Romans 3:5–8

Second Jewish objection

But if our unrighteousness brings out God’s righteousness more clearly, what shall we say? That God is unjust in bringing his wrath on us? (I am using a human argument.) 6 Certainly not! If that were so, how could God judge the world? 7 Someone might argue, “If my falsehood enhances God’s truthfulness and so increases his glory, why am I still condemned as a sinner?” 8 Why not say—as we are being slanderously reported as saying and as some claim that we say—“Let us do evil that good may result”? Their condemnation is deserved.

If, as the psalmist says, God is always “proved right” when he speaks and “justified” when he judges, doesn’t it follow that each conviction of a sinner serves to demonstrate God’s justice? The sinner’s being proved wrong shows the rightness of God, thus resulting in glory and honor to God. Isn’t that doing God a favor? And if so, why should the sinner be punished for glorifying God?

Both verse 5 and 7 reflect the “human argument” that underlies this grossly false, even blasphemous, line of reasoning. The logic of verse 5 suggests that if God always prevails over evil, then our unrighteousness brings out God’s righteousness all the more clearly. It’s like a jeweler displaying a fine pearl. To make its milky whiteness stand out all the more, the pearl is displayed on a foil of black velvet to highlight the contrast. Likewise, the argument goes, our sins serve as a foil for God’s holiness. He looks better in comparison to us.

Verse 7 expresses a parallel idea, but in addition it raises the question of whether guilt is still involved. “Someone might argue, ‘If my falsehood enhances God’s truthfulness and so increases his glory, why am I still condemned as a sinner?’” Isn’t the sinner really doing God a service when he creates a situation wherein God can gain glory by showing his justice? And doesn’t that take away the guilt from him who has brought glory to God?

Paul’s answer is, If that were so, how could God judge the world? Note the basic assumption on Paul’s part that God is going to judge the world. That’s a given for both Jew and Gentile. If God can’t punish the evildoer, as he must do in judging the world, then any kind of evil is permissible. Then one might as well say, “Let us do evil that good may result.”

There apparently were people who not only said that but who also attributed this blasphemous teaching to Paul. Perhaps this erroneous idea stemmed from a misunderstanding (deliberate or innocent) of Paul’s teaching that salvation is a gift of God’s grace without the requirement of any personally earned merit or worthiness. This apparently was interpreted as allowing the sinner to do whatever he pleased.

 Regarding those who misunderstood grace and distorted the teaching of Christian liberty into sinful license, and then as a crowning insult laid that false teaching at Paul’s doorstep, the apostle simply says, “Their condemnation is deserved.” God is indeed going to judge the world. Then such people will get what is rightly coming to them.