A daily guide for living from the book of Romans (electronic ed.). Grand Rapids: Baker Book House; Ligonier Ministries. Page 23.

(2) Excerpted with permission from From Guilt to Glory — Explained © 1976 by Ray Stedman Ministries. All rights reserved. Visit www.RayStedman.org for the complete library of Ray Stedman material. Please direct any questions to webmaster@RayStedman.org

(3) Definition of “double standard” from the Cambridge Academic Content Dictionary © Cambridge University Press https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/double-standard

0 FacebookTwitterEmail

Romans – Chapter Two V

by Ed Urzi March 27, 2026

“Therefore, any one of you who judges is without excuse. For when you judge another, you condemn yourself, since you, the judge, do the same things” (Romans 2:1 HCSB).

Having considered the general validity of “judgment,” we can now turn our attention to the indefensible form of judgment described here in Romans 2:1. That type of judgment proceeds from the hypocrite, or the person who indulges in the same sinful behaviors that he or she condemns in others. This portion of Scripture tells us that those who engage in such practices have no excuse or defense for their conduct.

It is a peculiar facet of human nature that permits us to criticize others while simultaneously taking part in the behaviors we condemn. While we can find examples of this type of conduct in virtually every walk of life, it seems our author had a particular type of individual in mind…

“Paul deals with the… type of man who rejects the gospel, the self-righteous moralist, who is outwardly decent, good-living, and clean-cut. Inwardly, however, he is filled with resentments, jealousies, murder, hatred, and envy; and his attitudes are as wrong as the actions of those who are outwardly evil.

The problem is that such men delude themselves by thinking that everything is going to be all right with them. Because they have maintained a certain respectable facade, they think that God is going to overlook the inner sins of their life and that there is going to be no judgment for them because everything appears to be fine.” (1)

Another commentary adds the following insight…

“Often the sins we notice most clearly in others are the ones that have taken root in us. If we look closely at ourselves, we may find that we are committing the same sins in more socially acceptable forms… When Paul’s letter was read in the Roman church, no doubt many heads nodded as he condemned idol worshipers, homosexual practices, and violent people. But what surprise his listeners must have felt when he turned on them and said in effect, ‘You are just as bad, and you have no excuse!’ Paul was emphatically stressing that we have all sinned repeatedly, and there is no way apart from Christ to be saved from sin’s consequences.” (2)

Although we may attempt to rationalize this type of double-standard, our text from Romans chapter two warns us that God sees through our efforts to excuse such things. We cannot exempt ourselves from God’s judgment if we engage in the practices we condemn in others. Therefore, we would be well advised to follow the counsel given to us in the New Testament book of 1 Corinthians: “…if we judged ourselves, we would not come under judgment” (1 Corinthian 11:31 NIV).

(1) Excerpted with permission from From Guilt to Glory — Explained © 1976 by Ray Stedman Ministries. All rights reserved. Visit www.RayStedman.org for the complete library of Ray Stedman material. Please direct any questions to webmaster@RayStedman.org

(2) Life Application Study Bible NKJV [Romans 2:1] Copyright © 1988, 1989, 1991, 1993, 1996, 2004 by Tyndale House Publishers Inc., all rights reserved.

0 FacebookTwitterEmail

Romans – Chapter Two IV

by Ed Urzi March 26, 2026

“Therefore you are without excuse, whoever you are, when you judge someone else. For on whatever grounds you judge another, you condemn yourself, because you who judge practice the same things” (Romans 2:1 NET).

As we continue on the topic of judgment from Romans 2:1, we now stop to consider another inappropriate form of judgment. That type of judgment occurs when we look down upon the less affluent, or those who appear to fall below our personal standard of living. We can turn once again to the Biblical book of James for some valuable guidance on this subject…

“Dear brothers, how can you claim that you belong to the Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, if you show favoritism to rich people and look down on poor people? If a man comes into your church dressed in expensive clothes and with valuable gold rings on his fingers, and at the same moment another man comes in who is poor and dressed in threadbare clothes, and you make a lot of fuss over the rich man and give him the best seat in the house and say to the poor man, ‘You can stand over there if you like or else sit on the floor’– well, judging a man by his wealth shows that you are guided by wrong motives” (James 2:1-4 TLB).

Another type of judgmental error concerns the secondary aspects of Christian life and practice. This would involve areas where Godly men and women have different (but valid) standards and beliefs. Paul the Apostle will discuss this topic at length in Romans chapter fourteen, but we can preview that section with the following excerpt…

“Accept him whose faith is weak, without passing judgment on disputable matters… Who are you to judge someone else’s servant? To his own master he stands or falls. And he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand… You, then, why do you judge your brother? Or why do you look down on your brother? For we will all stand before God’s judgment seat… Therefore let us stop passing judgment on one another. Instead, make up your mind not to put any stumbling block or obstacle in your brother’s way” (Romans 14:1,4,10,13 NIV).

These passages illustrate the different ways in which inappropriate judgments are formed and expressed. However, these examples differ from the act of “judging” someone who is engaged in a harmful or self-destructive behavior. If done with the proper motivation, in a spirit of humility and concern, that type of judgment might save others from serious harm.

0 FacebookTwitterEmail

Romans – Chapter Two III

by Ed Urzi March 25, 2026

“Therefore you have no excuse, O man, every one of you who judges. For in passing judgment on another you condemn yourself, because you, the judge, practice the very same things” (Romans 2:1 ESV).

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.”

We can start by observing that Jesus often judged between right and wrong. We can find one such example in Matthew 23:13-36 where He brought a scathing indictment against the religious leadership of His day. Nevertheless, some might object by referencing Jesus’ famous prohibition from Matthew 7:1: “Judge not, that you be not judged.” In considering that cautionary message, we would do well to read the portion of Scripture that follows…

“For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you. Why do you see the speck that is in your brother’s eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when there is the log in your own eye?” You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye” (Matthew 7:2-5).

In making these statements, Jesus did not condemn all forms of judgment. In fact, the directive to “Judge not…” is a judgment itself. Furthermore, anyone else who says, “do not judge,” makes a judgmental statement of their own. With these things in mind, we can gain a better understanding of these passages by identifying the type of judgment in view.

The “judgment” Jesus speaks of in these verses clearly refers to the self-righteous, hypocritical, and condemnatory type of judgment practiced by the spiritual elitists of His day. In Jesus’ view, that type of judgment was nothing more than hypocrisy in action. Jesus also encouraged us to make the right kinds of judgments in John 7:24 where He is quoted as saying, “Do not judge according to appearance, but judge with righteous judgment.”

So, Jesus cautioned us to avoid a “do as I say, not as I do” judgmental standard. That admonishment aligns seamlessly with our text from Romans 2:1. As Jesus also reminded us, “… you must give account on Judgment Day for every idle word you speak. Your words now reflect your fate then: either you will be justified by them or you will be condemned” (Matthew 12:36-37).

Image Attribution: Chris Potter, CC BY 2.0, via Wikimedia Commons

0 FacebookTwitterEmail

Romans – Chapter Two II

by Ed Urzi March 24, 2026

“Therefore you are inexcusable, O man, whoever you are who judge, for in whatever you judge another you condemn yourself; for you who judge practice the same things” (Romans 2:1).

The word “judge” can take on a variety of meanings depending on its context. For instance, this word can relate to the act of making an assessment or forming a personal view. It can also refer to one who makes an estimate as to worth, quality, or fitness. (1) In a Biblical context, “judging” can also mean “to distinguish, that is, decide (mentally or judicially)” or, “to be of an opinion, to deem, to think.” (2)

With these things in mind, we can say that our choices and decisions each reflect a form of judgment. For example, every item we purchase represents a type of judgment. In other words, we judge a product to be worthy of the money we spend to buy it. The elements of our daily schedules are judgments as well, for people make time for the things they feel are important. The same is true of our preferences and opinions, for they each represent a type of judgment.

Therefore, the question is not, “is it right to judge?” The question is (or should be) “what kinds of judgments are right?” The New Testament epistle of James offers one such guideline for those who seek to make the right kinds of judgments…

“Do not speak evil of one another, brethren. He who speaks evil of a brother and judges his brother, speaks evil of the law and judges the law. But if you judge the law, you are not a doer of the law but a judge. There is one Lawgiver, who is able to save and to destroy. Who are you to judge another?” (James 4:11-12).

J.B. Phillips offers an descriptive translation of this text from James 4:11: “Never pull each other to pieces, my brothers.” This restriction prohibits things like ridicule, slander, and other forms of verbal abuse directed towards others. It also encompasses similar behaviors such as gossip, rumor-mongering, or unsubstantiated speculation regarding the trials and difficulties that others may experience.

Here in Romans chapter two, the Apostle Paul tells us that God will hold everyone accountable for their judgments, even those who haven’t engaged in the type of conduct mentioned in James chapter four, or the sins described earlier in Romans chapter one. However, the rhetorical question of James 4:12 (“Who are you to judge another?“) brings us to an important point that we’ll consider next.

Image Attribution : Talking Opinions by j4p4n, CC BY-SA 1.0 via openclipart.org

(1) judge. (n.d.) American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fifth Edition. (2011). Retrieved September 24 2025 from https://www.thefreedictionary.com/judge

(2) G2919 – krino – Strong’s Greek Lexicon (kjv). (n.d.). Blue Letter Bible. https://www.blueletterbible.org/lexicon/g2919/kjv/tr/0-1/

0 FacebookTwitterEmail

Romans – Chapter Two I

by Ed Urzi March 23, 2026

In the opening sentence of Romans chapter one, the Apostle Paul defined his ministry and set the foundation for his authority: “Paul, a servant of Christ Jesus, called to be an apostle and set apart for the gospel of God…” (NIV). He then closed that portion of this epistle with a series of challenging observations.

He began by addressing those who do not wish to acknowledge God. That group might include those who explicitly reject the Biblical concept of a Creator or others who acknowledge the existence of a “god” in theory, but live as if god did not exist. According to Romans 1:18, these are the individuals who suppress the evidence for God’s existence in favor of various (and inferior) substitutes. As a result, God relinquished them to a corrupt mindset that led them to engage in things that should not be done. That led to an exhaustive list of destructive behaviors that often characterize the lives of those who choose that path.

Here in Romans chapter two, Paul will build on that foundation by turning his attention to those who claim various exemptions for themselves. He will do so by confronting three types of individuals:

  • The hypocrite, or someone who fails to “practice what they preach.”
  • The moralist, or someone who claims to possess superior moral authority.
  • The legalist, or someone who feels as if he or she can find acceptance with God by adhering to a set of regulations.

To accomplish this, Paul will employ a literary device known as a diatribe. That approach involves structuring this portion of his letter as a dialog with an imaginary opponent. Paul undoubtedly honed this skill in live debate with those who came to hear him speak. Thus, it is easy to visualize this portion of Romans as a back-and-forth exchange with those who opposed his message.

One commentator prepares us for this transition into the second chapter of Romans…

“In Romans 1, Paul has shown that the human race has turned away from God in order to pursue its own way and that the horrible things we do and see about us are the result.

…No one wants to admit that, however. So, instead of acknowledging that what Paul said about the human race is true, most of us make excuses, arguing that although Paul’s description may be true of other people, particularly very debased individuals or the heathen, it is certainly not true of us. ‘We know better than that,’ we say. ‘And we act better, too.’ In the second chapter of Romans Paul is going to disabuse us of these erroneous ideas.” (1)

(1) Boice, J. M. (2005). Romans: Justification by Faith (Romans 1-4). Baker Books. [p.202]

0 FacebookTwitterEmail

Romans – Chapter One LXV

by Ed Urzi March 20, 2026

“Though they know God’s righteous decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them” (Romans 1:32).

While we rarely have all the information needed to make decisions in life, Romans 1:32 tells us one thing for certain: those who reject their Creator do not act in ignorance regarding the consequences that flow from that decision. And since we naturally seek the affirmation of others as we travel our chosen path in life, we shouldn’t be surprised to find that other travelers along the road away from God offer support and encouragement along the way.

Jesus’ famous counsel from The Sermon On The Mount is instructive in this regard…

“Enter by the narrow gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and there are many who go in by it. Because narrow is the gate and difficult is the way which leads to life, and there are few who find it” (-14).

The following commentary ties these thoughts together…

“Paul’s conclusion is that the heathen are never without a witness to the presence and personality of God. They have the witness of nature and the witness of their own conscience. However, the heathen have deliberately suppressed these witnesses to the truth and have consistently opted for a lie in place of the truth. They have chosen the course of idolatry, which is always accompanied by debauchery.

Thus, God has revealed His wrath from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth of God. In addition, God has given them up to idolatry, to passions of infamy, and to an undiscerning and unapproving mind.” (1)

Another commentator adds, “…this chapter is a call to self-examination, the end of which should be, a deep conviction of sin, and of the necessity of deliverance from a state of condemnation.” (2)  As we look back on our study of Romans chapter one, the following verses from Romans chapter two function as a guidepost that points to the ultimate destination alluded to in this passage…

“[God] will give each one whatever his deeds deserve. He will give eternal life to those who patiently do the will of God, seeking for the unseen glory and honor and eternal life that he offers. But he will terribly punish those who fight against the truth of God and walk in evil ways-God’s anger will be poured out upon them” (Romans 2:6-8 TLB).

Image Attribution :The narrow gate, CC BY-NC 2.0,Adam, via flickr.com, disclaimer notice

(1) Edward E. Hindson and Woodrow Michael Kroll, eds., KJV Bible Commentary (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1994), 2211.

(2) Henry, Matthew. “Concise Commentary on Romans 1”. “Henry’s Concise Commentary on the Whole Bible”. https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/eng/mhn/romans-1.html. 1706.

0 FacebookTwitterEmail

Romans – Chapter One LXIV

by Ed Urzi March 19, 2026

“who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them” (Romans 1:32).

How do objects become warped or twisted out of shape? In most cases, a sufficient amount of heat or pressure is all that is needed to cause most objects to warp, twist, or shatter. This question relates to our text from Romans chapter one in an important way.

With very few exceptions, every human being experiences the tangible reality of creation each day. Our daily interaction with the visible world points to the existence of a Creator who remains unseen. And then, in an unguarded moment, a thought may occur: “It’s impossible for everything to have arisen from nothing. What if there really is a God?”

But then we lay such questions aside as we return to the busy routine of daily life. But they never completely disappear: “How could ‘nothing’ produce ‘something’? What if God really exists?” No matter how many justifications, rationalizations, or excuses we layer upon those questions, they still remain: “What if…” They stick with us like a recurring irritant or a pebble in one’s shoe.

There’s something else as well. If we are honest with ourselves, we know we are not everything we should be. For instance, we know it is wrong to lie, steal, or use other human beings to accomplish our goals. We know such things are wrong because we object when others do such things to us. But who among us is innocent of these behaviors? That reality gives rise to painful truths we’d often prefer to avoid: “I stole something; that makes me a thief. I lied about something; that makes me a liar.”

We might try to rationalize those shortcomings by saying, “I’m not as bad as so-and-so,” but that doesn’t erase the guilt associated with such behaviors. And if given a choice, we usually prefer to avoid thinking about the fate of the guilty.

When we live with the external testimony of creation and the internal knowledge that we are not what we should be, many respond by attempting to suppress those realities. But that response creates pressure, and pressure is often difficult to contain. We can deal with that pressure by attempting to convince ourselves that we are little more than highly developed animals. That’s an attractive proposition for many, for if we are nothing more than highly evolved animals, then there is little reason why we cannot act like them.

Or we can attempt to substitute the infinite, all-powerful, unseen God for one that is better suited to our liking. In the words of Romans 1:25, we exchange the truth of God for the lie and remake God in our image. These are the pressures that inevitably twist the way we view ourselves, each other, and the world around us.

0 FacebookTwitterEmail

Romans – Chapter One LXIII

by Ed Urzi March 18, 2026

“undiscerning, untrustworthy, unloving, unforgiving, unmerciful” (Romans 1:31).

The final group of sinful characteristics from this portion of Romans chapter one begins with a reference to those who are undiscerning. Discernment involves the ability to see things as they are, and not how they may appear to be. In light of this, the person described here in Romans 1:31 is someone who lacks the perception necessary to make spiritual, moral, or ethical judgments that align with God’s intent for His creation.

While such individuals might be highly skilled in a professional capacity, they may be entirely devoid of spiritual discernment. Jesus illustrated that unfortunate reality in an interaction with the religious leaders of His era…

“…’When evening comes, you say, ‘It will be fair weather, for the sky is red,’ and in the morning, ‘Today it will be stormy, for the sky is red and overcast.’ You know how to interpret the appearance of the sky, but you cannot interpret the signs of the times'” (Matthew 16:2-3 NIV).

Thus, we are reminded that proficiency in one area of life does not necessarily mean that we possess the ability to discern spiritual truth.

That negative character trait is then followed by a reference to those who are untrustworthy. This attribute goes far beyond the simple question of whether it is wise to rely on someone or let that person borrow something we own. You see, every substantive human relationship must feature an element of trust as part of its foundation. When trust is not present, it is virtually impossible to invest emotionally in others.

This is why we are often forced to maintain shallow relationships with those we perceive to be untrustworthy. By doing so, we limit the capacity of those individuals to hurt us. This characteristic thus robs us of the ability to establish and maintain deep human relationships.

“Unloving” describes a lack of natural affection, such as the kind that should exist among friends and family members. Since love always seeks another person’s highest good, it is difficult to follow God’s command to love one another if we refuse to acknowledge Him. In such instances, “love” sometimes devolves into a matter of preference, convenience, or personal benefit.

Next comes those who are unforgiving. Forgiveness is “the act of excusing or pardoning others in spite of their slights, shortcomings, and errors.” (1) If we fail to recognize our personal need for forgiveness, it becomes much harder to forgive others. This passage, along with Jesus’ teachings on the subject of forgiveness, should motivate us to seek God’s empowerment to put aside our animosities and embrace genuine forgiveness.

This verse then concludes with a reference to those who are unmerciful. Once again, we can turn to Jesus’ teachings for an important reminder on this subject: “Blessed are the merciful, For they shall obtain mercy” (Matthew 5:7).

(1) “Forgiveness.” Ronald F. Youngblood, F. F. Bruce, and R. K. Harrison, Thomas Nelson Publishers, eds., Nelson’s New Illustrated Bible Dictionary (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, Inc., 1995).

0 FacebookTwitterEmail

Romans – Chapter One LXII

by Ed Urzi March 17, 2026

“slanderers, God-haters, arrogant, proud, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents” (Romans 1:30 HCSB).

In the mid-1950’s, Japanese artist Mitsuteru Yokoyama pioneered a new genre of manga (Japanese comic books) and anime (Japanese animation) with his creation of Tetsujin 28-gō.

Yokoyama’s origin story for his new creation took place in the waning stages of World War II. In that fictional history, the Japanese government commissioned a group of scientists led by Dr. Shōtarō Kaneda and his assistant, Professor Shikishima, to create a secret weapon for use against the Allied forces. After twenty-seven failed attempts, Kaneda’s team successfully created Tetsujin 28 (“Iron Man 28”), a hulking robot that stood 18 meters (sixty feet) tall. However, Dr. Kaneda perished and the war ended before his creation could be pressed into service as a military weapon.

Although created as a war machine, Tetusjin 28’s control unit later passed into the hands of Dr. Kaneda’s son, who repurposed the giant robot for use in a fight against crime and a seemingly endless array of antagonists (many of whom possessed their own giant robots) who sought to dominate the world.

This brief cultural snapshot reminds us that most real-world technologies can be used for good or evil purposes depending on those who deploy them. But while a good invention might be misappropriated for evil purposes, our text from Romans 1:30 points to the inherently corrupt nature of those who “invent ways of doing evil” (NIV).

If you have ever encountered a device or research initiative and wondered, “What possible good could come from that?” then you may have come across the mindset described here in Romans 1:30. This passage from Romans chapter one thus identifies those who seek creative ways to demonstrate their sense of disrespect for their Creator.

The final characteristic that appears in this passage involves disobedience to parents. The long-standing directive to honor one’s parents was first inscribed within the Ten Commandments (see Exodus 20:12). It was later reiterated in the New Testament book of Ephesians, where we read, “Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right. Honor your father and mother which is the first commandment with a promise, so that it may be well with you, and that you may live long on the earth” (Ephesians 6:1-3).

We should also note that this is the only Commandment that carries a personal incentive: “…so that it may go well with you and that you may enjoy long life on the earth” (NIV). But more importantly, these passages tell us that those who rebel against parental authority also rebel against the One who established that authority as well.

Image Attribution: Tetsujin 28-gō, CC BY-NC 2.0, © pspechtenhauser, via flickr.com disclaimer notice. Tetsujin 28 is also known as Gigantor in the United States and some other areas of the world

0 FacebookTwitterEmail

Romans – Chapter One LXI

by Ed Urzi March 16, 2026

“slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents” (Romans 1:30 ESV).

The next attribute cited in this list from Romans 1:30 involves those who are boastful (CSB) or braggarts (Mounce). This term is derived from the word alazon in the original text of this passage, and it refers to one who is “an empty pretender.” (1) It describes those who are driven by a need to embellish their skills, abilities, assets, talents, or accomplishments. In other words, this characteristic defines those who boast of qualities they don’t actually possess.

The following commentator examines this word from a historical perspective…

“Alazon is a word with an interesting history… Xenophon said that the name belongs to those who pretend to be richer and braver than they are, and who promise to do what they are really unable to do in order to make some profit or gain. Again Theophrastus has a character study of such a man–the pretentious man, the snob. He is the kind of man who boasts of trade deals which exist only in his imagination, of connections with influential people which do not exist at all, of gifts to charities and public services which he never gave or rendered…

The braggart is out to impress others–and the world is still full of his like.” (2)

Many of us have probably encountered those who fit this description. Nevertheless, it should go without saying that this characteristic does not originate with God. Instead, the New Testament epistle of 1 John identifies the source of that character trait in 1 John 2:16: “…everything in the world -the cravings of sinful man, the lust of his eyes and the boasting of what he has and does- comes not from the Father but from the world” (NIV).

From the politician who boasts of fictional accomplishments, to the workplace acquaintance who embellishes his or her achievements, to the older adult whose self-assessment reflects a life that might have been, but never was, we can find examples of this character trait in every walk of life.

Such actions may conceal an underlying sense of insecurity that drives us to attempt to elevate ourselves in the sight of others. But whatever the underlying cause, the need for such boastfulness disappears for those who find their approval in Christ. That relationship brings humility (for we know we are unworthy of what Christ has done on our behalf) and security (for we can be secure in the knowledge that we are accepted in Him).

(1) G213 – alazon – Strong’s Greek Lexicon (kjv). (n.d.). Blue Letter Bible. https://www.blueletterbible.org/lexicon/g213/kjv/tr/0-1/

(2) Barclay, William. “Commentary on Romans 1”. “William Barclay’s Daily Study Bible“. https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/eng/dsb/romans-1.html. 1956-1959.

0 FacebookTwitterEmail

Romans – Chapter One LX

by Ed Urzi March 13, 2026

“They are backstabbers, haters of God, insolent, proud, and boastful. They invent new ways of sinning, and they disobey their parents” (Romans 1:30 NLT).

We may have a tendency to rush past these references to the insolent or arrogant (CSB) individuals who are mentioned here in Romans 1:30. This is especially true in light of the more prominent behaviors that appear throughout Romans 1:29-31. But a cursory glance at this reference might overlook the highly inappropriate conduct that is described for us within this passage. For instance, this word identifies…

  • “…one who behaves with humiliating and unconscionable arrogance to those who are not powerful enough to retaliate.” (1)
  • “…one who, uplifted with pride, either heaps insulting language upon others or does them some shameful act of wrong.” (2)
  • “It describes the man who is wantonly and sadistically cruel and insulting. Aristotle describes it as the spirit which harms and grieves someone else, not for the sake of revenge and not for any advantage that may be gained from it, but simply for the sheer pleasure of hurting. There are people who get pleasure from seeing someone wince at a cruel saying. There are people who take a devilish delight in inflicting mental and physical pain on others. That is hubris (G5196); it is the sadism which finds delight in hurting others simply for the sake of hurting them.” (3)

To borrow a phrase that appears in the following chapter of this epistle, we might say to those who engage in such behavior, “…you are treasuring up for yourself wrath in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God” (Romans 2:5).

Another related characteristic is pride. Pride is emblematic of those who consider themselves to be superior to others or those who possess an inflated opinion of themselves. That attitude subsequently reveals itself in the form of arrogant, contemptuous behavior towards others. While there may be many contributing factors that help explain those responses, the important thing is to identify these attitudes and prayerfully seek God’s enablement to remove them from our lives.

Paul the Apostle will later provide us with an effective way to guard against pride later in Romans 12:3: “I tell everyone among you not to think of himself more highly than he should think. Instead, think sensibly, as God has distributed a measure of faith to each one” (CSB). Another, more direct, incentive appears in the Biblical book of Proverbs: “Pride comes before destruction, and an arrogant spirit before a fall” (Proverbs 16:18 CSB).

(1) F. F. Bruce, The Letter of Paul to the Roman [p. 81] quoted in Notes on Romans 2025 Edition, Dr. Thomas L. Constable https://soniclight.com/tcon/notes/pdf/romans.pdf<s/mall>

(2) Rich Cathers, Romans 1:24-32. (n.d.). https://bstudy2.calvaryfullerton.org/45%20Rom/2008/45%20Rom%2001d.htm

(3) Barclay, William. “Commentary on Romans 1”. “William Barclay’s Daily Study Bible“. https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/eng/dsb/romans-1.html. 1956-1959.

0 FacebookTwitterEmail

Romans – Chapter One LIX

by Ed Urzi March 12, 2026

“backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents” (Romans 1:30).

  • “Unnamed sources report…”
  • “According to those who spoke on the condition of anonymity…”
  • “As stated by those who declined to be named…”

These phrases (and others like them) are undoubtedly familiar to anyone who follows the daily news cycle. While an unnamed source might have a good reason to maintain anonymity, that may not be the case in every instance.

For instance, a professional athlete with an agenda might leak disparaging information about a player, coach, or manager to a reporter. Politicians might quietly spread unsubstantiated allegations among sympathetic news outlets in order to smear a political rival. Then there are media organizations that seek to frame the news of the day in a manner that supports an ideological bias or malign those who do not subscribe to their preferred narrative. These behaviors have become so commonplace that we often come to expect them.

They also serve to illustrate the next characteristic in our survey of Romans 1:29-31. That trait is “backbiting,” or “backstabbing” (NLT). This phrase conveys several negative qualities such as…

  • One who is a defamer, or evil speaker. (1)
  • Evil-speaking, or maliciously defaming the absent. (2)
  • To speak evil of, to malign. (3)

“Evil” is the common denominator among these definitions and thus emphasizes the harm and misfortune that such conduct inflicts upon others. It also brings Jesus’ message from Matthew 12:35-36 into sharp focus: “A good person produces good things from the treasury of a good heart, and an evil person produces evil things from the treasury of an evil heart. And I tell you this, you must give an account on judgment day for every idle word you speak” (NLT).

This is followed by “haters of God.” While this may seem to be a rather harsh indictment, consider the following observation: “Not many people would admit that they hate God, choosing rather to think of themselves as rather tolerant of him. But nowhere do they show their hatred more than in their condescending attitudes.” (4)

One common illustration of the truth behind that statement occurs whenever someone employs Jesus’ name as a profanity or an expletive. Another example occurs whenever we casually refer to God in a thoughtless, flippant, irreverent, or condescending manner. Some examples might include the term “ohmigod,” “OMG,” or other similar expressions.

While some might argue that such exclamations do not express hatred for God, they expose a presumptuous mindset that assumes God is not worthy to be taken seriously. Furthermore, such actions disregard a clear directive from the Scripture: “You shall not misuse the name of the LORD your God, for the LORD will not hold anyone guiltless who misuses his name” (Exodus 20:7 NIV).

Image Attribution: Kaworu1992, CC BY-SA 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons

(1) G2637 – katalalos – Strong’s Greek Lexicon (kjv). (n.d.). Blue Letter Bible. https://www.blueletterbible.org/lexicon/g2637/kjv/tr/0-1/

(2) Christian Classics Ethereal Library, M.G. Easton M.A., D.D., Illustrated Bible Dictionary, Third Edition. “Backbite.” https://www.ccel.org/e/easton/ebd/ebd/T0000400.html#T0000413

(3) “Slander.” Unger, M. F., Harrison, R. K., & Vos, H. F. (1988). The New Unger’s Bible Dictionary. Moody Publishers. [p. 1203]

(4) Boice, J. M. (2005). Romans: Justification by Faith (Romans 1-4). Baker Books. [p.189]

0 FacebookTwitterEmail

Romans – Chapter One LVIII

by Ed Urzi March 11, 2026

“being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers” (Romans 1:29).

Romans 1:29 continues this list of negative characteristics with a reference to “evil mindedness.” One source tells us that the ancient philosopher Aristotle associated this idea with “the spirit which always supposes the worst about other people.” (1) Other references relate this idea to bad character (2) or a disposition for mischief, misfortune, and malignity. (3)

Since “evil” can be defined as something that causes harm, misfortune, or destruction, an evil-minded person will surely bring those qualities into his or her relationships with others. To illustrate this idea, let’s take the example of an employee who decides to secretly retaliate against an employer to avenge a perceived wrong. The issue with that response is twofold. First, it shows a clear disregard for the Biblical teaching on that subject. Next, a person who follows that path will bring harm, misfortune, or destruction against his or her employer, and thus exhibit evil-mindedness as a result.

Such a person might also exhibit a few of the other qualities mentioned here in Romans 1:29 including maliciousness and/or deceit. Thus, we can learn much about how we should conduct our lives by examining these characteristics.

Next comes a reference to “whisperers,” or those who secretly slander others. This generally involves false statements that are intended to bring reputational damage to others. We might associate this word with a person who quietly disparages others, or those who “talk behind your back” as described below…

“[This word] describes the man who whispers his malicious stories in the listener’s ear, who takes a man apart into a corner and whispers a character-destroying story. Both are bad, but the whisperer is the worse. A man can at least defend himself against an open slander, but he is helpless against the secret whisperer who delights in destroying reputations.” (4)

Another commentator offers a challenging truth concerning those who engage in such conduct: “People whisper their plans because they cannot speak them aloud. Even in a fallen world, our plans are so evil that others will reject them, so we whisper.” (5) We should also note that this seemingly minor indiscretion is included among other, higher-profile sins such as sexual immorality and murder here in Romans 1:29. Therefore, we should consider the possibility that this “minor” transgression is not nearly as insignificant as it may seem.

This is especially true in light of Jesus’ cautionary message from the Gospel of Luke…

“For there is nothing covered that will not be revealed, nor hidden that will not be known. Therefore whatever you have spoken in the dark will be heard in the light, and what you have spoken in the ear in inner rooms will be proclaimed on the housetops” (Luke 12:2-3).

(1) Barclay, William. “Commentary on Romans 1”. “William Barclay’s Daily Study Bible“. https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/eng/dsb/romans-1.html. 1956-1959.

(2) G2550 – kakoetheia – Strong’s Greek Lexicon (kjv). (n.d.). Blue Letter Bible. https://www.blueletterbible.org/lexicon/g2550/kjv/tr/0-1/

(3) kakoetheia (n.d.). billmounce.com. https://www.billmounce.com/greek-dictionary/kakoetheia

(4) Barclay, Ibid.

(5) Sproul, R. C. (2024). The power of the Gospel: A Year in Romans. [p. 41]

0 FacebookTwitterEmail

Romans – Chapter One LVII

by Ed Urzi March 10, 2026

“They were filled with all manner of unrighteousness, evil, covetousness, malice. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, maliciousness. They are gossips,” (Romans 1:29 ESV).

“Strife” is the next trait that appears on this list of negative attributes from Romans 1:29. This characteristic refers to the contention, rivalry, and discord we sometimes experience with others. The New Testament epistle of 1 Timothy tells us that the qualities of pride and ignorance may sometimes lead to strife with others (see 1 Timothy 6:3-5).

The Old Testament book of Proverbs contains over a dozen references to strife and its associated characteristics. Those references offer many valuable insights for personal reflection…

“Hatred stirs up strife, But love covers all sins” (Proverbs 10:12).

“By pride comes nothing but strife, But with the well-advised is wisdom” (Proverbs 13:10).

“An evil man sows strife; gossip separates the best of friends” (Proverbs 16:28).

“Cast out the scoffer, and contention will leave; Yes, strife and reproach will cease” (Proverbs 22:10).

“As charcoal is to burning coals, and wood to fire, So is a contentious man to kindle strife” (Proverbs 26:21).

“He who is of a proud heart stirs up strife, But he who trusts in the LORD will be prospered” (Proverbs 28:25).

“An angry man stirs up strife, And a furious man abounds in transgression” (Proverbs 29:22).

The following commentary also offers several helpful observations concerning this subject…

“Its meaning is the contention which is born of envy, ambition, the desire for prestige, and place and prominence. It comes from the heart in which there is jealousy. If a man is cleansed of jealousy, he has gone far to being cleansed of all that arouses contention and strife. It is a God-given gift to be able to take as much pleasure in the successes of others as in one’s own.” (1)

This reference to strife is then followed by another ungodly attribute: deceit. “Deceit” involves an effort to manipulate or fool others in a dishonest manner. The type of deceit mentioned here refers to “a bait or contrivance for entrapping.” (2) Other descriptive terms that characterize this idea include guile, treachery, and cunning (in a bad way).

From a person who “shades the truth” to gain a personal advantage, to the unscrupulous merchant who dishonestly markets a defective product to an unsuspecting consumer, this quality describes those who trick or mislead others. Much like the quality of maliciousness mentioned earlier in this verse, this form of deceit involves the intent to injure someone, and should not be found among those who profess to follow Christ.

Image Attribution: Nallaislyceesiegfried le havre, CC BY-SA 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons

(1) Barclay, William. “Commentary on Romans 1”. “William Barclay’s Daily Study Bible“. https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/eng/dsb/romans-1.html. 1956-1959.

(2) dolos (n.d.). billmounce.com. https://www.billmounce.com/greek-dictionary/dolos

0 FacebookTwitterEmail

Romans – Chapter One LVI

by Ed Urzi March 9, 2026

“They are filled with every kind of unrighteousness, wickedness, covetousness, malice. They are rife with envy, murder, strife, deceit, hostility. They are gossips” (Romans 1:29 NET).

The next attribute given to us in Romans 1:29 is the horrific act of murder. One reference defines murder as “the unlawful killing of a human being with malice.” (1) Although that definition appears straightforward, the act of murder takes many forms.

For example, “premeditated murder” refers to a killing that is planned in advance. That offense is generally classified as first-degree criminal homicide in the United States. Another type of murder is manslaughter. This describes a form of homicide that occurs when someone kills another person without prior intent.

Manslaughter is typically divided into two subcategories. The first is voluntary manslaughter (a death that occurs “in the heat of the moment” or when someone seeks to injure, but not kill someone). The second is involuntary manslaughter (or an unintentional death that results from criminal negligence or recklessness).

We should also note that “killing” does not always constitute murder, for there may be reasonable grounds that justify the act of taking another person’s life. Those grounds might include a judicially sanctioned execution (also known as capital punishment), an act of self-defense, or a circumstance where a soldier engages in lethal force against an enemy during an armed conflict.

With these things in mind, we can say murder is a crime that violates the sixth commandment and shows a callous disregard for human life. Furthermore, an act of murder demonstrates contempt for God, for it involves a lawless act that ends the life of someone who is created in His image. Murder is also an attribute of Satan, our spiritual adversary. Consider Jesus’ characterization of Satan from the Gospel of John: “…He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him…” (John 8:44).

Finally, Jesus also expanded the definition of murder to include our internal thought life as well…

“You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not murder, and whoever murders will be in danger of the judgment.’ But I say to you that whoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment…” (Matthew 5:21-22, see also Mark 7:20-23).

To this, one source adds…

“You appeal to the sixth commandment, which forbids murder, and you feel good about this because you have never actually murdered anybody. But have you forgotten that God looks on the heart and judges by thoughts and wishes as well as by actions? Have you never been angry enough with somebody to want to murder that person? Jesus said on one occasion that even speaking a defamatory word is sufficient to incur God’s wrath for breaking this commandment (Matt. 5:21-22).” (2)

Therefore, we should seek God’s empowerment to avoid all such expressions of murder.

(1) 1536. Murder — Definition and degrees. (2020, January 17). https://www.justice.gov/archives/jm/criminal-resource-manual-1536-murder-definition-and-degrees

(2) Boice, J. M. (2005). Romans: Justification by Faith (Romans 1-4). Baker Books. [p.205]

0 FacebookTwitterEmail

Romans – Chapter One LV

by Ed Urzi March 6, 2026

“being filled with all unrighteousness, sexual immorality, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers” (Romans 1:29).

“The judgment of man upon God was the judgment that God was not worthy of human consideration. The error of the human mind does not proceed from a mere logical miscalculation. It was not an error flowing out of logical reasoning, but a deliberate evaluation of the worth of the knowledge of God. The error of the pagan is not accidental, but clearly deliberate. The ‘not seeing fit’ is an obstinate refusal to acknowledge that which is manifestly true.” (1)

Romans 1:29 begins a partial list of consequences that arise from an implicit or explicit rejection of God. That list characterizes those cultures and individuals who do “…not like to retain God in their knowledge” (Romans 1:28). The Apostle Paul offered similar “vice lists” in several of his Biblical epistles, but the catalog given to us here in Romans 1:29-31 is the most extensive (see 1 Corinthians 5:11; 6:9-11; 2 Corinthians 12:20-21; Galatians 5:19-21; Ephesians 4:31; 5:3-4; and Colossians 3:5-9).

That decision inevitably leads to the following list of negative effects…

  • Unrighteousness. As mentioned earlier, “unrighteousness” is a wide-ranging term that encompasses various forms of injustice, inappropriate conduct, or violations of the law.
  • Sexual immorality. In the original language of this passage, the phrase “sexual immorality” is derived from the word porneia. This word serves as the basis for our modern-day term “pornography.” It encompasses any type of physical relationship that occurs outside of a Biblically sanctioned marriage partnership. Jesus also expanded that definition to include internal expressions of sexual immorality as well (Matthew 5:27-28).
  • Wickedness. Synonyms for wickedness include depravity, iniquity, and malice (2)
  • Covetousness. This word envelopes a wide variety of inappropriate desires. It refers to a greedy aspiration to obtain more of something we already possess. It may also characterize a desire to possess something (or someone) that belongs to someone else. This word is thus used to identify one who craves more, especially what belongs to others.
  • Maliciousness. “Maliciousness” involves a desire to harm others or see others suffer. It also pertains to an act that intends to bring injury to someone else.
  • Envy involves a sense of discontent or resentment when others are blessed or successful. One source associates “envy” with “…the feeling of displeasure produced by witnessing or hearing of the advantage or prosperity of others.” (3) If an envious person cannot secure the qualities that others possess, he or she may seek to belittle or ridicule such things.

We’ll continue with our survey of this list of characteristics next.

(1) Sproul, R. C. (1988). If there’s a God, why are there atheists? Tyndale House Pub.
(2) G4189 – poneria – Strong’s Greek Lexicon (kjv). (n.d.). Blue Letter Bible. https://www.blueletterbible.org/lexicon/g4189/kjv/tr/0-1/
(3) G5355 – phthonos Vine’s Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words, © 1984, 1996, Thomas Nelson, Inc.

0 FacebookTwitterEmail

Romans – Chapter One LIV

by Ed Urzi March 5, 2026

“And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting” (Romans 1:28).

Having examined the root cause of humanity’s rebellion against its Creator, Paul the Apostle now turns to a consequence of that decision here in Romans 1:28: divine abandonment. This response is perhaps best articulated in the Living Bible paraphrase of this passage: “…God gave them up to doing everything their evil minds could think of” (TLB).

One author makes a pointed observation regarding this verse that we may condense and summarize as follows: “There are many that have God in their knowledge but they do not retain Him there because it thwarts their lusts, they do not like it. There is a difference between the knowledge and acknowledgement of God; the pagans knew God, but would not acknowledge Him.” (1)

This underscores the element of personal responsibility assumed by those who “…did not think it worthwhile to acknowledge God” (CSB). Since these individuals did not find value in the knowledge of God they already had, He permitted them to experience the natural consequences that flowed from that decision. Several other commentators offer brief (yet perceptive), insights regarding this passage that are well worth our attention…

“People reject the natural knowledge they have of God. This rejection, however, does not annihilate either the revelation or the knowledge itself. The sin of mankind is in refusing to acknowledge the knowledge they have. They act against the truth that God reveals and they clearly receive. (2)

“The human race put God to the test for the purpose of approving Him should He meet the specifications which it laid down for a God who would be to its liking, and finding that He did not meet those specifications, it refused to approve Him as the God to be worshipped, or have Him in its knowledge.” (3)

“Truth would enter human hearts from God’s work in nature and from conscience, yet men pull down the blind and close the curtain. It is not that they do not know, but that they refuse to have God in their knowledge. They shun the thought of God, Psa_10:4.” (4)

“…for the third time in almost as many verses, the apostle records that God gave them up (or over) to what they wanted all along. When He did so, the results were disastrous.” (5)

Paul will go on to identify several of the shameful exits along this road away from God over the last few verses of this chapter.

(1) Condensed and adapted from Verses 19–32 – Matthew Henry’s commentary – Bible Gateway. (n.d.). https://www.biblegateway.com/resources/matthew-henry/Rom.1.19-Rom.1.32
(2) Sproul, R. C. (1997). Grace Unknown: The Heart of Reformed Theology. Baker Publishing Group.
(3) Kenneth S. Wuest, Word Studies in the Greek New Testament (note on Romans 1:28) Copyright © 1942-55 by Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.
(4) Meyer, Frederick Brotherton. “Commentary on Romans 1“. “F. B. Meyer’s ‘Through the Bible’ Commentary“. https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/eng/fbm/romans-1.html. 1914.
(5) Edward E. Hindson and Woodrow Michael Kroll, eds., KJV Bible Commentary (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1994), 2211.

0 FacebookTwitterEmail

Romans – Chapter One LIII

by Ed Urzi March 4, 2026

“Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due” (Romans 1:27).

The Biblical account of creation defines God’s design for marriage as a formal, monogamous union between one genetic male and one genetic female (see Genesis 2:22). That design thus excludes premarital, extramarital, polygamous, polyamorous, or same-sex relationships as appropriate venues for human sexual expression. In addition to what we read here in Romans 1:26-27, the Scriptures offer several admonitions regarding these types of relationships and other such behaviors (see Leviticus 18:20, Hebrews 13:4, 1 Corinthians 6:9-10, Ephesians 5:3, 1 Thessalonians 4:3-5, 1 Timothy 1:9-10, and Revelation 21:8 for some examples).

Much like the prohibition regarding heterosexual adultery, the Biblical prohibition concerning same-sex relationships originates in the Old Testament book of Leviticus: “If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads” (20:13 NIV). As we’re told in the 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 passage linked above, those whose lives are characterized by such conduct will not inherit the kingdom of God.

It is also worth noting that homosexual engagements were common among certain segments of first-century Roman society, thus reflecting a trend seen among many 21st-century cultures as well. In fact, multiple sources report that at least a dozen of the first fifteen Roman emperors were involved in homosexual or bisexual relationships, including Nero, most notably.

With this in mind, we can say that this portion of Romans probably faced widespread condemnation outside the Christian community when it first appeared, particularly in a city that served as the preeminent center of Roman power and authority. At a minimum, this message certainly would have met with some degree of cultural resistance, as is often the case today.

Finally, we should note that homosexuality is one among many practices that appear in closing verses of Romans chapter one. As one commentator observes, “Christians err when they excuse homosexuality, and deny that it is sin. But they also err just as badly when they single it out as a sin God is uniquely angry with.” (1) Another source offers the following insight: “Human sexuality is a much larger concept than sexual behaviour. It’s focus falls more on what people are than on what they do.”(2) In the case of same-sex relationships, this preference reflects an internal mindset that is contrary to God’s intent for His creation.

(1) David Guzik, 1 Corinthians 6 – Lawsuits and Loose Living [4. (8-11)] https://enduringword.com/commentary/1-corinthians-6/

(2) Ferguson, S. B., Packer, J. I., & Wright, D. F. (1988). New Dictionary of Theology. IVP Academic. pg. 637

0 FacebookTwitterEmail

Romans – Chapter One LII

by Ed Urzi March 3, 2026

“For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature” (Romans 1:26).

Whenever we remove God from the position of highest priority in life, the resulting consequences will inevitably permeate every aspect of our lives. To illustrate that reality, Paul the Apostle turns to the impact of that decision in the realm of sexual expression. From a physiological perspective, male and female anatomies are naturally designed for physical compatibility. But when we are untethered from an acknowledgment of God and His blueprint for human relationships, we may choose to express our natural physical desires in ways that go beyond that natural design.

“Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due” (Romans 1:27).

We can begin our consideration of these verses with a look at God’s intent for intimate relationships. That discussion begins with the first two members of the human family…

“Then the Lord God formed a woman from the rib that he had taken from the man. He brought her to the man. The man said, ‘This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh. She will be named woman because she was taken from man.’ That is why a man will leave his father and mother and will be united with his wife, and they will become one flesh” (Genesis 2:22-24).

While many dismiss this portion of Scripture as nothing more than a fantasy, myth, or legend, Jesus accepted the historic truth of this account (Matthew 19:4-6). Therefore, we can make use of this passage to inform our discussion of this topic based on His authority.

Our text from Genesis chapter two identifies God’s intent for human sexual expression: one man and one woman. If God instilled a different orientation within some members of His human creation, it would conflict with the precedent He set forth here in the book of Genesis.

Nevertheless, proponents of same-sex relationships may seek to validate that position by highlighting the natural attraction that frequently exists between such couples. While this argument seems valid, it’s important to remember that “natural” doesn’t always mean permissible or right. In fact, a natural inclination that “feels right” may be far removed from God’s intent for humanity. For example, a heterosexual person might naturally feel a desire to engage in multiple physical relationships with the opposite sex. However, the Scriptures condemn such conduct as well.

0 FacebookTwitterEmail

Romans – Chapter One LI

by Ed Urzi March 2, 2026

“who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen” (Romans 1:25).

In considering this passage, the great 17th century commentator Matthew Henry once remarked, “It was the greatest honour God did to man that he made man in the image of God; but it is the greatest dishonour man has done to God that he has made God in the image of man.” (1) This portion of Scripture thus depicts a form of idolatry without ever resorting to the use of that word.

Idolatry occurs when someone worships some aspect of creation instead of the One who brought creation into existence. We can define an “idol” as anything that supplants God in the hierarchy of our lives. Whenever someone chooses to prioritize anything above God, that “something” (whatever it is) effectively becomes an idol.

That alternative doesn’t need to incorporate a spiritual idea or belief. Instead, it may reflect an opinion, an ideology, or a deeply held conviction that shapes the direction of our lives. Of course, some might object to Romans 1:25 and its use of the words “worshiped” and “served“ in this context. Since most people in this century do not practice the ancient pagan custom of bowing before a crafted image, we might be under the impression that we do not engage in such idolatrous behavior.

But when we speak of idolatry (ancient or modern), we are essentially referring to a matter of priorities. For instance, let’s take the case of an individual who prioritizes some aspect of his or her life above everything else,  including God. A person who does so is someone who is just as guilty of idolatry as the person who bowed before a carved image in the Old Testament era. To borrow a portion of our text from Romans 1:25, each of these individuals exchanges the creature for the Creator, for each relinquishes God’s rightful place in their lives to something else. The same is true of anything that takes God’s place in our lives.

Such practices are an affront to a Creator who merits our love and reverence, not our contempt. As Jesus Himself once said, “No one can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other…” (Matthew 6:24 NIV). Thus, “…religious honor cannot be given to a creature, without taking it away, in a disgraceful and sacrilegious manner, from God.” (2)

(1) Verses 19–32 – Matthew Henry’s commentary – Bible Gateway. (n.d.). https://www.biblegateway.com/resources/matthew-henry/Rom.1.19-Rom.1.32

(2) John Calvin: Commentary on Romans – Christian Classics Ethereal Library. (n.d.). https://www.ccel.org/ccel/calvin/calcom38.v.vii.html#:~:text=John%20Calvin:%20Commentary%20on%20Romans%20%2D%20Christian%20Classics%20Ethereal%20Library via Worshiping the Creature (2014, January 20). Ligonier Ministries. https://learn.ligonier.org/devotionals/worshiping-creature

0 FacebookTwitterEmail

Ruth – Chapter Two

by Ed Urzi February 27, 2026

I

While the first chapter of Ruth chronicled the desperate situation facing Ruth and Naomi, the opening verse of chapter two introduces us to someone who will eventually alter the course of their lives…

“ There was a relative of Naomi’s husband, a man of great wealth, of the family of Elimelech. His name was Boaz” (Ruth 2:1).

While Boaz is only briefly noted here, his introduction furnishes us with some background information that foreshadows his later emergence within this chapter. First, the name Boaz is thought to convey the idea of strength. (1) That may explain why Solomon, his great-great-grandson, later adopted that name as a designation for one of the Jerusalem Temple’s structural support columns (1 Kings 7:21).

Boaz is further identified as a prominent man (CSB) of great riches (WYC), influence(AMP), and outstanding character (GW). We’re also informed that he was a relative of Naomi’s late husband, Elimelech. That family lineage will later play a pivotal role in the events to follow.

Boaz’ status as “… a rich and important man” (CEV) is also interesting to consider in light of some events that occurred a decade earlier. As mentioned in the previous chapter, Boaz’ relative, Elimelech, relocated to Moab in response to a famine that had gripped the Bethlehem area. However, it seems that Boaz chose a different path in response to that development.

Boaz evidently opted to remain in Bethlehem, where he undoubtedly had to face the hardships that Elimelech sought to avoid. With this in mind, we might reasonably conclude that God enabled Boaz to persevere through those difficult conditions.

Ten years have now passed in our narrative, and Boaz is established as a wealthy, prominent, and respected individual. Tragically, Elimelech’s life ended in Moab, leaving only his sons to care for his wife. When his sons later passed away, his widow possessed no further means of support.

While it is difficult to draw a direct correlation between Boaz and Elimelech, there is nothing to indicate that Elimelech prayed or sought God’s direction prior to his decision to relocate to Moab. On the other hand, Boaz will later emerge as a man of exemplary, God-honoring character. Perhaps that may account for the differences in their respective fates.

(1) Boaz’s name is generally interpreted to mean fleetness . However, several references (including Fausset’s Bible Dictionary, Hitchcock’s Bible Names Dictionary, and Nelson’s New Illustrated Bible Dictionary ) also link his name with the concept of strength.

II

“ So Ruth the Moabitess said to Naomi, ‘Please let me go to the field, and glean heads of grain after him in whose sight I may find favor.’ And she said to her, ‘Go, my daughter’” (Ruth 2:2).

This passage highlights a key aspect of Ruth’s character. An unprotected young foreign widow might be easily susceptible to various forms of assault. But despite those potential dangers, Ruth sought to provide for herself and her mother-in-law by going to “…gather the grain that the harvest workers leave” (GNT) .

As mentioned earlier, this referred to the act of following a group of harvesters in order to collect any produce that was left behind. The Old Testament law legalized that activity by issuing the following directives to farmers and landowners …

“ When you harvest your land’s produce, you must not harvest all the way to the edge of your field; and don’t gather up every remaining bit of your harvest. Also do not pick your vineyard clean or gather up all the grapes that have fallen there. Leave these items for the poor and the immigrant; I am the Lord your God” (Leviticus 19:9-10 CEB)

“ If you forget to bring in a stack of harvested grain, don’t go back in the field to get it. Leave it for the poor, including foreigners, orphans, and widows, and the Lord will make you successful in everything you do. When you harvest your olives, don’t try to get them all for yourself, but leave some for the poor. And when you pick your grapes, go over the vines only once, then let the poor have what is left. You lived in poverty as slaves in Egypt until the Lord your God rescued you. That’s why I am giving you these laws” (Deuteronomy 24:19-22 CEV).

This act of “charity with dignity” allowed those with limited financial resources to meet their essential needs. Unfortunately, these events took place during a period when “All the people did whatever seemed right in their own eyes” (Judges 21:25 NCV).

If a landowner was unwilling to follow those directives, it’s easy to understand why Ruth might feel dependent on someone who was “…kind enough to let me gather the grain he leaves behind” (NCV).

III

“ Then she left, and went and gleaned in the field after the reapers. And she happened to come to the part of the field belonging to Boaz, who was of the family of Elimelech” (Ruth 2:3).

So, to support herself and her mother-in-law, Ruth proactively went to work by gathering the leftover grain that remained following the harvest. Although our text from Ruth 2:3 implies that Ruth entered this field by chance, it’s easy to perceive God’s unseen choreography as Ruth worked to support their little family.

But shortly after Ruth began her endeavors, the landowner arrived to inspect the ongoing work…

“ Now behold, Boaz came from Bethlehem, and said to the reapers, ‘The Lord be with you!’ And they answered him, ‘The Lord bless you!’” (Ruth 2:4).

As a prosperous and influential figure in that region, Boaz might have been managing some of his other business affairs that morning prior to arriving at his estate. And since laborers often began work early to avoid the oppressive heat of the day, it’s not surprising to learn that harvest operations were already underway when he appeared.

We should also note that Boaz greeted his employees by saying, “…‘The LORD bless you!’ They replied, ‘And may the LORD bless you!’” (CEV). Much like Ruth’s demonstrated willingness to labor for the food that would ensure her family’s survival, this simple exchange of greetings offers some insight into Boaz’ character.

While a typical business owner might first ask a foreman or supervisor to submit a production report, Boaz did not subordinate his business interests to his relationship with the Lord. In fact, it seems the opposite was true; Boaz placed God first in greeting his employees.

This suggests that Boaz cultivated a business environment that honored God in an era when others did whatever seemed best for them. While this may seem like an overstatement based on a simple exchange of greetings, the fact that Boaz’ laborers reciprocated his message tells us that his God-honoring character had a positive impact on his employees, at least externally.

IV

“ Then Boaz said to his servant who was in charge of the reapers, ‘Whose young woman is this?’” (Ruth 2:5).

Today, we might seek to identify an unknown person by asking, “ Who is he or she?” However, that was not Boaz’ question. When Boaz saw Ruth gleaning in his field, he responded by asking, “Whose maiden is this?” (RSV). This difference between “who is she” and “who does she belong to” reflects the culture of Boaz’ day.

The patriarchal society of Boaz’ era categorized a young woman of marriageable age in one of two ways. A young, unmarried woman belonged to her father. A young, married woman belonged to her husband.

Since a young woman working alone was subject to a variety of physical dangers, the answer to that question would quickly allow Boaz to determine if Ruth was under the protection of a father or a husband.

However, the subject of Boaz’ inquiry did not align with either category…

“ So the servant who was in charge of the reapers answered and said, ‘It is the young Moabite woman who came back with Naomi from the country of Moab’” (Ruth 2:6)

It’s been said that news travels quickly, and word of Naomi’s return from Moab with her widowed daughter-in-law had apparently spread throughout the Bethlehem community. But even though Boaz may have been unaware of Ruth’s identity, we’ll find that he was not unaware of the circumstances of her arrival.

It also seems that Ruth had quickly established a positive reputation among Boaz’ employees in the brief time she spent gleaning in his field. That involved a specific type of work ethic that caught the attention of Boaz’ field supervisor.

V

“‘… It is the young Moabite woman who came back with Naomi from the country of Moab. And she said, ‘Please let me glean and gather after the reapers among the sheaves.’ So she came and has continued from morning until now, though she rested a little in the house” (Ruth 2:6-7).

This passage identifies some key elements of Ruth’s conduct that readily apply to a contemporary work environment. For example, the Old Testament Law allowed Ruth to glean within any field she wished (Leviticus 19:9, Deuteronomy 24:19). However, Ruth extended the courtesy of requesting permission from Boaz’ foreman before entering his field. Ruth thus exhibited respect and discretion in exercising her lawful right.

Next, Boaz’ foreman noted Ruth’s work ethic in offering him an unsolicited report: “…she has continued from early morning until now, except for a short rest” (ESV). This seemingly offhand comment reminds us that others take notice of our labors. As far as we know, this supervisor never complimented or acknowledged Ruth for her efforts. Yet, he was clearly aware of the quality of her work and reported it to his employer without being prompted to do so.

While it is often disappointing when others fail to appreciate our efforts, our primary aim in work or ministry should not involve the acquisition of praise or accolades from others. Instead, our commitment to quality work (whatever our profession), stems from a desire to honor God and uphold our personal reputation, even in the absence of external recognition.

For this reason, we must be alert to the subtle temptation of laboring to gain the affirmation of others. As the Apostle Paul observed in the New Testament epistle of 1 Corinthians…

“… I am not at all concerned about being judged by you or by any human standard; I don’t even pass judgment on myself. My conscience is clear, but that does not prove that I am really innocent. The Lord is the one who passes judgment on me.

So you should not pass judgment on anyone before the right time comes. Final judgment must wait until the Lord comes; he will bring to light the dark secrets and expose the hidden purposes of people’s minds. And then all will receive from God the praise they deserve” (1 Corinthians 4:3-5 GNB).

VI

“ Then Boaz said to Ruth, ‘You will listen, my daughter, will you not? Do not go to glean in another field, nor go from here, but stay close by my young women. Let your eyes be on the field which they reap, and go after them. Have I not commanded the young men not to touch you? And when you are thirsty, go to the vessels and drink from what the young men have drawn’” (Ruth 2:8-9).

In referring to Ruth as “my daughter,” Boaz provides us with a clue that helps gauge the age difference between them. This phrase indicates that Boaz was probably old enough to be Ruth’s father. That, along with the fact that he referred to his field laborers as “young men,” highlights the difference in their respective ages. Since Ruth was probably in her late teens or early twenties during this time, this means that Boaz was probably 40-50 years old at the time of these events.

Boaz’ counsel to “… keep close to my young women” also reflected the customary labor arrangement for a harvest of that time. A group of men typically began the harvest by cutting the grain with a sickle or other implement. They were followed by a second group of women who collected the cut stalks and bundled them into sheaves for transport. By staying close to that second group, Ruth could maximize the amount of grain she might collect.

This simple act of kindness also brought an additional benefit: it provided Ruth with an opportunity to build relationships with other young women of her age. As a stranger with no other acquaintances in Bethlehem (other than Naomi), Ruth surely welcomed the chance to develop her own social network.

Boaz next addressed Ruth’s personal vulnerability by issuing an order of protection: “I have warned the men not to bother you” (CEV). As one commentator observes, “ Boaz is hereby instituting the first anti-sexual-harassment policy in the workplace recorded in the Bible.” (1)

Finally, Boaz anticipated Ruth’s needs and made provisions for her: “…when you are thirsty, go to the vessels and drink what the young men have drawn” (ESV). This provided Ruth with a degree of dignity and relieved her from the need to ask (or beg) for a drink of water during her long hours of labor under the scorching sun.

In all these things, Boaz offers a excellent representation of God’s gracious provision for us.

(1) Daniel I. Block, Judges, Ruth, p. 660 quoted in Constable’s Notes On Ruth , Dr. Thomas L. Constable, http://www.soniclight.com/constable/notes/htm/OT/Ruth/Ruth.htm#p341

VII

“ So she fell on her face, bowed down to the ground, and said to him, ‘Why have I found favor in your eyes, that you should take notice of me, since I am a foreigner?’” (Ruth 2:10).

Boaz’ act of generosity clearly made a significant impact on Ruth. Her response to his gracious display of compassion conveyed a deep sense of gratitude, respect, and appreciation for his efforts on her behalf.

As a man of God-honoring character, Boaz shouldered the legal obligation to permit travelers, foreigners, and other disadvantaged individuals to glean within his fields. However, Boaz’ kindness towards Ruth extended far beyond what was minimally required of him. In response, Ruth acknowledged his compassion by bowing deeply, an act that continues to be recognized as a universal expression of respect.

Boaz then explained the reasoning behind his generous response…

“ And Boaz answered and said to her, ‘It has been fully reported to me, all that you have done for your mother-in-law since the death of your husband, and how you have left your father and your mother and the land of your birth, and have come to a people whom you did not know before. The Lord repay your work, and a full reward be given you by the Lord God of Israel, under whose wings you have come for refuge’” (Ruth 2:11-12).

A prominent business owner like Boaz surely had a network of employees, business associates, and others who could supply him with the news of the day. Having learned of Naomi’s return along with Ruth, Boaz seized the opportunity to acknowledge her kindness and devotion towards Naomi, a person who had been a member of Boaz’ own family.

In addition to providing for her needs, Boaz also conveyed his desire that God would bestow His favor upon Ruth. He did so by employing the imagery of a bird protecting its young under the sheltering presence of its wings. This same imagery also appears within the Biblical book of Psalms to illustrate God’s providential care and protection (see Psalm 61:4, 63:7 , and 91:1-4 ).

Nevertheless, Boaz was surely unaware that he would eventually become the means by which God would fulfill his stated desire: “…the LORD reward you for what you have done” (GW).

VIII

“ Then she said, ‘Let me find favor in your sight, my lord; for you have comforted me, and have spoken kindly to your maidservant, though I am not like one of your maidservants’” (Ruth 2:13)

Life had been extremely difficult for Ruth. She lost her husband, and then completed a long journey to a foreign nation where she had no friends or acquaintances. She was isolated within an unfamiliar culture with no means of income. Now she had to scavenge leftovers to feed herself and her widowed mother-in-law.

But a previously unknown individual had suddenly appeared with an offer of extraordinary compassion. With this in mind, it’s easy to comprehend Ruth’s outpouring of gratitude, appreciation, and respect:“You really are being kind to me, sir, for you have reassured and encouraged me, your servant, even though I am not one of your servants!” (NET).

However, Boaz would go on to demonstrate his generosity towards Ruth in a far more immediate manner…

“ Now Boaz said to her at mealtime, ‘Come here, and eat of the bread, and dip your piece of bread in the vinegar.’ So she sat beside the reapers, and he passed parched grain to her; and she ate and was satisfied, and kept some back” (Ruth 2:14).

Although common today, people in the Biblical era typically dined without utensils such as knives, forks, or spoons. A typical meal of that day would have included bread, torn by hand from a larger portion. Each person would then take turns dipping their bread into a communal bowl of sauce. In this instance, the “sauce” comprised wine or vinegar.

This represented an act of great kindness, for outsiders would not typically receive permission to share a meal with the host or his employees. Through his invitation, Boaz signaled his intent to accept Ruth as “part of the team,” so to speak.

Nevertheless, an attentive reader will notice a subtle aside hidden away within this passage: Ruth ate until she was full, but “…kept some back.”We’ll see why Ruth did so (and what it tells us about her character), later in this chapter.

IX

“ And when she rose up to glean, Boaz commanded his young men, saying, ‘Let her glean even among the sheaves, and do not reproach her. Also let grain from the bundles fall purposely for her; leave it that she may glean, and do not rebuke her’” (Ruth 2:15).

While the Law of Moses commanded a landowner to make portions of his field available for harvest by the disadvantaged, Boaz permitted Ruth to glean within the area where the workers bundled the cut stalks of grain for transport. Since the act of collecting those stalks was sure to dislodge a significant amount of grain, this provided Ruth with the best opportunity for success.

Boaz also instructed his employees to support Ruth’s efforts by saying, “Be sure to pull out some stalks of grain from the bundles and leave them on the ground for her” (CEV). While Boaz could have given Ruth some grain from his fields, he chose instead to help her in a manner that preserved her dignity as she worked to support herself.

Boaz’ response illustrates the way a God-honoring person can employ a Scriptural directive as a guideline for righteous living. For example, Boaz took the principles that appear in Leviticus 19:9 and Deuteronomy 24:19 and adapted them for use with Ruth.

As the Apostle Paul would later go on to say, “… we know that the law is good, if one uses it lawfully” (1 Timothy 1:8 ESV). Boaz provides us with a good example that exemplifies this “lawful use of the law.” He adapted a Biblical mandate to align with this unique set of circumstances in order to extend mercy to someone who was in great need (see Hosea 6:6, Micah 6:8 and Matthew 12:7).

This passage also recalls a precept from the New Testament Gospel of Matthew: “Blessed are the merciful, For they shall obtain mercy” (Matthew 5:7). Ruth showed mercy toward Naomi in working to provide for their mutual needs. In turn, Boaz demonstrated mercy toward Ruth by helping her meet those needs more effectively.

This brings us to another Biblical principle that fits well within the agricultural theme of Ruth chapter two: “…let us not grow weary while doing good, for in due season we shall reap if we do not lose heart” (Galatians 6:9).

X

“So she gleaned in the field until evening, and beat out what she had gleaned, and it was about an ephah of barley. Then she took it up and went into the city, and her mother-in-law saw what she had gleaned. So she brought out and gave to her what she had kept back after she had been satisfied” (Ruth 2:17-18).

The act of gleaning was a physically demanding task that typically yielded a meager return on one’s efforts. A day’s work gleaning might sustain someone for a day or two, and virtually ensured that he or she would have to return to the fields to scavenge for anything edible that others overlooked.

Of course, a person with nothing to eat might view that option as better than nothing, especially if he or she had no other choice. However, the return on Ruth’s investment was quite a different story.

When Ruth completed her day’s work in the field, she took what she collected and “…pounded the grain off the stalks” (CEV). This involved the act of separating the grain from the surrounding husks by striking or beating them with a stick. This process was known as threshing, and it provided Ruth with an ephah of barley.

An “ephah” was an ancient measure of dry volume that was roughly equivalent to two-thirds of a bushel or about thirty to forty pounds (14-18 kg). This was substantially more than anyone might reasonably expect to glean from a field. It also provided enough to sustain Ruth and Naomi for at least a week or ten days. As one source observes, “This was a huge amount of barley for one woman to gather in a single day. It testifies both to Ruth’s industry and to Boaz’s generosity.” (1)

While Boaz clearly assisted Ruth in her efforts, that did not stop her from doing the best she could. In this manner, Ruth’s conduct embodied the noble qualities attributed to the virtuous woman described in Proverbs 31…

“She also rises while it is still night, and gives food to her household, and a share to her young women… She looks well to the ways of her household, and does not eat the bread of idleness” (Proverbs 31:15, 27).

(1) NETBible: Ruth 2 – Bible.Org, https://netbible.org/bible/Ruth+2# . Accessed 21 Feb. 2026.

XI

After Boaz invited Ruth to join his employees for lunch, “…she sat down beside the harvesters. Then he handed her some roasted grain. She ate until she was full and saved the rest” (Ruth 2:14 NET). For someone like Ruth (a person who didn’t know where her next meal might come from), we might expect to read that she kept those leftovers for herself.

But Ruth had a different motivation for saving the rest of her meal: “Ruth also took out what she had left over from lunch and gave it to Naomi” (GW). So, instead of simply looking out for herself, Ruth elected to share her blessings with someone who was equally in need.

This simple act of kindness offers a window into Ruth’s character. Even while Ruth was enjoying the unexpected benefit of a free lunch, she was mindful of Naomi and the fact that she had little or nothing to eat. Then she met that need while she was enjoying a meal of her own.

With this in mind, we should not be surprised to read of Naomi’s response in the following verse…

“ And her mother-in-law said to her, ‘Where have you gleaned today? And where did you work? Blessed be the one who took notice of you.’ So she told her mother-in-law with whom she had worked, and said, ‘The man’s name with whom I worked today is Boaz’” (Ruth 2:19).

So Boaz’ generosity blessed two people. His example reminds us that our words and deeds may have an impact that reverberates far beyond our initial actions. In this instance, Boaz’ simple act of compassion will trigger a series of events that will return those blessings to him; but it all started with the decision to help someone in need by providing her with lunch.

XII

When Naomi learned that Boaz had been responsible for displaying such generosity towards her daughter-in-law, she responded with an outpouring of thanksgiving to God…

“ Then Naomi said to her daughter-in-law, ‘Blessed be he of the Lord, who has not forsaken His kindness to the living and the dead!’ And Naomi said to her, ‘This man is a relation of ours, one of our close relatives’” (Ruth 1:20).

Through this simple act of benevolence, Boaz became a living embodiment of a principle that God would later codify through the pen of the Apostle Paul…

“ Remember this—a farmer who plants only a few seeds will get a small crop. But the one who plants generously will get a generous crop. You must each decide in your heart how much to give. And don’t give reluctantly or in response to pressure. ‘For God loves a person who gives cheerfully.’ And God will generously provide all you need. Then you will always have everything you need and plenty left over to share with others. As the Scriptures say, ‘They share freely and give generously to the poor. Their good deeds will be remembered forever.’

For God is the one who provides seed for the farmer and then bread to eat. In the same way, he will provide and increase your resources and then produce a great harvest of generosity in you. Yes, you will be enriched in every way so that you can always be generous. And when we take your gifts to those who need them, they will thank God.

So two good things will result from this ministry of giving—the needs of the believers in Jerusalem will be met, and they will joyfully express their thanks to God. As a result of your ministry, they will give glory to God. For your generosity to them and to all believers will prove that you are obedient to the Good News of Christ. And they will pray for you with deep affection because of the overflowing grace God has given to you” (2 Corinthians 6:6-14 NLT).

XIII

“ Naomi said to her, ‘The man is one of our close relatives; he’s one of our redeemers’” (Ruth 2:20 CEB).

Boaz was a “close relative” to Ruth only in the sense that…

  • Ruth had once been married to a man (now dead),
  • who had been the son of a man (also dead),
  • who had been a member of Boaz’ family.

Nevertheless, that tenuous connection did not prevent Naomi from saying, “The man is a close relative ofours, one ofourredeemers” (ESV, emphasis added). So, despite the absence of any biological ties, Naomi held Ruth in the same regard as a blood relative. In doing so, Naomi foreshadowed what Christ has done in reconciling those who were far from God…

“ Christ came and preached peace to you Gentiles, who were far from God, and peace to us Jews, who were near God. And because of Christ, all of us can come to the Father by the same Spirit. You Gentiles are no longer strangers and foreigners. You are citizens with everyone else who belongs to the family of God” (Ephesians 2:17-19 CEV).

It is also interesting to note Naomi’s change of attitude as she heard this news. For instance, Naomi was the person who once said, “Do not call me Naomi(or pleasant); call me Mara(or bitter), for the Almighty has dealt very bitterly with me” (Ruth 1:20).

However, God’s gracious provision through Boaz had now caused Naomi to break out in a spontaneous expression of thankfulness: “May he be blessed by the Lord, who has not forsaken his kindness to the living or the dead” (Ruth 2:20 HCSB). To paraphrase a verse from the New Testament epistle of James, it seems that Naomi had started to grasp the divine purpose unfolding through her life’s experiences. That led her to discover that God is both compassionate and merciful (James 5:11).

This reference to God’s “ kindness to the living and the dead” (NIV) alluded to the memory of her late husband and sons, as well as Boaz’ connection to those now-deceased family members.

XIV

The concept of Boaz’ role as a “kinsman-redeemer” may be unfamiliar to many 21st-century audiences, but it is an important Biblical principle that holds significance for everyone who follows Christ.

Contemporary versions of Ruth 2:20 convey the meaning of a kinsman-redeemer by translating this reference as “guardian” (NET), “family redeemer” (NLT), or “one of those responsible for taking care of us” (GNB).

Naomi thus recognized Boaz as someone who was more than just a family member; he was a close relative who held an important position of responsibility. In the words of one commentary, “In this context Boaz, as a ‘redeemer,’ functions as a guardian of the family interests who has responsibility for caring for the widows of his deceased kinsmen” (1)

In the original language of this passage, Naomi identified Boaz as a “ ga’al.” This phrase was used to describe someone who held the power to act in several capacities. For instance, a ga’al possessed the ability to:

  • Repurchase family property.
  • Redeem another family member who had been sold into slavery.
  • Extract retribution on behalf of a relative who had been injured
  • Continue the lineage of a deceased male relative.

If a man died without a son to carry on the family name in the Biblical era, the oldest surviving brother was responsible to marry his widow and have children with her in order to preserve his brother’s heritage. The first-born son from their relationship would then serve as an heir of the deceased (see Deuteronomy 25:5). (2) This suggests that Naomi had already started to contemplate certain possibilities that will later unfold in chapter three.

These concepts lead to a natural association with Jesus’ role as our kinsman-redeemer in several respects. For instance:

  • Jesus is related to us through our common humanity.
  • His death on the cross served as the purchase price to redeem us from our estrangement from God.
  • He cares for us, protects us, provides for us, and gives eternal life to those who accept and follow Him.

Jesus thus serves as humanity’s spiritual kinsman-redeemer, and in the words of Naomi, “Blessed be he of the Lord, who has not forsaken His kindness to the living and the dead!’

(1) NET Bible Notes on Ruth 3:9 http://classic.net.bible.org/bible.php?book=Rut&chapter=3#n39

XV

“ Ruth the Moabitess said, ‘He also said to me, ‘You shall stay close by my young men until they have finished all my harvest’” (Ruth 2:21).

Although Ruth shared the blessings of her day’s work in speaking with Naomi, there was something amiss in this report of her conversation with Boaz.

When Ruth began to elaborate on all that had taken place in the course of her day, she told Naomi, “…[Boaz] also told me, ‘Stay with my young men until they have finished all of my harvest’” (HCSB) . However, a closer look at that conversation between Ruth and Boaz reveals something different.

When Boaz invited Ruth to continue working in his field, he said to her, “Now, listen, my daughter, do not go to glean in another field or leave this one, but keep close to my maidens” (Ruth 2:8 RSV, emphasis added). So, it seems that Ruth interpreted Boaz’ message as an invitation to get a little closer with the young men who worked for him.

There’s something else as well. When Boaz invited Ruth to join his employees for lunch, she did not choose to sit among the members of his female workforce. Instead, she took a seat among the reapers or grain cutters (see Ruth 2:14).

So while Ruth may have welcomed the opportunity to meet and establish relationships with Boaz’ female employees, these subtle clues indicate that she may have been equally interested in meeting an eligible bachelor. While it’s difficult to fault Ruth if she harbored that desire, Boaz apparently possessed enough foresight to know that it was not in her best interest to socialize with the male employees under his supervision: “ I have ordered my young men not to touch you” (Ruth 2:9 GW).

It seems that Naomi also picked up on that potential risk as well…

“And Naomi said to Ruth her daughter-in-law, ‘It is good, my daughter, that you go out with his young women, and that people do not meet you in any other field’” (Ruth 2:22).

So just as Ruth was vigilant in seeking to provide for Naomi’s needs, Naomi was equally diligent in drawing upon her experience to help protect her young daughter-in-law.

XVI

“ So she stayed close by the young women of Boaz, to glean until the end of barley harvest and wheat harvest; and she dwelt with her mother-in-law” (Ruth 2:23).

Although Ruth may have been interested in getting to know the young men of Boaz’ workforce, Naomi wisely counseled her daughter-in-law to stay near his female employees instead. Naomi’s apprehension was clearly evident in her exchange with Ruth: “Who knows what might happen to you in someone else’s field!” (Ruth 2:22 CEV). Other translations express Naomi’s fear that Ruth might be molested (GNB) , harmed (NIV), or assaulted (ESV) if she left the protection of Boaz’ leadership.

So, Ruth embraced the counsel offered by Naomi and Boaz, both of whom possessed the benefit of age and experience. Instead of dismissing their suggestions and acting solely on her own judgment, “…Ruth stayed with the young women who were working for Boaz…” (GW).

We can draw a comparison between Ruth’s decision and the subsequent experience of a young man named Rehoboam, the son of King Solomon. Following Rehoboam’s ascension to the throne, he elected to act upon the questionable counsel offered by the companions of his youth instead of the wise counsel offered by the men who had advised his father (see 1 Kings chapter 12:1-24). As a result of that decision, a significant portion of the nation ultimately seceded from his leadership.

Unlike Rehoboam, Ruth’s decision had no immediate national impact. Nevertheless, the fact that she followed her mother-in-law’s guidance serves as a further testament to her good character. The fact that Ruth continued to work with Boaz throughout the barley and wheat harvests also indicates that she gleaned within his fields for perhaps as long as six to eight weeks.

So, Ruth faithfully persevered with Naomi through some very difficult times and continued to demonstrate that same degree of loyalty, dedication, and commitment now that their prospects were improving as well.

0 FacebookTwitterEmail

Romans – Chapter One L

by Ed Urzi February 27, 2026

“Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves, who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen” (Romans 1:24-25).

Romans 1:24 identifies the correlation that exists between one’s beliefs and the consequences that flow from those beliefs. If we could visualize that progression in the form of a flowchart, we might do so in the following manner…

This progression exists because people generally act on what they believe unless something prevents them from doing so. If God elects to remove His restraints from those who choose to reject Him and subsequently delivers them over to “…the lusts of their own hearts” (Romans 1:24 KJV), then He no longer shields them from the impact of their choices. As we’ll see, that progression leads to an array of negative consequences once those restraints are removed.

The word “lust” that appears here in Romans 1:24 identifies a craving, urge, or longing for something forbidden. (1) Lust often accompanies a range of inappropriate behaviors, including selfishness, immorality, and malicious conduct (see Colossians 3:5-9). We should also notice that the word “exchange” appears once again in Romans 1:25: “…[they] exchanged the truth of God for the lie.” We might understand this reference to “the lie” in the context of those who “suppress the truth” concerning God’s existence (Romans 1:18).

A person who wishes to have nothing to do with his or her Creator must replace Him at the top of life’s priority scale with something else. That “something else” might be a person, an idea, an object, or anything that someone loves, respects, or fears the most. That’s the exchange that takes place here in this passage. It involves substituting “the lie” (in whatever form it takes) for “the truth” concerning God. This “lie exchange” thus occurs whenever someone replaces God with anything that takes His place.

It is one thing to deny the existence of God, but it is another matter to add insult to that denial by worshiping a member of His created realm. Another source adds the following insight…

“All through history foolish men have attempted to bring God down to their level, portraying Him in various images and worshiping created things rather than the Creator. It’s a direct violation of the first two of the Ten Commandments (Exodus 20:1–5). Their minds rejected the proof they had of the divine nature, so, as a just punishment, God abandoned them to minds incapable of grasping the truth (Romans 1:19–20).” (2)

(1) G1939 – epithymia – Strong’s Greek Lexicon (kjv). (n.d.). Blue Letter Bible. https://www.blueletterbible.org/lexicon/g1939/kjv/tr/0-1/

(2) GotQuestions.org. (2024, November 7). What does it mean that “God gave them over” in Romans 1:24–28? https://www.gotquestions.org/God-gave-them-over.html

0 FacebookTwitterEmail

Romans – Chapter One XLIX

by Ed Urzi February 26, 2026

“Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves” (Romans 1:24).

Thus far in Romans chapter one, Paul the Apostle has established several links that unite an attitude or behavior with an associated consequence. For example, God expresses His wrath against those who choose to suppress the truth in unrighteousness (verse eighteen). In addition, those who reject the existence of God are without excuse since His attributes are clearly seen in the created realm (verses nineteen and twenty).

In verse twenty-one, Paul explained that a refusal to acknowledge God leads to futility. Finally, those who professed to be wise ultimately exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for images of His creation. In doing so, they became fools (verses twenty-two and twenty-three). Here now in verse twenty-four, our author introduces another related consequence: God responds to those who take such actions by “giving them up” to their preferences.

This act of “giving them up” communicates the idea of someone who is surrendered into one’s power or use. (1) When people habitually reject and dishonor God, He may opt to withdraw from them and permit them to dishonor themselves. This is a form of judgment in itself; God delivers them over (the judicial decision) to the degrading and shameful desires of their hearts (the corresponding sentence). In one sense, it is almost as if God says to the unrighteous, “If that’s the way you want it to be, I’m going to let you do what you want.”

So, the decision to reject God did not lead these individuals to become more virtuous or honorable human beings. On the contrary, that decision led to dishonor and a multitude of destructive behaviors that our author will catalog in the closing verses of this chapter. God did not initiate that chain of events but “steps aside” to permit the unrighteous to follow the path they have chosen…

“Paul clearly portrays the inevitable downward spiral into sin. First, people reject God; next, they make up their own ideas of what a god should be and do; then they fall into every kind of wickedness: greed, hate, envy, murder, quarreling, deception, malicious behavior, and gossip. Finally, they grow to hate God and encourage others to do so. God does not cause this steady progression toward evil. Rather, when people reject him, he allows them to live as they choose. God gives them over to or permits them to experience the natural consequences of their sin.” (2)

(1) G3860 – paradidomi – Strong’s Greek Lexicon (kjv). (n.d.). Blue Letter Bible. https://www.blueletterbible.org/lexicon/g3860/kjv/tr/0-1/

(2) Life Application Study Bible [Romans 1:21-32] Copyright © 1988, 1989, 1991, 1993, 1996, 2004 by Tyndale House Publishers Inc., all rights reserved.

0 FacebookTwitterEmail

Romans – Chapter One XLVIII

by Ed Urzi February 25, 2026

“Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for an image resembling mortal human beings or birds or four-footed animals or reptiles” (Romans 1:22-23 NET).

This passage speaks of an exchange that takes place with those who choose to reject the existence of God. This concept should be familiar to virtually everyone, for we frequently engage in various types of exchanges each day. Perhaps the most common example is the person who is seeking to purchase an item from a merchant. To do so, the buyer must exchange money (or another commodity) in order to complete the sale.

A wise consumer aims to secure a “good buy” by acquiring an item with a value that meets or exceeds its purchase price. However, let’s consider the exchange that takes place here in Romans 1:22-23. In this transaction, a priceless treasure (God) is exchanged for a inferior imitation (a human-like image or a representative of the animal kingdom). Today, we might add other commodities (like financial wealth or material possessions) to that list of substitutes.

However, this decision involves more than just a bad deal. A good consumer might recover from a bad purchase, but foolishness will undoubtedly manifest itself in many different areas of life. Unfortunately, a decision to exchange “…the glory and majesty and excellence of the immortal God” (AMP) offers an excellent starting point for a variety of foolish choices.

From ancient mythologies that remade God in man’s image, to modern-day idolatries that replace God at the top of life’s priority scale with social status, power, influence, or other types of acquisitions, humanity has consistently attempted to reconcile its rejection of God by substituting Him with something else. In fact, we can trace the origin of such behaviors all the way back to Garden of Eden.

As the following source observes, “One of Paul’s primary points in Romans 1:22–25 is that there is no such thing as religious neutrality within the hearts and minds of human beings. When people reject the one true God, they do not stop worshiping; rather, they direct their religious affections elsewhere. Only the term foolishness can describe this redirection of devotion.” (1)

So, those who embrace such practices reveal their foolishness. They also violate the very first of the Ten Commandments…

“You shall have no other gods before me. You shall not make for yourself an image in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. You shall not bow down to them or worship them” (Exodus 20:3-5 NIV).

Image Attribution : Exchange by Nick Youngson CC BY-SA 3.0 Alpha Stock Images via The Blue Diamond Gallery

(1) Worshiping the Creature (2014, January 20). Ligonier Ministries. https://learn.ligonier.org/devotionals/worshiping-creature

0 FacebookTwitterEmail

Romans – Chapter One XLVII

by Ed Urzi February 24, 2026

“Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things” (Romans 1:22-23 ESV).

What mental image does the word “fool” elicit? In the original language of this passage, the word “fool” is moros, and serves as the precursor to our contemporary term “moron.” This word typically describes someone who is lacking in wisdom, understanding, good judgment, or common sense. The Old Testament book of Psalms offers another definition of this word that relates to our text from Romans 1:22-23: “The fool has said in his heart, ‘There is no God…'” (Psalm 14:1).

Those who seek to navigate through life without the acknowledgment of God are those who are charting a foolish course. One source builds upon this concept with the following observations…

“The New International Theological Dictionary of New Testament Theology adds, ‘Moros means foolish, stupid and, like moria, foolishness denotes inappropriate behavior, thought or speech, both of single lapses of sense as well as in the sense of a permanent attribute.’ In other words, people who claim to be wise apart from God are not just acting foolishly in the moment; they are demonstrating the lifestyle and worldview they have adopted, and the impact thereof.

The idea behind the word moros is that there is ‘a power which dominates man.’ His foolishness is beyond his comprehension or control. He acts foolishly, but believes that his foolishness is wisdom.” (1)

Another commentator shares some additional insights concerning the fool described in this passage…

“Instead of looking out to God, he looked into himself. He involved himself in vain speculations and thought he was wise, while all the time he was a fool. Why? He was a fool because he made his ideas, his opinions, his speculations the standard and the law of life, instead of the will of God. The sinner’s folly consisted in making ‘man the master of things.’ He found his standards in his own opinions and not in the laws of God. He lived in a self-centred instead of a God-centred universe. Instead of walking looking out to God he walked looking into himself, and, like any man who does not look where he is going, he fell.” (2)

Of course, it is reasonable to expect that foolish individuals will eventually engage in foolish actions. If we choose to reject the one true God, we must then replace Him with an inferior substitute as the object of highest worth in our lives. Our author will provide us with some examples of those inferior substitutes in the following verse.

Image Attribution: Johann Georg Rauch, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

(1) Baucham, V., Jr. (2015). Expository Apologetics: Answering Objections with the Power of the Word. Wheaton, IL: Crossway. Page 27.

(2) Romans 1 – Barclay’s Daily Study Bible (n.d.). StudyLight.org. https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/eng/dsb/romans-1.html

0 FacebookTwitterEmail
Newer Posts
Older Posts

Recent Studies

Promotion Image
Promotion Image
Promotion Image

Social Media

Social Media

Copyright © 1996-2026 | Privacy Policy | Developed by CI Design + Media


Back To Top
The Doctor's Office
  • Home
  • Old Testament Book Studies
    • The Book Of Genesis
    • The Book of Ruth
    • The Book of Nehemiah
    • The Book Of Esther
    • The Book Of Ecclesiastes
  • New Testament Book Studies
    • The Gospel Of Mark
    • The Book Of Romans
    • The Book Of 1 Corinthians
    • The Book Of 2 Corinthians
    • The Book Of Galatians
    • The Book Of Ephesians
    • The Book Of Philippians
    • The Book Of 1 Timothy
    • The Book Of Colossians
    • The Book Of 1 Thessalonians
    • The Book Of 2 Thessalonians
    • The Book Of 2 Timothy
    • The Book of Titus
    • The Book Of Philemon
    • The Book Of Hebrews
    • The Book Of 1 Peter
    • The Book Of 2 Peter
    • The Book Of James
    • The Book Of 1 John
    • The Books Of 2 John / 3 John
    • The Book Of Revelation