Chapter # 12 Paragraph # 4 Study # 12
July 26, 2020
Humble, Texas
(Download Audio)
(061)
Thesis: Retribution is a divine prerogative.
Introduction: In our last study we considered the significance of two crucial issues: Paul's insertion of the believers' status as "beloved" into the exhortation to "give God the place of wrath"; and the question(s) of "written revelation" that "stands" throughout the history of men. Since, in
Romans 5:5, Paul claimed that "the love of God has been poured out within our hearts through the Holy Spirit", we have the foundation for believing in our status as "the beloved of God". Additionally we considered some of the reason(s) for God's sponsorship of a "written record" of His words so that our minds might be engaged and renewed by our interaction both with God (in prayer) and with His truth (through written words).
At issue in this study is the continuing focus upon Paul's insistence that we allow God to be The Executor of Retribution. This is critical because Moses wrote Deuteronomy 32:35 (which says that retribution is the prerogative of God alone) and both Paul (in our current text) and the author of Hebrews 10:30 quote the Mosaic words as the foundation of their instruction regarding "retribution" as an exclusive divine prerogative. This is not to deny Romans 13:4 and its declaration that human governors are God's instruments of divine "retribution", using the term "avenger" (ekdikos). That text simply indicates one of the ways God exercises His identity as The Executor of Retribution. "Instrumentality" is not contrary to "exclusive" retribution, just as all of the history of Israel indicates when it says that God used Israel to visit retribution upon "the nations", and He used "the nations" to visit retribution upon Israel. In our current text, we are faced with the "written" insistence that those believers who are not "ministers of the vengeance of God" refrain from taking that prerogative upon themselves. This raises the question of 'whether' and 'when' a believer might be used of God as an instrument of vengeance.
Thus, we are going to look into this claim of "exclusive retribution" in light of the insistence that a believer not be such an instrument.
- I. Paul's Rationale Continued.
- A. In two ways Paul emphasizes the exclusivity of the prerogative of retribution.
- 1. He uses the personal pronoun, translated "mine" (literally "to me [is] vengeance"), which the Logos Library System says is "only expressed ['written'] when emphatic".
- 2. He then turns immediately around and uses it again, translated "I", and is the emphatic subject of the verb "repay".
- B. Both of these uses of the personal pronoun are tied to the Person Who both spoke, and had what He spoke recorded.
- 1. This Person is identified as "The Lord".
- a. Paul's use of "kurios" in Romans is extensive (38 texts contain this descriptive title).
- 1) From this text alone we derive the concept of "Lord" as "Ultimate Judge Over All Creation" because "vengeance is Mine" means He will dispense righteous judgment without any legitimate objection.
- 2) When it comes to righteous judgment over the totality of time and all creation, it is this Lord ("kurios") Who will sit as both "Evaluator" and "Executor".
- a) In the setting of the Judgment Seat of Christ, this "Lord" is the One Who sits upon it.
- b) In the setting of the Great White Throne of Judgment (Revelation 20:11-15), it is this "Lord" who is the One Who sits upon it (John 5:22, 27).
- 3) There is in this an echo of Abraham's question in Genesis 18:25; "Shall not the Judge of all the earth deal justly?"
- a) At issue in Abraham's question is whether, or not, God would destroy Lot while in the process of destroying Sodom.
- b) The destruction of Sodom is deliberately rooted by God in the "greatness" of the sin of Sodom in Genesis 18:20-21, thus making the destruction a matter of "retribution".
- b. In Romans 4:24, this "Lord" is specifically called Jesus and is tied, theologically, to Acts 2:36 where Peter says that "God has made Him both Lord and Christ".
- 2. This Person, made "Lord" by God Himself, "says" (legei in the present tense as an on-going reality).
- a. The use of legei is a signal of doctrine declared as truth.
- b. The use of the present tense indicates that what Moses originally declared in writing, this "Lord" is still "saying".
- 1) The "it stands written" means "He is continuing to say".
- 2) What God has motivated men to "write" continually expresses a present word.
- C. What this Person says is that vengeance is His exclusive prerogative.
- 1. In the first part of His "saying" is this claim.
- a. Vengeance is ekdikesis.
- 1) The ek is "out from the midst of".
- 2) The dikesis is "Justice" (as in Acts 28:4) as expressed by the "eye for an eye" principle.
- 3) Thus "vengeance" is simply "paying back what is legally due by reason of earlier action/ actions.
- b. Vengeance is "to Me" (mine).
- 2. In the second part of His "saying" is this claim of exclusive prerogative.
- a. The emphatic use of the personal pronoun means "I" will act.
- b. The verb is a compound of three parts.
- 1) The first part of the word is "ant", which means "against".
- 2) The second part is "apo", which means "out of"
- 3) The third part is the same verb as is given in 12:19 translated "give room".
- c. Thus, "against" the perpetrator of the action at issue, "out of Myself", "I will give" what is due.
- 3. The two parts boil down to one: "vengeance" is "payback", which will be done by Me.
- C. How this "exclusive" prerogative sometimes becomes one which is exercised "instrumentally" with the "believer" used as the "instrument".
- 1. Instrumentality automatically shifts the attribution of the action taken to the One Who is making use of an instrument so that the "instrument" gets no credit.
- 2. Texts that make human beings the divine instruments of vengeance.
- a. Acts 7:24; Moses defends one treated "unjustly" and "takes vengeance".
- b. 2 Corinthians 7:11; the Corinthians dealing with injustices within the Church.
- c. Hebrews 10:28-31; the ones in Israel who are charged with addressing judgment "without mercy".
- d. 1 Peter 2:14; legitimate human authorities who are charged by God with the responsibility of "exacting vengeance upon evildoers".
- e. Romans 13:1-7; same as 1 Peter 2:14, (and following immediately upon the heels of our current text).
- 3. The "common theme" among these texts: God has imparted "instrumentality authority" to certain ones by "law" who are, then, charged with the execution of vengeance as "divine executors of what Romans 13:1 addresses under the thesis that "there is no authority except from God" and that "those [authorities] which exist are established by God".
- a. This means that the "exclusive prerogative" of God in respect to "vengeance" is "His", but He sometimes exercises that prerogative through His delegated "authorities" who are those "established" in human law ("...whoever resists authority has opposed the ordinance of God...": Romans 13:2).
- b. Thus, whatever "vengeance" is legally accomplished by a human being is within the parameters of the exclusive domain of God (Romans 13:4).
- c. Thus, the instructions to "give [God] the place of The Executor of Vengeance" means to allow divine instruction to guide in matters of "enemies" and the actions they take to injure.
