https://youtu.be/Gza0Yc_oyBM
In our verse by verse study of Romans last time we finished Rom 2:25; with the expanded translation "So on the one hand circumcision is beneficial if you accomplish the purpose of the law (salvation adjustment to the justice of God through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ): but if on the other hand you are a transgressor of the law, your circumcision has become uncircumcision."
This tells us the ritual if meaningless without the corresponding reality in the thinking because there is no reality in ritual the reality always lies in the doctrine that makes the ritual meaningful.
Doctrine must be in the soul for the ritual to be meaningful because neither the ritual of circumcision nor the activity of law keeping can provide salvation or spirituality.
Rom 2:26; " if therefore" We have another third conditional clause translated from "ean oun" is how the verse begins: "ean" is a conditional conjunction "if" introducing a 3rd class condition, "ean" plus the subjunctive; "oun" is an inferential particle that is used to denote that whatever is introduced from the previous sentence is inferred so we translate it "If therefore."
"the uncircumcision" - the nominative singular subject from "akrobustia," referring here to the Gentiles, the person who has not had ritual circumcision, the person who has not had the privilege of having the Mosaic law to evangelize him and to teach him about the Lord "If therefore the uncircumcised."
"keep the righteousness of the law" from the present active subjunctive from the verb "phulasso," that means to defend, to guard, to protect, and when used with "nomos" it means to observe or to keep the law.
The present tense is a retroactive progressive present denoting what has begun in the past and continues into the present time.
Always in every generation there are certain people who have never heard of circumcision and who have never heard of or seen the Mosaic Law, and yet these people have produced the righteous objectives of the law; and Paul constantly uses them to make his particular point.
The active voice: the Gentile without the ritual of circumcision and without the spiritual heritage of the Mosaic Law, produce the action. The subjunctive mood goes with the 3rd class condition; that implies future reference as a rule, but with principle of contingency.
Plus the accusative plural direct object from "dikaioma" that means the requirements or regulations pertaining to the law. Originally it meant a legal claim but here is means a righteous requirement. With the source of "nomos" it means "righteous requirements from the law."
So the protasis of the third class condition is "if therefore the uncircumcised Gentile keeps the righteous requirements from the law..."
Next comes a question that is used as an apodasis. It begins with the strong negative "ouk" in a question, implying that the answer to the question is yes.
Along with the nominative singular subject "akrobustia" that is a reference to the uncircumcised Gentile, with a possessive genitive singular from the intensive pronoun "autos" used as the possessive pronoun "his;" so we have "will not his uncircumcision."
The verb is the future active indicative of "logizomai," that means to reckon, to calculate, to credit, to be considered, to be regarded, or to be thought of. Here it is translated to "be regarded" or to "be evaluated as."
The future tense is a deliberative future for a question of uncertainty expressed as a future active. It is a rhetorical question that takes the place of a direct assertion that is used as a nuance of the debater's technique.
The passive voice: the subject, the uncircumcised Gentile, receives the action of the verb. The indicative mood is interrogative for a rhetorical question. Then the preposition "eis" plus the accusative of "peritome" is translated as "circumcision" so we have "will not his uncircumcision be regarded as circumcision?" And then, because of "ouk," the implied answer that is not written is, "Yes, it will."
Rom 2:26; Expanded Translation; "If therefore the uncircumcised Gentile observes the righteous requirements from the law, will not his uncircumcision be evaluated as circumcision? (Yes, it will.)"
The principle here is that while ritual cannot account for reality, reality can account for ritual.
Ritual is for those who don't know the doctrine until they learn doctrine and become strong in doctrine. The strong really don't need ritual because their reality is the doctrine that the ritual represents.
Rom 2:27; "And he who is physically uncircumcised." The intensive use of "kai" here, is translated "and instead of "in fact" The connective use of "kai" means "and," the adjunctive use of "kai" means "also," the ascensive use of "kai" means "even," the intensive use of "kai" means "in fact."
The subject "akrobustia" in the nominative singular again refers, to uncircumcision. There is also a definite article that denotes its previous reference in the context. Then the preposition "ek" translated "from" with the ablative of "physis" that means nature, or natural.
The ablative of means is used is not the regular case for means but when the source is implied then the ablative is used for means so a literal translation is "in fact, the uncircumcised Gentile by nature."
But a literal translation does not bring out the idiom that creates a better translation that is "In fact, the physically uncircumcised Gentile."
This is a reference to the Gentile who was outside of the priest nation Israel, without the ritual of circumcision, and without the doctrine of the Mosaic law and therefore without all of the privileges that the Jews had.
"if he keeps the law" the present active participle from "teleo" is better translated "accomplishes the purpose or fulfills."
The present tense is a futuristic present, that denotes an event that has not yet occurred but it is regarded as being so certain that the tense regards it as having already happened.
The active voice: an uncircumcised Gentile fulfils the action of the verb by accomplishing the purpose of the law in adjusting to God's justice without the ritual.
This is a conditional participle that is used as the protasis of a conditional sentence. Then the accusative singular from "nomos" is used as the object of the participle. "In fact, if he accomplishes the purpose of the law."