Skip to content

Romans 9:30

Romans 9:30
What shall we say then? That the Gentiles, which followed not after righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness which is of faith.

My Notes

What Does Romans 9:30 Mean?

Romans 9:30 announces the most ironic spiritual reversal in Paul's letters — and he does it with a question that answers itself. "What shall we say then?" — ti oun eroumen? Paul steps back to summarize the staggering conclusion his argument has reached. "That the Gentiles, which followed not after righteousness, have attained to righteousness" — hoti ethnē ta mē diōkonta dikaiosunēn katelaben dikaiosunēn. The Gentiles — who weren't even trying, who weren't pursuing righteousness, who had no Torah, no temple, no covenant, no religious system designed to produce right standing before God — obtained it. Katelaben — seized it, grabbed it, caught up to it.

"Even the righteousness which is of faith" — dikaiosunēn de tēn ek pisteōs. The righteousness they attained wasn't earned by effort. It was received by faith. The Gentiles, who never had the law and never pursued its righteousness, stumbled into a righteousness that surpassed everything the law could produce — because it operated on a completely different mechanism.

Verse 31 provides the contrast: "But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness." Israel pursued. Israel strived. Israel had the system, the training, the centuries of religious infrastructure. And they didn't arrive. Because (v. 32) they pursued it by works rather than by faith. They used the wrong mechanism for the right goal.

The irony is total: the people who ran hardest didn't arrive. The people who weren't running caught it. The race was won by someone who didn't know they were in it.

Reflection Questions

  • 1.Are you pursuing righteousness by effort (works) or receiving it by trust (faith)?
  • 2.How does the irony — non-pursuers obtaining what pursuers missed — challenge your assumptions about spiritual achievement?
  • 3.Where might your religious effort be functioning like Israel's — genuine but using the wrong mechanism?
  • 4.What would it look like to stop running and start receiving?

Devotional

The people who weren't even trying got there. The people who ran the hardest didn't.

Paul marvels at the irony — and so should you. The Gentiles had no Torah. No Sabbath. No circumcision. No prophets. No temple. No religious system of any kind designed to make them righteous. They weren't pursuing righteousness. They didn't know the pursuit existed. And they obtained it. They grabbed it — katelaben, seized it, caught it like someone who wasn't even looking and found it anyway.

Israel, meanwhile, ran. Hard. For centuries. With every possible advantage — the law, the covenant, the commandments, the sacrificial system, the prophets pointing the way. And they didn't arrive. Not because the goal was wrong. Because the method was wrong. They pursued righteousness by works — by effort, by compliance, by the relentless accumulation of religious performance. And the method betrayed them. Works can't produce what faith receives.

The race wasn't won by the fastest runner. It was won by the person who stopped running and started trusting. The Gentiles attained righteousness by faith — not because they were better than Israel, but because faith was the only mechanism that works. And Israel, who had every tool except faith, missed it — like a carpenter with every instrument in the shop trying to cut wood with a spoon.

This isn't a story about Gentile superiority. It's a story about the bankruptcy of self-generated righteousness. The effort was real. The system was real. The running was genuine. And none of it produced what one act of trusting received. Are you running or trusting?

Commentary

Trusted original commentary from respected historical Bible scholars and theologians.

Gill's ExpositionBaptist theologian, 1697–1771

But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness,.... The Israelites, the far greater part of the Jews, who…

Barnes' NotesPresbyterian pastor, 1798–1870

What shall we say then? - What conclusion shall we draw from the previous train of remarks? To what results have we come…

Adam ClarkeMethodist theologian, 1762–1832

What shall we say then? - What is the final conclusion to be drawn from all these prophecies, facts, and reasonings?…

Matthew HenryNonconformist minister, 1662–1714Romans 9:30-33

The apostle comes here at last to fix the true reason of the reception of the Gentiles, and the rejection of the Jews.…

Cambridge BibleAcademic commentary, 1882–1921

What shall we say then? Same word as Rom 9:14; where see note.

followed not after To them no Revelation had pointed out…