Romans Commentary

2004-01-08T17:54:00.000-08:00

Introduction

I plan on using different colors for different levels of exegesis, namely levels that carry different degrees of intimacy with the text, starting from the raw and moving outward to comprehension.

Ideas:

- Vocabulary, grammar, argumentation given the prepositions 'flow' of thought

- Considerations within the epistle

- Historical considerations

- Theological considerations

2004-01-07T13:20:00.007-08:00

Romans 1

1 Paul, a servant of Christ Jesus, called to be an apostle, set apart for the gospel of God,

What other passages refer to Paul's calling? What can we learn about it?

"Paul was not merely saying that the gospel originates from God. He was saying too that the gospel is ABOUT God, about God?s righteousness, His love, His mercy and grace. The good news that God is not like the harsh nor like the indulgent idols of our imaginings. The good news is that God is like the Father of Jesus, that God is like Jesus Himself. No, the gospel is more: The good news is that the Father of Jesus IS God, and that Jesus Himself IS God made flesh. The good news is that God has revealed His character and His purposes, in His Son. The gospel is no gospel without the incarnation; there is no good news without the good news of Christmas. According to this gospel of God, the words of Jesus are the words of God, the compassion of Jesus is the compassion of God, the death of Jesus is the human death of God the Son, and the resurrection of Jesus is the victory of God." -Peter Liethart

2 which he promised beforehand through his prophets in the holy Scriptures,

3 concerning his Son, who was descended from David according to the flesh

Where are some Davidic promises?

4 and was declared to be the Son of God in power according to the Spirit of holiness by his resurrection from the dead, Jesus Christ our Lord,

How is this a declaration?

5 through whom we have received grace and apostleship to bring about the obedience of faith for the sake of his name among all the nations,

The grace and apostleship given to Paul was purpose-oriented.

6 including you who are called to belong to Jesus Christ,

"Called to belong" - What does that mean?

7 To all those in Rome who are loved by God and called to be saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

8 First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for all of you, because your faith is proclaimed in all the world.

What was the "world" to Paul? It obviously cannot mean that every individual has heard of the faith of the Roman Christians?

Does Paul have a characteristic usage of kosmos?

Reference Romans 11:18: But I ask, have they not heard? Indeed they have, for “Their voice has gone out to all the earth, and their words to the ends of the world.”

9 For God is my witness, whom I serve with my spirit in the gospel of his Son, that without ceasing I mention you

You mean, when you pray three times a day, you always mention them?

10 always in my prayers, asking that somehow by God's will I may now at last succeed in coming to you.

Usage of "God's will"?

11 For I long to see you, that I may impart to you some spiritual gift to strengthen you—

12 that is, that we may be mutually encouraged by each other's faith, both yours and mine.

13 I want you to know, brothers, [2] that I have often intended to come to you (but thus far have been prevented), in order that I may reap some harvest among you as well as among the rest of the Gentiles. 14 I am under obligation both to Greeks and to barbarians, both to the wise and to the foolish. 15 So I am eager to preach the gospel to you also who are in Rome.

16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.

Why would Paul be ashamed?

17 For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith for faith, as it is written, “The righteous shall live by faith.”

"Douglas A. Campbell argues forcefully for interpreting the phrase 'ek pisteos' (from faith) in Romans 1:17 as a reference to the faithfulness of Christ in his obedience to death. This, in turn, suggests strongly that Paul's later use of 'pistis Christou' (faith of Christ) as Christ's own faithfulness rather than our human faith in Jesus. Several of Campbell's arguments are worth noting...

"[Paraphrase of v.17:] The eschatological saving righteousness of God is being revealed in the gospel by means of faithfulness (namely, the faithfulness of Christ), with the goal of faith/fulness (in the Christian)." -Peter Liethart

Calvin: "By the righteousness of God I understand that which is approved at His tribunal, as on the other hand that which is reckoned and counted as righteousness in the opinion of men, even though it is a mere triviality, is generally referred to as the ‘righteousness of men’. Paul, however, is without doubt alluding to the many prophecies in which the Spirit is throughout setting forth the righteousness of God in the future kingdom of Christ. Some commentators explain the meaning to be ‘what is given to us by God.’ I certainly grant that the words will bear this meaning, because God justifies us by His Gospel, and thus saves us. And yet the former sense seems to me more suitable, although I would not spend much time on the question. It is of more importance that some scholars think that this righteousness consists not only in the free remission of sins, but in part also the grace of regeneration."

18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth.

How is this wrath revealed?

19 For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them.

20 For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse.

21 For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened.

22 Claiming to be wise, they became fools, 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles.

How were they claiming to be wise?

24 Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves,

25 because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen.

26 For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature;

Do we have a extra-Romans Biblical definition of "natural relations"?

27 and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.

And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done. They were filled with all manner of unrighteousness, evil, covetousness, malice. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, maliciousness. They are gossips, slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless. (28-31)

Note how contrary these practices are to the law, which is fulfilled by loving God and loving man.

"[T]he one who loves another has fulfilled the law. The commandments, 'You shall not commit adultery, You shall not murder, You shall not steal, You shall not covet,' and any other commandment, are summed up in this word: 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself.' Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfilling of the law. (Romans 13:8b-10)

32 Though they know God's decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.

Should this make me second-guess as to whether or not this is in fact Pagans being spoken of, and not Israelites who have access to decrees?

2004-01-07T13:20:00.006-08:00

Romans 2

1 Therefore you have no excuse, O man, every one of you who judges. For in passing judgment on another you condemn yourself, because you, the judge, practice the very same things.

This seems targeted at Jews who were inwardly uncircumcised, but were trusting to be beneficiaries of the promises of God by virtue of outward circumcision.

What a fascinating transition. Of 1:18-3:20, Peter Leithart notes, "the rhetoric of the passage indicates that his main purpose in this is to convict the JEWS of guilt before God."

2 We know that the judgment of God rightly falls on those who do such things.

And this is far from being hypothetical: it will fall on those who do those things.

3 Do you suppose, O man-you who judge those who do such things and yet do them yourself-that you will escape the judgment of God?

4 Or do you presume on the riches of his kindness and forbearance and patience, not knowing that God's kindness is meant to lead you to repentance?

5 But because of your hard and impenitent heart you are storing up wrath for yourself on the day of wrath when God's righteous judgment will be revealed.

He will render to each one according to his works: to those who by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life; but for those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, there will be wrath and fury. There will be tribulation and distress for every human being who does evil, the Jew first and also the Greek, but glory and honor and peace for everyone who does good, the Jew first and also the Greek. (v. 6-10)

Final Judgment
There is no passage in the Bible indicates that final judgment will be rendered simply on the basis of justification by faith apart from works. Am I wrong here? As Paul indicates, it is based on works, particularly works that fulfill the law: love for God and love for man.

"When the Son of Man comes in his glory", according to Jesus, the goats and the sheep will be differentiated by their acts of love (Matthew 25:31-46).

Jesus commanded his disciples "to preach to the people and to testify that he is the one appointed by God to be judge of the living and the dead" (Acts 10:42).

Final judgment was part of Paul's gospel presentation to the Athenians in Acts 17:31. He proclaimed that they should repent, because God "has fixed a day on which he will judge the world in righteousness by a man whom he has appointed; and of this he has given assurance to all by raising him from the dead."

Paul affirms a "day when, according to my gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus," in Romans 2:16.

"[W]e make it our aim to please him. For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may receive what is due for what he has done in the body, whether good or evil." (2 Corinthians 5:9b-10)

The writer of Hebrews considered "eternal judgment" an "elementary doctrine of Christ" (Hebrews 6:1-2).

God purposes that others will "know that I am he who searches mind and heart, and I will give to each of you as your works deserve" (Revelation 2:23b).

See also Mark 13:13, Luke 16:1-31, and John 3:16-18; 5:19-24; 12:44-50, Revelation 20:11-15, Revelation 2:23b.

How does this relate to Peter's words in Acts 10:34?

Jouette Bassler notes that 1:16-2:10 contains an interesting structure:

A. 1:16: to the Jew and also to the Greek
B. 1:18: revelation, wrath
C. 1:18: against all ungodliness of men
D. 1:18: wrath, unrighteousness, truth
E. 1:20: without excuse

E'. 2:1: without excuse
B'. 2:5: revelation, wrath
D'. 2:8: truth, unrighteousness, wrath
C'. 2:9: to every soul of man
A'. 2:10: to the Jew and also to the Greek

11 For God shows no partiality.

12 For all who have sinned without the law will also perish without the law, and all who have sinned under the law will be judged by the law.

Am I right in thinking the one who has sinned here is not necessarily one who has fallen from perfection, but rather one who "does evil" (v. 9) and is "self-seeking and do[es] not obey the truth, but obey[s] unrighteousness (v. 8). This is in contrast to one who, "by patience in well-doing seek for glory and honor and immortality..." (v. 7)

St. Chrysostom: "Those who lived prior to the Mosaic law will not receive the same judgment as those after the law. Rather those who sin after the giving of the law fall under a stiffer penalty. 'For all who sin apart from the law, die apart from the law.' That is, the very fact of not having the teaching and assistance of the law makes their punishment more moderate. 'All who sin by the law, through the law they are judged.' "

13 For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the law who will be justified.

And the doers of the law can be externally uncircumcised Gentiles, because circumcision is a matter of the heart by the Spirit.

What does it mean to do the law?

Reference the Good Samaritan.

14 For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature (NASB: instinctively) do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law.

What does the Torah require? "...the one who loves another has fulfilled the law" (Romans 13:8).

15 They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them

16 on that day when, according to my gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus.

See above note on final judgment.

17 But if you call yourself a Jew and rely on the law and boast in God

18 and know his will and approve what is excellent, because you are instructed from the law;

19 and if you are sure that you yourself are a guide to the blind, a light to those who are in darkness, 20 an instructor of the foolish, a teacher of children, having in the law the embodiment of knowledge and truth-

I don't think Paul is being sarcastic here, for the "Jews were entrusted with the oracles of God" (3:2), some of which are commands against stealing (2:21), adultery, and idolatry (v. 22). Israel was supposed to be a guide/light/instructor/student to the blind/dark/foolish nations, was it not? Individuals likewise. Paul doesn't jab at the God-given role of being a teacher per se, but rather at the hypocrisy of those appointed.

21 you then who teach others, do you not teach yourself? While you preach against stealing, do you steal? 22 You who say that one must not commit adultery, do you commit adultery? You who abhor idols, do you rob temples?

Pagans, uncircumcised at heart, "though they know God's decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them" (1:32).

Jews, uncircumcised at heart, "know that the judgment of God rightly falls on those who do such things" (2:2), but "judge those who do such things and yet do them..." (v. 3).

23 You who boast/exalt in the law dishonor God by breaking the law.

In response to the NPP view on this: "By transgressing the law, they have become the opposite of what they claim to be: they are not circumcision, but uncircumcision. One of the ways they have transgressed the law may be a pride and dependence on election, in a presumptive way. One great sin was their exclusion of Gentiles from salvation. But that’s not what Paul says: he simply says they have transgressed the law." - From Peter Liethart's notes on material from Simon Gathercole

24 For, as it is written, "The name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you."

"Here is the gospel of election, of the decree, that Jesus Christ was, from all eternity, elected and chosen as the true Israel of God, to ensure that God's name would be honored among the nations." -Peter Liethart

[Find scriptures relating to Israel's mission among the nations.]

[In the case of the un-heart-circumcised Pagans, the truth about God is suppressed and sin is...]

But the un-heart-circumcised Jews, boasting and exalting in the God-given law, cause the name of God to be blasphemed among the Gentiles by breaking the law. It seems as though the breaking of the law here is not a matter of mere legal imperfection against the backdrop of Gentile-demanded perfection, but rather of self-seeking disobedience that essentially contradicts its salient precepts of the law.

25 For circumcision indeed is of value if you obey the law, but if you break the law, your circumcision becomes uncircumcision.

Circumcision would precisely be of value because the name of God would be honored among the Gentiles.

26 So, if a man who is uncircumcised keeps the precepts of the law, will not his uncircumcision be regarded [logizomai: 'credited [to him]', 'reckoned', 'counted'] as circumcision?

There has to be some huge connection between this and Romans 4:1-12.

27 Then he who is physically uncircumcised but keeps the law will condemn you who have the written code and circumcision but break the law.

"In verse 27, 'keep' translates TELOEIN, 'complete,' 'accomplish,' 'bring to its proper end.' It seems naturally to point ahead to 10:4, that Christ is the 'telos' of the law for those who believe." -Peter Liethart

"That, as much as anything, is a bitter indictment of the Jews who possess and boast in their possession of the 'embodiment of knowledge and of the truth' in the Torah (2:20)." -Peter Leithart

"Verse 27 makes a neat reversal of the initial verses of the chapter. There, Paul addresses an interlocutor (probably to be understood as Jewish) who is eager to judge others and hopes to escape the judgment of God by passing judgment on others. But those who judge others, even if they judge other rightly, but fail to keep Torah themselves will be 'judged' (v 27) by the Gentiles who keep Torah through the Spirit. The tables are turned, and the 'righteous' who participate in the judgment of angels, who eat from the tree of knowledge, are not the "naturally" circumcised, but those who though 'naturally' uncircumcised do the things written in Torah." -Peter Liethart

28 For no one is a Jew who is merely one outwardly, nor is circumcision outward and physical.

Paul, you mean circumcision that is of value to the honor of the name of God among the Gentiles?

29 But a Jew is one inwardly, and circumcision is a matter of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter. His praise is not from man but from God.

"by the letter" - Where else is this found?

"...who has made us competent to be ministers of a new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit. For the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life." (2 Corinthians 3:6)

"But now we are released from the law, having died to that which held us captive, so that we serve not under the old written code but in the new life of the Spirit." (Romans 7:6)

How is his praise not from man? How does this jive with the negativity behind the name of God being blasphemed among the Gentiles?

What is the relationship between "circumcision" and "praise"?

"...the whole contrast here is between OC and NC realities, between 'flesh' and 'spirit.' The Jews are those who are in the new covenant, who enjoy the realities of the fulfilled covenant -- circumcision of the heart, through the Spirit, praise from God. Because those within the NC 'keep the law' and 'fulfill the law' they honor God's name among the Gentiles, in contrast to those who do not keep the law and bring blasphemy upon the name of Yahweh. And God responds to their honoring of His name by praising them." -Peter Liethart

2004-01-07T13:20:00.005-08:00

Romans 3

1Then what advantage has the Jew? Or what is the value of circumcision?

Why would a person ask these questions?

2 Much in every way. To begin with, the Jews were entrusted with the oracles of God.

3 What if some were unfaithful? Does their faithlessness nullify the faithfulness of God?

Unfaithful how? The faithfulness of God to do what?

"If God's purpose for the Gentiles and the world through Israel has come to nothing, what does that say about God? Can He be trusted? Is He really committed to doing right in the world, to bringing about righteousness, justice, and peace in His creation? Or is He the kind of God who makes a world and then leaves it to its own sorry devices? Does the Judge of all the earth in fact do right?" -Peter Leithart

4 By no means! Let God be true though every one were a liar, as it is written, "That you may be justified in your words, and prevail when you are judged."

5 But if our unrighteousness serves to show the righteousness of God, what shall we say? That God is unrighteous to inflict wrath on us? (I speak in a human way.)

How does the unrepentant Jew show the righteousness of God?

6 By no means! For then how could God judge the world?

7 But if through my lie God's truth abounds to his glory, why am I still being condemned as a sinner?

8 And why not do evil that good may come?-as some people slanderously charge us with saying. Their condemnation is just.

I don't think the justice Paul is appealing to finds its significance in perfection judging imperfection. This is the type of justice that OT figures found comfort in, the type that saw a man for his heart's working, and the type that punished the unrepentantly wicked, thus vindicating God's true people in the face of persecution, apparently successful non-God-fearers, and hypocrites.

Compare to 1:32 and 2:2. We know that the judgment of God rightly falls on those who persist in self-seeking, lawless, disobedience to the truth.

9 What then? Are we Jews any better off? No, not at all. For we have already charged that all, both Jews and Greeks, are under sin,

"Are we Jews any better off, even to the degree that circumcised Jews, uncircumcised at heart, are better off than uncircumcised Gentiles?"

Members of both Jew and Gentile communities are under the power of sin, without respect to whether or not they year the sin. Therefore, being distinctively a Jew doesn't automatically benefit a person with regard to escape the power of sin.

I think the "all" here refers to all communities, not necessarily all individiuals. Emphasis: being under one particular community embrella doesn't determine your being under the power of sin; Jewishness doesn't suffice, and not possessing the written law doesn't cut it. Checking the Greek would be nice. Christians who benefit from the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ are no longer under the power of sin, but under the power of the Spirit.

"under sin" - some translations render this "under the power of sin"

10 as it is written: "None is righteous, no, not one;

If one took unrighteousness here for cumulative imperfection, this would be true of every individual.

11 no one understands; no one seeks for God.

12 All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good, not even one."

13 "Their throat is an open grave; they use their tongues to deceive." "The venom of asps is under their lips."

14 "Their mouth is full of curses and bitterness."

15 "Their feet are swift to shed blood;

16 in their paths are ruin and misery,

17 and the way of peace they have not known.",

18 "There is no fear of God before their eyes."

19 Now we know that whatever the law says it speaks to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be stopped, and the whole world may be held accountable to God.

20 For by works of the law no human being will be justified in his sight, since through the law comes knowledge of sin.

21 But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law, although the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it-

Peter Leithart:

One of the ways to characterize current debates about this passage, and about the righteousness of God and justification in general, is to ask whether this is about the righteousness that is given to those who believe as a matter of "ordo salutis" or whether it is about the righteousness of God Himself manifested in "historia salutis." The beginning of 3:21 answers this question decisively: I agree with Cranfield that the NUN should be given its full temporal force; Paul is not saying "now, this follows logically from what I've presented," but rather "all flesh stands condemned before God, but God has done something new now in Jesus so that those who believe will not be condemned." It is clear that Paul does not regard "justification by faith" as something that is revealed "now"; chapter 4 demonstrates that Abraham and all Abraham's children, whether Jew or Gentile, are reckoned righteous by faith. If in 3:21 Paul is talking about individual soteriology, there is no "but now" about it. Justification has always and ever been by faith. What is NEW, what is NOW, is that God has revealed His righteousness through the faithful work of Jesus. By punishing sin in the cross, and by justifying those who believe in Jesus, God has revealed His righteousness, His covenant faithfulness and His commitment to make the world right.

Surely this can be better expressed, but the "but now" makes it clear that 3:21-31 is historia salutis first of all, rather than ordo salutis (though I don't think Paul would oppose these two at all).

Peter Lienhart:

Most commentaries I've examined assume that Paul's discussion of the work of Jesus in Romans 3:21-31 centers in the cross. The reference to blood and to propitiation (or propitiating sacrifice) in v 25 justifies this, but this doesn't mean that Paul's focus is exclusively on the cross. Several things support the notion that he also has resurrection in view:

1) Paul's summary of the gospel in 1:3-4 is a brief narrative of death and resurrection, not merely a story of the cross. That sets the background for all that he says elsewhere. This is strengthened by contextual considerations: 3:21-31 is the first expanded discussion of the "righteousness of God" that was first mentioned in the "prologue" (1:17-18), and the prologue is chiastically structured with the "gospel of God's righteousness" parallel to the "gospel of God's Son." Hence, the "manifestation of the righteousness of God" in 3:21-31 is the story of death and resurrection from 1:3-4.

2) Paul says that justification is a gift of grace that is available "through the redemption which is in Jesus Christ" (v. 24). While Paul can certainly use "redemption" as a description of what occurred at the cross (Eph 1:7; Heb 9:15 if Heb is Pauline), he more commonly uses the word to describe the resurrection (Rom 8:23; Eph 1:14; 4:30). Jesus' resurrection may well be in the background of Col 1:14 as well; redemption is defined as "the forgiveness of sins," but as Paul insists in 1 Cor 15 without the resurrection we are still in our sins. (As Dick Gaffin puts it, a dead Christ is an unjustified Christ; and without a justified Christ there are no justified or forgiven Christians.) Thus, justification comes as a gift of grace through the death and resurrection of the Son of God, who is Son of David.

3) Even "propitiating sacrifice" includes a note of resurrection. This is evident in the sacrificial system generally, where the death of a victim was followed by its translation into smoke and its ascent to Yahweh's throne in heaven. If we take HILASTERION as simply "propitiation," it still remains that turning away God's wrath gives sinners a fresh start. If Paul is alluding to the day of atonement in particular, the point still stands: The rites of the day of atonement not only cleansed the sanctuary from all its old defilements, and cleansed Israel from all its sins and transgressions, but also, and by the same token, initiated a new start for Israel. If Kiuchi is correct in his claims about the day of atonement, then it was in particular a new start for the priesthood; Aaron shed all the sins and iniquities of Israel that had attached themselves to him over the year, and he was refreshed to start the whole process over again. This is not to say that HILASTERION refers to the resurrection; it refers to the cross ("in his blood"), but the purpose of the propitiation, however understood, was to offer new life.

Now, how does this clarify the argument of Rom 3:21ff? First, it helps to explain how it is that justification as a gift of grace can be accomplished "through" the redemption that is in Christ Jesus. The phrasing suggests (though perhaps does not require) that the justification of which Paul speaks is accomplished in the work of Jesus. He does not say that teh redemption is the GROUND or the PRESUPPOSITION of justification, but the means or agency by which the justification occurred. That is, Paul is not talking about justification as "ordo salutis" but as "historia salutis." That's why he can say that justification is accomplished "through" the redemption, through the work of Jesus in His death and resurrection supremely.

Second, how is THIS the case? Let me attempt to explain this as concretely as I can: Paul says that God's righteousness has been revealed to all who believe in Jesus. They are justified through the redemption that is in Jesus. During Jesus' lifetime, He gathered disciples, who believed in Him and trusted in Him. They trusted that they would be acceptable to God, and that God would display before the world that they were His people. They believed this because they believed that Jesus was indeed the Messiah, and their association with Him meant that they would share in the glory of His vindication. This vindication takes place not only through Jesus' death, but through His death-and-resurrection. (Again, a dead Christ is an unvindicated Christ.) God passes His judgment, a judgment of "not guilty" and "righteous" on His Son by raising Him from the dead. Those who believe in Jesus are likewise vindicated in their faith: they have put their trust in the right man, and His vindication (through the redemption) is THEIR vindication.

22 the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction:

23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,

Is this referring to the cumulative imperfect nature of all human beings? Or, rather, the fact that Jewish and Gentile communities both contain self-seeking lawbreakers, and hence no ethnic/law-hearing distinction makes one or the other better off?

"all have sinned" seems to echo 2:12.

"fall short of the glory of God" seems to echo 2:8 (which is contrasted with 2:7)

Peter Lienhart:

There looks to be some chiastic action going on in Romans 3:27-30:

A. Where is boasting? Excluded
B. By law of works?
C. No: Law of faith
C. justification is by faith
B. not by works of law (reversing word order of previous verse)
A. God is God of Jews and Gentiles

The value of this is to highlight the nature of the "boasting" in v 27. It is no doubt boasting about one's performance of the law, confidence that one's performance will pass muster before God's judgment seat (cf. Gathercole). But it is also, perhaps centrally, the boasting of the Jew over the Gentile, the boasting in Jewish privilege. Paul has been at pains in the early part of Romans to demonstrate that the Jews stand with Gentiles under the condemnation of God and under the threat of wrath. Turn that around in a soteriological direction, and Paul is at pains to demonstrate that Jews and Gentiles are both vindicated, reconciled, delivered, what have you through the faith of Jesus that comes to us through faith. Jews are no better than Gentiles when it comes to sin; Jews have no unique and special pathway to God different from that of Gentiles. Boasting on both scores is excluded by the "law of faith."

Another point, not based on the above structural analysis: What does Paul mean by "law of faith"? Doubtless, Paul is having his bit of fun, punning on NOMOS as he puns on works in Galatians ("faith WORKING through love"). At the same time, there is doubtless a serious point, and I think that point can be clarified by looking at what Paul says in the following verse, v 28. If we take "we" as "we Jews" in v 28, things fall into place rather nicely. Here's the argument:

1) Boasting is excluded.
2) Boasting would NOT be excluded if justification were accomplished by the works of the law. If one's performance made one acceptable before God, then he could boast in his position. If one's possession of the law made one acceptable before GOd, then he could boast.
3) Rather, what excludes boasting is faith.
4) But faith is precisely what the Torah, rightly understood, enjoined. The Torah is not a "law of works" in the sense that it promotes and encourages boasting. Torah is a "law of faith" in that it promotes and encourages trust in God's deliverance.
5) After all, we Jews know FROM THE TORAH ITSELF that justification is through faith apart from the works of the law. I'll show this at length from the example of Abraham in just a moment.
6) Even before we get to Abraham, we can go back to our basic confession, the Shema. God is one, and that means there has to be ONE pathway to right standing and life with Him.
7) To say that justification is through the works of Torah, through the specific things that Torah enjoins or through our performance of Torah, would be to say that Gentiles without Torah could not be justified. But this would imply that God is not one.
8) Therefore, monotheism implies justification by grace through faith.
9) As I've already intimated, this is not an attack on Torah, but drawn from Torah itself. We Jews don't undermine Torah when we talk about faith, because the Torah itself talks about faith.
10) Let's take Abraham as our example....

24 and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus,

Hrmmm... does this echo 2:13?

25 whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God's righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins.

26 It was to show his righteousness at the present time, so that he might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.

"God is himself righteous, as the covenant God who has made promises and kept them. In terms of the law-court metaphor, he has been true to his word, he has been impartial (note the way in which Paul goes on at once to speak of God’s even-handed dealing with Jew and Gentile alike), and he has dealt with sin. He has also thereby vindicated the helpless: he is the ‘justifier of the one who has faith.’ This theme of God’s own righteousness, understood as his covenant faithfulness, and seen in terms of the law-court metaphor, is the key to this vital passage.” N.T. Wright

27 Then what becomes of our boasting/exalting/glorifying? It is excluded. By what kind of law? By a law of works? No, but by the law of faith.

Then what becomes of our boasting/exalting/glorifying in being covenant beneficiaries due to our outward, ethnic status as 'circumcised', which is supposed to accord with our inward circumcision, by the Spirit? It's zilch, because we're reckoned to be covenant beneficiaries by faith, circumcised at heart by the Spirit, regardless of our outward status of ethnicity/circumcision.

We can boast/exalt/glorify over having the advantage the of law of works, because we were "entrusted with the oracles of God." (v. 2) But in regards to being under the power of sin, we're no better off (v.9).

What is meant by "law of faith"? Perhaps: "...through the Spirit, by faith, we ourselves eagerly wait for the hope of righteousness. For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything, but only faith working through love" (Galatians 5:5-6). Faith working through love fulfills the Torah.

See a great parallel:

"For even those who are circumcised do not themselves keep the law, but they desire to have you circumcised that they may boast in your flesh. But far be it from me to boast except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world. For neither circumcision counts for anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creation." (Galatians 6:13-15)

28 For we hold that one is justified by faith apart from works of the law.

"Works of the law" - Usage?

29 Or is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles also? Yes, of Gentiles also, 30 since God is one. He will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through faith.

31 Do we then overthrow the law by this faith? By no means! On the contrary, we uphold the law.

John Piper: " 'Paul, you keep saying that a person gets right with God - gets justified - by faith apart from 'works of the Law,' and that the 'law of works' can't overcome boasting. So it seems to us that you are virtually nullifying the Law. You are saying that all those commandments in the moral law of God have no authority and may be safely ignored by God's people. You are, it seems, calling for a lawless people.' . . . If we get right with God first by faith alone, and then live in that freedom of love and acceptance and justification, we will be changed from the inside out and will begin to love the very things the moral law requires so that they become established in our lives - not as works of merit, but as the fruit of faith (I Thessalonians 1:3; 2 Thessalonians 1:11) and the fruit of the Spirit."

Peter Liethart:

There's something chiastic going on in 3:19-31 (or maybe 2:25-3:30).

A. by works of law no flesh shall be justified, 19-20
B. Apart from law, righteousness of God is revealed, 21
C. righteousness through faith in Jesus--> for all have sinned, 22-23
D. being justified as a gift through Jesus the propitiation, 24-25a
C'. to demonstrate his righteousness (having passed over sin), 25
B'. demonstration righteousness at the present time, right through faith 26-27
A'. Because man is justified by faith apart from wokrs of law, 28-31

The circumcision/uncircumcision in v 30 reaches back to the end of 2, so there may be something broader going on here. Verse 31 might go with chapter 4: Torah is established by an appeal to faith because Torah contains the story of Abe and he was justified by faith.

2004-01-07T13:20:00.004-08:00

Romans 4

1 What then shall we say was gained by Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh?

"You know the old spiritual, 'Noah found grace in the eyes of the Lord.' That's based on Genesis 6:8. Well, what did Abraham find? Did he also find grace? Was his relationship with God based on grace?" -John Piper

Why do most translations render heurisko ("gained") as "found" or "discovered? This is not the same "gain" in Philippians 1:21, 3:7, and Titus 1:11, "kerdos", which I think is more akin to the category of "advantage".

Given the next verse, it seems as though the usage of heurisko would make more sense if rendered "gained".

2 For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast/exhalt/glorify about, but not before God.

What advantage was circumcision of the flesh to Abraham if it was not his praise from God?

He would have something to boast/exhalt/glorify about before man, namely outward and physical circumcision that is visibly reckoned, by man, as righteous.

"But a Jew is one inwardly, and circumcision is a matter of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter. His praise is not from man but from God." (Romans 2:29)

Hrmmm...

The uncircumcised man, circumcised at heart and obedient to the precepts of the law, will condemn (opposite of justify) the circumcised man, uncircumcised at heart and disobedient to the precepts of the law.

The doers of the law will be justified by God.

"[S]ince the context of Abraham excludes works of the Mosaic law (coming long before the giving of that law), we can see that it is an error to artificially limit the scope of 'works' to 'works done in obedience to Mosaic Law' . . . note again this use of 'before God', for we have already seen that this is the realm in which justification relating to salvation takes place." (James White, "The God Who Justifies", p. 207)

3 For what does the Scripture say? "Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness."

Scriptures: twenty-two books of the Hebrew Scriptures.

4 Now to the one who works, his wages are not counted as a gift but as his due. 5 And to the one who does not work but trusts him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness,

I think the point of 'ungodly' here is to stress that the 'godliness' of adherents to the Mosaic covenant doesn't return the wages of justification... ?

"This was utterly shocking. It jars all of our judicial sentiments (see Exodus 23:7; Proverbs 17:15). It makes us cry out, 'How can this be?' And the answer is, of course, that 'Christ died for the ungodly' (Romans 5:6). God can justify the ungodly because his Son died for the ungodly." -John Piper

I think this truth is portrayed against the background of truths from Romans 2, especially:

"...if a man who is uncircumcised keeps the precepts of the law, will not his uncircumcision be regarded [logizomai: 'credited to him', 'reckoned', 'counted as'] as circumcision?" (v. 16)

Gary A. Anderson: "Unlike workers who earn their wages according to a contractual norm, the reward given to Abraham takes place apart from any such agreement."

To be "one who does not work" and "ungodly" doesn't mean here to be one living contrary to the precepts of the law, but rather one who does not work to earn wages according to the contract of the Mosaic Law (?)... [thought developing]

6 just as David also speaks of the blessing of the one to whom God counts righteousness apart from works:

7 "Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven, and whose sins are covered;

8 blessed is the man against whom the Lord will not count his sin."

9 Is this blessing then only for the circumcised, or also for the uncircumcised? We say that faith was counted to Abraham as righteousness.

10 How then was it counted to him? Was it before or after he had been circumcised? It was not after, but before he was circumcised.

11 He received the sign of circumcision as a seal of the righteousness that he had by faith while he was still uncircumcised. The purpose was to make him the father of all who believe without being circumcised, so that righteousness would be counted to them as well,

12 and to make him the father of the circumcised who are not merely circumcised but who also walk in the footsteps of the faith that our father Abraham had before he was circumcised.

13 For the promise to Abraham and his offspring that he would be heir of the world did not come through the law but through the righteousness of faith.

14 For if it is the adherents of the law who are to be the heirs, faith is null and the promise is void.

15 For the law brings wrath, but where there is no law there is no transgression.

How exactly does the Torah bring wrath? Doesn't the Torah point to justification by faith? Doesn't it promise blessings for those who fulfill it (i.e. exercise love for God and man)?

Could it be that the law brings wrath because the flesh treats it as though it opposes its own fulfillment, namely loving one's neighbor (even Gentiles)? The gospel unequivocally reveals loving one's neighbor, the fulfillment, as real and open and required, by bringing those who are "far off" into the same covenant community. I'm still developing this thought...

What is the relationship between this and 3:19-20?

"Now we know that whatever the law says it speaks to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be stopped, and the whole world may be held accountable to God. For by works of the law no human being will be justified in his sight, since through the law comes knowledge of sin." (Romans 3:19-20)

Geneva: "...promise cannot be apprehended by the law: because the law does not reconcile God and us, but rather proclaims his anger against us, because no man can fully keep it."

Johnson: "The law threatens punishment to all who break its enactments, and since none keep it perfectly, it works punishment for all. Whereas, if no law had been given, there could be no transgression of its demands."

Reisinger: "There was sin before Sinai, but sin was not reckoned as a breach of covenant law... After Sinai, the nation of Israel not only sinned against conscience and the law written in the heart, they also deliberately sinned against clearly known written covenant laws.

Gary A. Anderson: "The law exposes human error (Rom 7:13); it 'locks up' (Gal 3:22) all things under sin in order to demonstrate the need for faith."

Expound on Origen's position on this text. He rendered "law" as the natural law described in chapter 1. This can't be right.

16 That is why it depends on faith, in order that the promise may rest on grace and be guaranteed to all his offspring-not only to the adherent of the law but also to the one who shares the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all,

17 as it is written, "I have made you the father of many nations"-in the presence of the God in whom he believed, who gives life to the dead and calls into existence the things that do not exist.

18 In hope he believed against hope, that he should become the father of many nations, as he had been told, "So shall your offspring be."

19 He did not weaken in faith when he considered his own body, which was as good as dead (since he was about a hundred years old), or when he considered the barrenness of Sarah's womb.

20 No distrust made him waver concerning the promise of God, but he grew strong in his faith as he gave glory to God,

21 fully convinced that God was able to do what he had promised.

22 That is why his faith was "counted to him as righteousness."

23 But the words "it was counted to him" were not written for his sake alone,

24 but for ours also. It will be counted to us who believe in him who raised from the dead Jesus our Lord,

25 who was delivered up for our trespasses and raised for our justification.
What is the relationship between the resurrection and justification?

2004-01-07T13:20:00.003-08:00

Romans 5

1Therefore, since we have been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ.

2 Through him we have also obtained access by faith into this grace in which we stand, and we rejoice in hope of the glory of God.

3 More than that, we rejoice in our sufferings, knowing that suffering produces endurance,

4 and endurance produces character, and character produces hope,

5 and hope does not put us to shame, because God's love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit who has been given to us.

6 For while we were still weak, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly.

7 For one will scarcely die for a righteous person—though perhaps for a good person one would dare even to die—

8 but God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us.

9 Since, therefore, we have now been justified by his blood, much more shall we be saved by him from the wrath of God.

10 For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, now that we are reconciled, shall we be saved by his life.

11 More than that, we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received reconciliation.

12 Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned—

13 for sin indeed was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not counted where there is no law.

14 Yet death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those whose sinning was not like the transgression of Adam, who was a type of the one who was to come.

15 But the free gift is not like the trespass. For if many died through one man's trespass, much more have the grace of God and the free gift by the grace of that one man Jesus Christ abounded for many.

16 And the free gift is not like the result of that one man's sin. For the judgment following one trespass brought condemnation, but the free gift following many trespasses brought justification.

17 If, because of one man's trespass, death reigned through that one man, much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and the free gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man Jesus Christ.

18 Therefore, as one trespass [5] led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness [6] leads to justification and life for all men. 19 For as by the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man's obedience the many will be made righteous. 20 Now the law came in to increase the trespass, but where sin increased, grace abounded all the more, 21 so that, as sin reigned in death, grace also might reign through righteousness leading to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

2004-01-07T13:20:00.002-08:00

Romans 6

1 What shall we say then? Are we to continue in sin that grace may abound?

2 By no means! How can we who died to sin still live in it?

What does it mean to die to sin?

3 Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death?

4 We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life.

5 For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we shall certainly be united with him in a resurrection like his.

Union with Jesus! :)

6 We know that our old self was crucified with him in order that the body of sin might be brought to nothing, so that we would no longer be enslaved to sin.

7 For one who has died has been set free from sin.

8 Now if we have died with Christ, we believe that we will also live with him.

How does one really know if he or she has died with Christ? It is a simple matter of faith and baptism? Repentance? Conversion? Ephesians 2-type moral change?

9 We know that Christ being raised from the dead will never die again; death no longer has dominion over him.

10 For the death he died he died to sin, once for all, but the life he lives he lives to God.

11 So you also must consider yourselves dead to sin and alive to God in Christ Jesus.

Same as "reckon"?

12 Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal bodies, to make you obey their passions.

13 Do not present your members to sin as instruments for unrighteousness, but present yourselves to God as those who have been brought from death to life, and your members to God as instruments for righteousness.

14 For sin will have no dominion over you, since you are not under law but under grace.

15 What then? Are we to sin because we are not under law but under grace? By no means!

16 Do you not know that if you present yourselves to anyone as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin, which leads to death, or of obedience, which leads to righteousness?

17 But thanks be to God, that you who were once slaves of sin have become obedient from the heart to the standard of teaching to which you were committed,

18 and, having been set free from sin, have become slaves of righteousness.

19 I am speaking in human terms, because of your natural limitations. For just as you once presented your members as slaves to impurity and to lawlessness leading to more lawlessness, so now present your members as slaves to righteousness leading to sanctification.

20 When you were slaves of sin, you were free in regard to righteousness.

21 But what fruit were you getting at that time from the things of which you are now ashamed? The end of those things is death.

22 But now that you have been set free from sin and have become slaves of God, the fruit you get leads to sanctification and its end, eternal life.

23 For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

2004-01-07T13:20:00.001-08:00

Romans 7

1 Or do you not know, brothers [1]-for I am speaking to those who know the law-that the law is binding on a person only as long as he lives? 2 Thus a married woman is bound by law to her husband while he lives, but if her husband dies she is released from the law of marriage. [2] 3 Accordingly, she will be called an adulteress if she lives with another man while her husband is alive. But if her husband dies, she is free from that law, and if she marries another man she is not an adulteress.

4 Likewise, my brothers, you also have died to the law through the body of Christ, so that you may belong to another, to him who has been raised from the dead, in order that we may bear fruit for God. 5 For while we were living in the flesh, our sinful passions, aroused by the law, were at work in our members to bear fruit for death. 6 But now we are released from the law, having died to that which held us captive, so that we serve not under the old written code but in the new life of the Spirit.
The Law and Sin

7 What then shall we say? That the law is sin? By no means! Yet if it had not been for the law, I would not have known sin. I would not have known what it is to covet if the law had not said, "You shall not covet." 8 But sin, seizing an opportunity through the commandment, produced in me all kinds of covetousness. Apart from the law, sin lies dead. 9 I was once alive apart from the law, but when the commandment came, sin came alive and I died. 10 The very commandment that promised life proved to be death to me. 11 For sin, seizing an opportunity through the commandment, deceived me and through it killed me. 12 So the law is holy, and the commandment is holy and righteous and good.

13 Did that which is good, then, bring death to me? By no means! It was sin, producing death in me through what is good, in order that sin might be shown to be sin, and through the commandment might become sinful beyond measure. 14 For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am of the flesh, sold under sin. 15 I do not understand my own actions. For I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I hate. 16 Now if I do what I do not want, I agree with the law, that it is good. 17 So now it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me. 18 For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh. For I have the desire to do what is right, but not the ability to carry it out. 19 For I do not do the good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I keep on doing. 20 Now if I do what I do not want, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me.

21 So I find it to be a law that when I want to do right, evil lies close at hand. 22 For I delight in the law of God, in my inner being, 23 but I see in my members another law waging war against the law of my mind and making me captive to the law of sin that dwells in my members. 24 Wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? 25 Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, I myself serve the law of God with my mind, but with my flesh I serve the law of sin.

2004-01-07T13:20:00.000-08:00

Romans 8

1 There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.

2 For the law of the Spirit of life has set you free in Christ Jesus from the law of sin and death.

3 For God has done what the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do. By sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, he condemned sin in the flesh,

4 in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.

What is the righteous requirement of the law? Love?

5 For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit set their minds on the things of the Spirit.

6 To set the mind on the flesh is death, but to set the mind on the Spirit is life and peace.

7 For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God's law; indeed, it cannot.

8 Those who are in the flesh cannot please God.

9 You, however, are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if in fact the Spirit of God dwells in you. Anyone who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him.

10 But if Christ is in you, although the body is dead because of sin, the Spirit is life because of righteousness.

11 If the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, he who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit who dwells in you.
Heirs with Christ

12 So then, brothers, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live according to the flesh.

13 For if you live according to the flesh you will die, but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live.

What is the relationship between this text and James 1:19-27?

14 For all who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God.

15 For you did not receive the spirit of slavery to fall back into fear, but you have received the Spirit of adoption as sons, by whom we cry, “Abba! Father!”

16 The Spirit himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God,

17 and if children, then heirs—heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ, provided we suffer with him in order that we may also be glorified with him.

18 For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worth comparing with the glory that is to be revealed to us.

19 For the creation waits with eager longing for the revealing of the sons of God.

20 For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of him who subjected it, in hope

21 that the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to decay and obtain the freedom of the glory of the children of God.

22 For we know that the whole creation has been groaning together in the pains of childbirth until now.

23 And not only the creation, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies.

24 For in this hope we were saved. Now hope that is seen is not hope. For who hopes for what he sees?

25 But if we hope for what we do not see, we wait for it with patience.

26 Likewise the Spirit helps us in our weakness. For we do not know what to pray for as we ought, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words.

27 And he who searches hearts knows what is the mind of the Spirit, because the Spirit intercedes for the saints according to the will of God.

28 And we know that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose.

29 For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers.

OT concept of God's foreknowledge?

NT usage?

30 And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified.

31 What then shall we say to these things? If God is for us, who can be against us?

32 He who did not spare his own Son but gave him up for us all, how will he not also with him graciously give us all things?

Amazing. Paul finds it absurd that God would give up His Son for someone who is not subsequently given all things.

33 Who shall bring any charge against God's elect? It is God who justifies.

34 Who is to condemn? Christ Jesus is the one who died—more than that, who was raised—who is at the right hand of God, who indeed is interceding for us.

35 Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or danger, or sword?

36 As it is written, “For your sake we are being killed all the day long; we are regarded as sheep to be slaughtered.”

37 No, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us.

38 For I am sure that neither death nor life, nor angels nor rulers, nor things present nor things to come, nor powers,

39 nor height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord.

2004-01-07T13:19:00.007-08:00

Romans 9

2004-01-07T13:19:00.006-08:00

Romans 10

10:3

"What disturbs me about Erasmus, that most learned man, my Spalatin, is the following: in explaining the Apostle, he understands the righteousness which originates in "works" or in "the Law" or "our own righteousness" (the Apostle calls it that) [Rom 9:31-32; 10:3] as referring to those ceremonial and figurative observances. Moreover he does not clearly state that in Romans, chapter 5, the Apostle is speaking of original sin, although he admits there is such a thing. Had Erasmus studied the books Augustine wrote against the Pelagians (especial the treatises On the Letter and the Spirit, On Merits and the Forgiveness of Sinners, Against the Two Letters of the Pelagians, andAgainst Julian, and had he recognized that nothing in Augustine is his own wisdom but is rather that of the most outstanding Fathers, such as Cyprian, Nazianzus, Rheticus, Irenaeus, Hilary, Olympius, Innocent, and Ambrose, then perhaps he would not only correctly understand the Apostle, but he would also hold Augustine in higher esteem than he has so far done...The "righteousness based upon the Law" or "upon deeds" is, therefore, in no way merely a matter of ceremonial but rather of the fulfillment of the entire Decalogue." -Martin Luther

2004-01-07T13:19:00.005-08:00

Romans 11

2004-01-07T13:19:00.004-08:00

Romans 12

2004-01-07T13:19:00.003-08:00

Romans 13

2004-01-07T13:19:00.002-08:00

Romans 14

1As for the one who is weak in faith, welcome him, but not to quarrel over opinions.

2 One person believes he may eat anything, while the weak person eats only vegetables.

3 Let not the one who eats despise the one who abstains, and let not the one who abstains pass judgment on the one who eats, for God has welcomed him.

4 Who are you to pass judgment on the servant of another? It is before his own master that he stands or falls. And he will be upheld, for the Lord is able to make him stand.

5 One person esteems one day as better than another, while another esteems all days alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind.

6 The one who observes the day, observes it in honor of the Lord. The one who eats, eats in honor of the Lord, since he gives thanks to God, while the one who abstains, abstains in honor of the Lord and gives thanks to God.

7 For none of us lives to himself, and none of us dies to himself.

8 If we live, we live to the Lord, and if we die, we die to the Lord. So then, whether we live or whether we die, we are the Lord's.

9 For to this end Christ died and lived again, that he might be Lord both of the dead and of the living.

10 Why do you pass judgment on your brother? Or you, why do you despise your brother? For we will all stand before the judgment seat of God;

11 for it is written, “As I live, says the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God.”

12 So then each of us will give an account of himself to God.

13 Therefore let us not pass judgment on one another any longer, but rather decide never to put a stumbling block or hindrance in the way of a brother.

14 I know and am persuaded in the Lord Jesus that nothing is unclean in itself, but it is unclean for anyone who thinks it unclean.

15 For if your brother is grieved by what you eat, you are no longer walking in love. By what you eat, do not destroy the one for whom Christ died.

"Notice that, for Paul, there is no mystery in who has faith, who is accepted by God, or who is a brother or sister. Indeed, Paul presupposes that we know for whom Christ died. Paul may acknowledge and teach there there is the 'wheat' and the 'tares' are both in the church (c.f. Second Timothy 2.19) but he did not allow his knowledge of what might happen according to God's eternal decree to restrain him from claiming that professing believers were indeed the recipients of God's grace, adopted into his household the church, and the people for whom Christ suffered and died." -Mark Horne

16 So do not let what you regard as good be spoken of as evil.

17 For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking but of righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit.

18 Whoever thus serves Christ is acceptable to God and approved by men.

19 So then let us pursue what makes for peace and for mutual upbuilding.

20 Do not, for the sake of food, destroy the work of God. Everything is indeed clean, but it is wrong for anyone to make another stumble by what he eats.

21 It is good not to eat meat or drink wine or do anything that causes your brother to stumble.

22 The faith that you have, keep between yourself and God. Blessed is the one who has no reason to pass judgment on himself for what he approves.

23 But whoever has doubts is condemned if he eats, because the eating is not from faith. For whatever does not proceed from faith is sin.

2004-01-07T13:19:00.001-08:00

Romans 15

2004-01-07T13:19:00.000-08:00

Romans 16

2004-01-06T13:33:00.000-08:00

Systematics

Faith & Faithfulness

- "The [Greek] word for God's 'faithfulness' is the same word used as 'faith' throughout his epistle. I don't think this means that Paul must mean the same thing by the word in every case. But I do think that if Paul was really worried about a reader including faithfulness in any form within the definition of saving faith, then he is not being very careful here... Paul simply does not seem to concerned about carefully defining faith so that it is distinguished from obedience."
- "Paul uses the faithful life of Abraham as his example of justifying faith"
- "Live by faith"
- "By faith Abraham, when he was called, obeyed"
- "The obedience of faith"

+ Why is Romans 3:3 translated with "faithfulness" or "faith" or "believe" in varying translations?

What is the relationship between faith and faithfulness? Does saving faith entail faithfulness?

Faith and Faithfulness

Westminster: "By this faith, a Christian believes to be true whatsoever is revealed in the Word, for the authority of God himself speaking therein; and acts differently upon that which each particular passage thereof contains; yielding obedience to the commands, trembling at the threats, and embracing the promises of God for this life, and that which is to come."

Justification

Calvin: It is “the acceptance with which God receives us into his favor as righteous men. And we say that it consists in the remission of sins and the imputation of Christ’s righteousness.”

Wright argues that justification "in the first century was not about how someone might establish a relationship with God. It was about God's eschatological definition, both future and present, of who was, in fact, a member of his people. In Sanders' terms, it was not so much about 'getting in,' or indeed about 'staying in,' as about 'how you could tell who was in.' In standard Christian theological language, it wasn't so much about soteriology as about ecclesiology; not so much about salvation as about the church." Wright, Paul, p. 119.

NPP: "Rather than imputation, justification is about the righteousness of God, or His covenant faithfulness, to vindicate and mark those people who belong to Him." [source]

Law

"works of the law" - "Not crass legalism but instead to the cultural markers of the Jews—circumcision and Sabbath observance."

Foreknowledge

Gospel