Romans 1:23Meaning & Commentary from the Church Fathers

Here, without any comparison, he mocks pagan wisdom, proving that it is in itself stupidity and a mere display of arrogance. So that you may know that the Gentiles had knowledge of God but destroyed it themselves, Paul said, “They changed.” One who changes something changes it with the intention of having something else.

The Gentiles wished to find something greater. But because they loved innovations, they did not remain within the bounds given. Therefore they lost even what they had before.

In this consisted all Hellenic wisdom. Therefore they rose up against one another. Aristotle rose up against Plato, the Stoics took arms against Aristotle, and in general each was the opponent of another.

Thus they should not be admired for their wisdom, but turned from and hated. Because of this very thing they became senseless. If they had not given themselves over to reflections, demonstrations, and sophisms, they would not have suffered what they suffered.

Further, continuing the accusation, the Apostle also mocks all the idol worship of the Gentiles. If changing the glory of God at all is ridiculous, then changing it to such a great degree is beyond every defense.

Consider to whom the Gentiles changed it, and to what they gave glory. One ought to think of God that He is the Lord of all, that He created non-being, and that He provides and cares for all things. In this consists the glory of God.

To whom did the Gentiles apply it? Not to men, but to “the likeness of the image of corruptible man.” They did not even stop there, but descended to animals, or rather, to images of them.

Notice Paul’s wisdom, how he presented two extremes: God, who is above all, and creeping things, which are beneath all. Or better, not creeping things, but likenesses of them. Thus he clearly showed the undeniable madness of the Gentiles.

The knowledge which they ought to have had of the Being who surpasses everything incomparably they applied to what is incomparably lower than everything.

Someone will say, “Does this concern the philosophers?” Yes, everything said concerns them especially. They have as teachers the Egyptians, who invented these things. Plato too, who seemed more honorable than others, is proud of this. His teacher was devoted to the same idols, for he ordered a rooster to be sacrificed to Asclepius.

In paganism one could see images of animals and creeping things, and also Apollo and Dionysus honored together with creeping things. Some philosophers even raised bulls, scorpions, dragons, and every other vanity to heaven.

The devil strove by every means to bring men down to the likeness of creeping things, and to subject those whom God wished to raise above heaven to the most irrational of all creatures.

Not only from this, but also from another point, one can see that the head of the philosophers, Plato, is guilty of what was said above. When he compares the poets and says that one must believe them in their teaching about God because they possess exact knowledge, he offers nothing in proof but a collection of fables. He asserts that these laughable inventions must be recognized as true.

Thus Paul says of them: "Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into the likeness of an image of corruptible man." Therefore those who affirm that human likeness, dmutā, belongs to God are mad together with those idolaters. Since they are seized by the same impiety, they are plainly under the apostle's rebuke. They too change the glory of the incorruptible God into the likeness of an image of corruptible man. They turn aside from the truth and remain far from the understanding proper to holiness. The phrase ba-dmutā d-ṣalmā corresponds to ἐν ὁμοιώματι εἰκόνος. Thus they will find no defense on the day of Judgment. Having known God, that is, having perceived God's glory through the very greatness of created things, they did not glorify Him as God. Instead, they became vain in their reasonings, and their foolish heart was darkened. For although, as they think, they investigated the nature of things with great care, he says they became vain by following empty reasonings. In their life they proclaimed the error of polytheism. In a most irrational way they changed "the glory of God" into an image like corruptible man, birds, four-footed beasts, and creeping things. Although the highest nature is not subject to quantitative measure and receives neither form nor appearance, they compare it not only with man. They fell into such foolish thoughts that they even liken it to birds, four-footed animals, and venomous reptiles.

As it is written in the Wisdom of Solomon: "Being mortal, he makes a dead thing with wicked hands" (Wis 15:17). "And birds, and four-footed beasts, and creeping things." By listing these creatures, he indicated their dullness, beyond their folly and vanity. For they so humbled the majesty and glory of God that they gave equal honor with God to everything small and lowly. The Babylonians were the first to call the image of a certain Bel, who is thought once to have been their king, a god. They also honored the serpent, the dragon slain by Daniel, the man of God (Dan 14:23-28), and they had its image. The Egyptians worshiped a four-footed creature like a bull and called it Apis. Jeroboam borrowed this evil when he made calves in Samaria so that the Jews might offer sacrifice to them (see 3 Kgs 12:28-33). Likewise birds were honored, for among the Gentiles ravens were sacred. All this was done by those who considered themselves wise in the world. Yet they lacked wisdom even in what is visible. Whoever finds great things difficult is not wise in small things.

“This increases their accusation. For while calling themselves wise, they showed by their deeds that they were senseless” (Blessed Theodoret).

“And they changed.” For this they are subject to still greater blame. They changed, and therefore they had something else before. If now, having changed, they fell into falsehood, it means that before they possessed the truth.

“The glory of God” means the boundless perfections which God manifested to them in Himself in various ways, as was indicated above, especially in creation and providence. See Oecumenius.

“Incorruptible” means either immortal and eternally living, or immaterial, invisible, and spiritual. “Into the likeness of an image” means into an idol representing a man or something else. The phrase is taken from the psalm; see Ps 105:20.

The Greeks deified human idols, while the Egyptians deified idols of birds, four-footed animals, and creeping things. They deified the sun, moon, stars, and other created objects. But the Apostle takes what was then being done before their eyes.

“They changed the glory of God” can be expressed otherwise thus: they replaced the all-perfect God, the eternally living Spirit, with dead and material idols. They began to honor these coarse, dead, material idols as god, not as representatives or reminders of God, but as God Himself.

It is incomprehensible how they could have reached such madness, especially after they previously had true concepts of God.

Saint Chrysostom says: “Here the Apostle proves that the wisdom of the Gentiles, in itself and apart from any comparison, is foolishness, a mere display of self-praise. And so that you may know that the Gentiles had knowledge of God but destroyed it themselves, Paul said, ‘They changed.’ For one who changes something has something else before he changes it.”

“The Gentiles wished to find something greater. They did not remain within the bounds given, and for this reason they fell. They loved to introduce new opinions. Further, intensifying the accusation, the Apostle mocks idol worship in its whole composition.”

“If changing the glory of God is, in itself, exceedingly ridiculous, then changing it into such things is wholly inexcusable. Consider into what the Gentiles changed it, and to what they gave glory. Of God one ought to think that He is God, the Lord of all, that He created those who did not exist, and that He provides and cares. In this consists the glory of God.”

“To whom did the Gentiles apply it? Not to men, but to the likeness of the image of corruptible man. They did not even stop there, but descended to cattle and to images of cattle. Notice Paul’s wisdom, how he presented two extremes: God, who is above all, and creeping things, which are beneath all. Or rather, not creeping things, but the likenesses of creeping things. Thus he showed the madness of the Gentiles in full light.”

“The knowledge which they ought to have had of the Being who surpasses all beyond comparison they applied to an object contemptible beyond comparison. The devil strove by every means to bring men down to the likeness of creeping things, and to subject those whom God wished to raise above the heavens to the most senseless creatures.”

Without the participation of this agent, wise in evil, it is impossible to explain the origin of idolatry. The preparation can still be explained by the development of the sinfulness that had entered in, which the father of sin only inflamed and directed.

That preparation was how men, having fallen from God into selfhood and sensuality, began to live in forgetfulness of God, as though God did not exist. But how they began to deify soulless things and idols cannot be explained by anything except this: the devil set them upon it.

The matter proceeded thus. They began to forget God, became vain, and the heart was darkened. Sound concepts of God and divine things were obscured. All attention and cares were turned toward the earthly and worldly.

Yet they could not drive from consciousness the fact that God exists and that He must be honored. This thought returned, but no attention was paid to it. By itself, together with the coarsening and materializing of feelings and dispositions, it became coarse and materialized.

With such a disposition, let the question come: What is God? It will strike unexpectedly, but it will demand a decision. It came, and they decided: “These are your gods.” Sometimes the sun, sometimes the stars, sometimes animals, sometimes man.

Why did they not return to what tradition gave? The enemy closed that side and set them upon this. They agreed to accept it because this way seemed to offer the most convenient means of fulfilling what consciousness required in obligatory relations to God.

An idol stands there. Burn incense, and you are right. Everything is done. But for the God to whom tradition bore witness, this could not be sufficient.

Origen, explaining the phenomenon of idolatry, says that the Gentiles, in the vanity of their thoughts, sought images for God and lost the true God. Oecumenius expresses something similar when he says that the Gentiles went astray because they sought to present the uncontainable in a certain outline, and the bodiless in bodily images.

The course of falling from God is one and the same now as it was then. The difference is that then men could not remain entirely without God, while now they boldly dare to do so.

The state of those now living who long live in forgetfulness of God, having God neither in thought nor in feeling, is the same as it always was and will be. It is impossible to avoid the thought of God coming and demanding a decision.

Our people boldly decide: there is no God. They are right in the sense that He is not in their thoughts and feelings, and that they do not know how to see Him in His wondrous works.

But who can agree that their decision corresponds to reality? Is saying, “There is no God,” not a greater madness than saying to a stone, “You are my God”?

The Apostle has explained how the Gentiles reached the point of holding the truth of God in unrighteousness, having fallen into idolatry. Now he begins to set forth what they became, at the same time or as a consequence, in the moral respect. That is, he shows how they also held moral truth in unrighteousness.