Romans 2 22

Romans 2:22 kjv

Thou that sayest a man should not commit adultery, dost thou commit adultery? thou that abhorrest idols, dost thou commit sacrilege?

Romans 2:22 nkjv

You who say, "Do not commit adultery," do you commit adultery? You who abhor idols, do you rob temples?

Romans 2:22 niv

You who say that people should not commit adultery, do you commit adultery? You who abhor idols, do you rob temples?

Romans 2:22 esv

You who say that one must not commit adultery, do you commit adultery? You who abhor idols, do you rob temples?

Romans 2:22 nlt

You say it is wrong to commit adultery, but do you commit adultery? You condemn idolatry, but do you use items stolen from pagan temples?

Romans 2 verses

Romans 2 22 Meaning

Romans 2:22 is a sharp rhetorical question posed by the Apostle Paul, exposing the profound hypocrisy of those who claim adherence to God's Law but fail to live by its principles. Paul directly challenges individuals (often understood as those Jews who boasted in the Law) for their inconsistent behavior. He presents two contrasting scenarios: condemning adultery while practicing it, and detesting idols while committing sacrilege. The verse emphasizes that merely knowing and teaching God's commands is insufficient; true righteousness demands consistent, obedient living. It underscores that God's judgment is impartial and based on deeds, not on one's religious affiliation or knowledge of the Law.

Romans 2 22 Context

Romans 2:22 is nestled within Paul's comprehensive argument regarding God's righteous judgment against both Gentiles and Jews. After establishing the universal guilt of Gentiles (Rom 1:18-32) who suppressed the truth, Paul turns his focus in Romans 2 to those (primarily Jews) who possessed the Law and boasted in their knowledge of God. He challenges their presumption that their privileged position or knowledge of the Law automatically exempts them from divine scrutiny.

In Romans 2:1-16, Paul asserts that God judges all according to their deeds, not their lineage or outward religious observance. He highlights that hypocrisy brings even greater condemnation. Romans 2:17-24 specifically addresses the Jewish person, detailing their claims of enlightenment, their role as guides for the blind, and their confidence in the Law as a perfect embodiment of knowledge and truth. Verse 22 then functions as a piercing rhetorical question that dismantles these claims by pointing to specific moral failings among those who preached against them. It serves as a devastating illustration of their internal inconsistency, leading directly to the conclusion in verse 24 that their actions cause the Gentile nations to blaspheme God's name, thus profaning the very God they claim to honor. This verse prepares the way for Paul's radical assertion that true Jewishness (or spiritual circumcision) is a matter of the heart, not merely external markers (Rom 2:28-29).

Historically, the Jewish people in the diaspora lived among Gentiles, constantly encountering pagan temples and practices. While they staunchly upheld monotheism and rejected idols, Paul's challenge regarding "sacrilege" could allude to instances where some Jews might have indirectly profited from pagan systems, exploited the Temple system for personal gain (perhaps through dishonest sacrifices or improper use of funds), or more generally, profaned God's holy name by their scandalous actions in Gentile lands, actions that effectively 'robbed' God of His honor among the nations.

Romans 2 22 Word analysis

• Thou that sayest (ὁ λέγων - ho legōn): This uses the present participle "saying" which emphasizes a continual state of teaching or professing. It points to someone who habitually preaches or declares moral principles to others.
• a man should not commit adultery (μὴ μοιχεύειν - mē moicheuein): This phrase reflects the prohibitive command (Exodus 20:14) against adultery. It refers to a widely understood moral absolute within the Law.
• dost thou commit adultery? (μοιχεύεις - moicheueis): The present indicative verb form here asks if this action is a current, ongoing, or habitual practice for the person who condemns it in others. It brings the external profession into direct conflict with internal practice, or lack thereof. Beyond literal marital infidelity, adultery in a spiritual sense often means unfaithfulness to God, akin to idolatry, which is relevant given the next question.
• thou that abhorrest idols (ὁ βδελυσσόμενος τὰ εἴδωλα - ho bdelussomenos ta eidōla): "Abhorrest" (βδελυσσόμενος) is a strong term indicating deep loathing, detestation, or disgust. It signifies a profound moral and religious aversion. "Idols" (εἴδωλα) refer to physical images worshipped as deities, directly condemned by the Second Commandment (Exodus 20:4). This highlights their strong anti-idolatrous stance.
• dost thou commit sacrilege? (ἱεροσυλεῖς - hierosyleis): This is the more challenging word. "Sacrilege" (ἱεροσυλέω) literally means "to rob temples," or "to steal sacred things." This could encompass several things:
  • Literal robbing of pagan temples: Though unlikely for a pious Jew to directly participate, some Jews may have gained illicitly from commerce connected to pagan rituals, or benefited from their dismantling during military conquests, though Paul's direct "you" suggests something more personal.
  • Literal robbing of the Jewish Temple: Instances of priests or others misusing Temple funds or offerings were not unheard of, even in Scripture (e.g., Malachi 3:8-9 where God asks, "Will a man rob God? Yet you have robbed Me! In tithes and offerings"). This is a strong possibility for the immediate understanding of "sacrilege" in a Jewish context.
  • Desecrating or profaning God's holiness: By committing moral atrocities, especially sexual ones, or exploiting one's position for personal gain while outwardly upholding the Law, a person effectively commits "sacrilege" against the sanctity of God's name and commands. This is supported by Romans 2:24 ("For 'the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you'"). This implies that inconsistent conduct (including "sacrilege" in a broad sense) dishonors God in the eyes of outsiders.

Words-group analysis:

• "Thou that sayest... dost thou...?": This parallel structure employing rhetorical questions effectively sets up a contrast between professed belief and actual practice. It functions as a direct, convicting accusation, drawing the listener or reader into self-reflection on their own consistency. The accusation of hypocrisy is sharp and personal.
• "Adultery" contrasted with "sacrilege": Paul pairs two specific transgressions. Adultery is a personal sin, violating a command about personal purity and relationship fidelity. Sacrilege, on the other hand, deals with the sacred and divine property or reputation. This progression suggests moving from a generally understood moral failing to a deeper violation that undermines one's relationship with God or brings His holy name into disrepute, especially significant for someone boasting in the Law. The contrast highlights the inconsistency of despising "foreign" idols but disrespecting or abusing what is "holy" or God's own.

Romans 2 22 Bonus section

• The rhetorical questions in Romans 2:21-23 lead to the indictment in verse 24 that "the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you." This suggests that the "sacrilege" Paul references might not only be literal theft but also the spiritual desecration of God's reputation through the inconsistent and immoral behavior of those who claimed to represent Him.
• The close connection between covetousness and idolatry (Col 3:5, Eph 5:5) provides another layer of interpretation for "sacrilege." If one prioritizes material gain or self-interest above devotion to God, they are effectively serving an idol—a mammon god—which constitutes a form of "robbing" God of the devotion due to Him. This makes the "abhorrence of idols" a mere superficiality if deeper, self-serving desires drive one's actions, leading to practical sacrilege against the true God.
• Paul is not advocating for lax moral standards but stressing that reliance on outward distinctions (like possessing the Law or being circumcised) is useless if the heart is not transformed and the life does not genuinely reflect the commands of God. This forms a foundational truth for his later argument for salvation by faith alone, apart from works of the Law, for even those under the Law fall short.

Romans 2 22 Commentary

Romans 2:22 functions as a critical juncture in Paul's argument against religious hypocrisy. He unmasks the internal inconsistency of those who intellectually assent to God's standards and even teach them, yet fail to embody them in their lives. The two examples chosen, adultery and sacrilege, are potent. Adultery represents a fundamental moral breach often condemned in society and explicitly by the Law. Sacrilege, more nuanced, could imply defilement of sacred things, defrauding the Temple (robbing God), or, most profoundly in light of the ensuing verse, the profanation of God's holy name through their shameful conduct among the Gentiles.

Paul's rhetorical thrust is that a mere outward rejection of pagan idolatry (abhorring idols) does not secure righteousness if one simultaneously engages in actions that betray a disregard for the true God's holiness or commands (sacrilege). This spiritual sacrilege can manifest as covetousness (which Paul elsewhere equates to idolatry, Col 3:5), self-gain at the expense of religious duties, or immoral living that mocks the very Law one teaches. The verse's core message is that true righteousness goes beyond intellectual knowledge or verbal pronouncements; it demands a transformation of the heart that results in a life consistently aligned with God's revealed will. Hypocrisy not only damages the individual but also dishonors God in the eyes of the world, making the very Law they boast in a source of scandal.