# comment

text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 7:2'>Rom 7:2</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For the woman that has a husband is bound by law to the husband while he lives; but if the husband dies, she is discharged from the law of the husband</em>- It’s tempting to interpret this as a reference to the death of Christ ending the Law. But that interpretation runs into problems in <em><a href='B:520 7:3'>Rom 7:3</a></em>, for there the woman- the body of believers- is married to “another man”. See note on <em><a href='B:520 7:4'>Rom 7:4</a></em>. Or it could be that Paul is seeking to make the simple point that the death of one person can free another person from a law / legal obligation; which is what happened in the death of Christ.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 7:3'>Rom 7:3</a></em>&nbsp;<em>So then if, while the husband lives, she be joined to another man</em>- “Be joined” doesn’t translate the usual Greek word for marriage:&nbsp;<em>Ginomai</em>&nbsp;has a wide range of meaning; the idea may be of her sharing with, being with, another husband at the same time as she is married to her first husband. Rather than making any specific point about marriage (see on <em><a href='B:520 7:4'>Rom 7:4</a></em>), Paul may be showing that it’s not possible for a woman to have two husbands at the same time- “man” as in “another man” is the same Greek word translated “husband”. This is being said in the context of seeking to persuade us how impossible it is for us to be in covenant relationship with the two spheres or positions of law and grace, condemnation and justification at one and the same time. This is both a comfort and a challenge to us.</p><p><em>She shall be called&nbsp;an adulteress; but if the husband dies, she is free from the law, so that she is no adulteress, though she is joined to another man</em>- “Shall be called” uses a Greek term usually used about a Divine statement, i:e. she will be called&nbsp;<em>by God</em>.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 7:4'>Rom 7:4</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Therefore…</em>- connects back to <em><a href='B:520 7:1'>Rom 7:1</a></em>. The point being made in <em><a href='B:520 7:2-3'>Rom 7:2-3</a></em> is that death means a person is free from keeping the Law. Paul isn’t here teaching about the nature of marriage nor the conditions under which he considered remarriage could occur; his theme is that death frees us from the Law. And more precisely, it was by the death of another that the woman had been freed from a law- that law no longer applied to her, not because she had died, but because another had died. This is the significance of the death of Christ in freeing us from the Law.</p><p><em>My brothers, you also were made dead to the law through the body of Christ</em>- This is to be interpreted in the light of <em><a href='B:580 2:14'>Col 2:14</a></em>, which also in a baptism context speaks of the Law being nailed to the cross. But it was the body of Christ which was nailed to the cross. If we are baptized into His body by baptism, nailed and crucified with Him, then the Law is dead to us too:&nbsp;</p><p><em>So that you should be joined to another</em>- the metaphor is mixed and almost impossible to consistently interpret- demonstrating if nothing else that logical consistency wasn’t of paramount importance to the Bible writers nor to the God who inspired their words:&nbsp;</p><p><em>To him who was raised from the dead, that we might bring&nbsp;forth fruit unto God</em>- We are now freed from the Law, and are free to marry Christ and bring forth fruit, children, unto God. The fruit of the Spirit is what will last beyond the span of our lifetimes, just as the desire for us to have significance beyond the grave is part of the motivating factor in the desire to have children. The Greek for ‘bring forth fruit’ occurs four of its eight times in the New Testament in the parable of the sower. The good seed of the Gospel is to bring forth fruit in us. Yet this doesn’t mean that Bible reading somehow brings forth fruit; it is our active intercourse and union with the Lord Jesus as a person which brings forth the fruit:&nbsp;</p><p>There is a frequent association of sin (the Devil) and the Mosaic Law throughout Romans (this is not to say that the law is itself sinful – it led to sin only due to human weakness). A clear example of this is found in Romans 6 talking about us dying to sin and living to righteousness, whilst Romans 7 speaks in the same language about the Law; thus “he that is dead is free from sin... you (are)&nbsp;<em>dead</em>&nbsp;indeed&nbsp;<em>unto sin</em>” (<em><a href='B:520 6:7'>Rom 6:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 6:11'>Rom 6:11</a></em>) cp. “You also are become&nbsp;<em>dead to the Law</em>” (<em><a href='B:520 7:4'>Rom 7:4</a></em>). Other relevant examples are tabulated above on <em><a href='B:520 7:1'>Rom 7:1</a></em>:&nbsp;</p><p>In the parable of the sower, the seed is surely the Lord Jesus (<em><a href='B:500 12:24'>Joh 12:24</a></em>)- our eternal destiny is decided upon our response to Him and His teaching. We are bidden believe in or into Jesus. Belief involves the heart; it doesn't mean to merely give mental assent to some propositions. It must in the end involve believing in a person, with all the feelings and emotions this involves. We are married unto the Lord Jesus, in order that we might bring forth fruit unto God (<em><a href='B:520 7:4'>Rom 7:4</a></em>). All spiritual fruit is therefore an offspring, an outcome, of a living, daily relationship with the Lord Jesus. This is how crucial it is to know Him.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 7:5'>Rom 7:5</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For when we were in the flesh</em>-&nbsp;In the sphere of the flesh. The NIV “sinful nature” is a poor translation; no change of nature occurred when we were baptized. Rather did we cross over from one status to another, from flesh to Spirit. We still possess the same “mortal flesh” as we did before conversion.</p><p><em>The sinful passions, which were through the law, worked in our limbs to bring forth fruit to death</em>- The Greek word translated “passions” is usually rendered “sufferings”. Sinful passions are their own suffering. The word is only used again in <em><a href='B:520 8:18'>Rom 8:18</a></em>, speaking of how “the&nbsp;<em>sufferings</em>&nbsp;s:w. “emotions” of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory that shall be revealed”. The sufferings of this life are, for us, the sufferings related to sin.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 7:6'>Rom 7:6</a></em>&nbsp;<em>But now we have been discharged from the law, having died to that wherein we were held</em>- “Discharged” is the same Greek word translated “loosed” in <em><a href='B:520 7:2'>Rom 7:2</a></em>:&nbsp; the woman is loosed from the law of her husband. The suggestion is that Paul’s audience had been married to the Law and now remarried to Christ because the Law had as it were died. This confirms our suggestion see on <em><a href='B:520 7:8'>Rom 7:8</a></em> that Romans 7 is aimed at Jews who had once been associated with the Law but were now in Christ. The death of the Law is made parallel with the death of Christ, in that He nailed it to the cross, in the sense that He embodied the Law by perfectly obeying and fulfilling it. The intention of the Law was that if fully obeyed, it would lead to a perfect man- the Lord Jesus. In this sense it was “ordained to life”. In this sense “the Law” and the person of Christ can be legitimately presented in parallel as they are by Paul here.</p><p><em><br/>So that we serve in newness of the spirit, and not in oldness of the letter</em>- Spirit… letter are likewise contrasted in <em><a href='B:520 2:29'>Rom 2:29</a></em> and <em><a href='B:540 3:6'>2Co 3:6</a></em>. It can be that we perceive even our service of God as the same old scene- the same round of daily Bible reading (although, why not try reading from another version or in another language?), the same cycle of church meetings and Bible schools. The same faces, the same issues. But our experience of grace means “that we should serve in&nbsp;<em>newness</em>&nbsp;of spirit and not in the oldness of the letter” (<em><a href='B:520 7:6'>Rom 7:6</a></em>). We don’t&nbsp;<em>have</em>&nbsp;to serve God in the sense that He grants us salvation by pure grace, not by works. But just because we don’t&nbsp;<em>have</em>&nbsp;to do it, we do. This is the power of grace; it doesn’t force us to monotonous service, but should be a wellspring of fresh motivation, to do perhaps the same things with an ever fresh spirit. The pure&nbsp;<em>wonder</em>&nbsp;of it all needs to be felt- that&nbsp;<em>for nothing but pure faith</em>&nbsp;the Lord will grant us eternal redemption for the sake of the Lord’s death and resurrection. Which is why <em><a href='B:520 6:4'>Rom 6:4</a></em> says that because of this, and our appropriation of it in baptism, we therefore live in&nbsp;<em>newness</em>&nbsp;of life, a quality of life that is ever new. Through His death, a new and living way is opened (<em><a href='B:650 10:20'>Heb 10:20</a></em>). We share the ever fresh life which the Lord lived from His resurrection. It does us good to try to imagine that scene- the Son of God, coming out of the grave at daybreak. He would have seen the lights of Jerusalem shimmering away in the distance, a few kms. away, as everyone woke up and went back to work, the first day after the long holiday. Getting the children ready, caring for the animals… it was back to the same old scene. But as they did so, the Son of God was rising to newness of life, standing alone in the fresh morning air, with a life that was ever new, with a joy and dynamism that was to know no end… His feelings are beyond us, but all the same, distorted by our nature, by our spiritual dysfunction, into&nbsp;<em>our&nbsp;</em>lives&nbsp;<em>His&nbsp;</em>life breaks through.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 7:7'>Rom 7:7</a></em>&nbsp;<em>What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid However, I had not known sin, except through the law. For I had not known coveting, except the law had said: You shall not covet</em>- Philo and other Jewish writings taught that covetousness was the origin of every sin. <em><a href='B:660 1:15'>Jas 1:15</a></em> may allude to this idea by saying that covetousness s:w:; AV “desire” gives birth to sin:&nbsp;</p><p>Although sin exists amongst people who don’t know God’s law, we come to “know” sin by the Law. The Greek&nbsp;<em>ginosko</em>&nbsp;translated “know” has a wide range of meaning; the idea could be that Paul had not known sin in the sense of not being responsible to Divine judgment for it- until he knew the Law:&nbsp;</p><p>Clearly perception of sinfulness grew in Paul after his conversion. He considered himself blameless in keeping the law (<em><a href='B:570 3:6'>Phi 3:6</a></em>); and yet chief of sinners (<em><a href='B:610 1:16'>1Ti 1:16</a></em>). He realized that sin is to do with attitudes rather than committed or omitted actions. I'd paraphrase Paul's personal reminiscence in <em><a href='B:520 7:7-10'>Rom 7:7-10</a></em> like this: "As a youngster, I had no real idea of sin. I did what I wanted, thought whatever I liked. But then in my early teens, the concept of God’s commandments hit me. The command not to covet really came home to me. I struggled through my teens and twenties with a mad desire for women forbidden to me (AV, conveniently archaic, has "all manner of concupiscence"). And slowly I found in an ongoing sense (Gk:), I grew to see, that the laws I had to keep were killing me, they would be my death in the end". Paul’s progressive realization of the nature of sin is reflected in <em><a href='B:520 7:18'>Rom 7:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 7:21'>Rom 7:21</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 7:23'>Rom 7:23</a></em>. He speaks there of how he came to&nbsp;<em>know</em>&nbsp;that nothing good was in him; he&nbsp;<em>found</em>&nbsp;a law of sinful tendency at work in him; he came to&nbsp;<em>see</em>&nbsp;another law apart from God’s law at work in his life. This process of knowing, finding and seeing his own sinfulness continued throughout his life. His way of escape from this moral and intellectual dilemma was through accepting the grace of the Lord Jesus at his conversion. In one of his earliest letters, Paul stresses that he felt like the least of the apostles, he honestly felt they were all better than he was (<em><a href='B:530 15:9'>1Co 15:9</a></em>). However, he reminisces that in his earlier self-assurance, he had once considered himself as not inferior to "the very chiefest apostles" (<em><a href='B:540 11:5'>2Co 11:5</a></em>). Some years later, he wrote to the Ephesians that he felt "less than the least of all saints" (<em><a href='B:560 3:8'>Eph 3:8</a></em>). This was no Uriah Heep, fawning humility. He really felt that he was the worst, the weakest, of all the thousands of believers scattered around the shores of the Mediterranean at that time. As he faced his death, he wrote to Timothy that he was " chief of sinners" (<em><a href='B:610 1:15'>1Ti 1:15</a></em>), the worst sinner in the world, and that Christ's grace to him should therefore serve as an inspiration to every other believer,&nbsp;<em>in that</em>&nbsp;none had sinned as grievously as he had done. It could well be that this is one of Paul’s many allusions back to the Gospels- for surely he had in mid the way the publican smote upon his breast, asking God to be merciful “to me&nbsp;<em>the</em>&nbsp;sinner” (<em><a href='B:490 18:13'>Luk 18:13</a></em> RVmg:). "Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners" is rooted in the Lord's words that He came to call sinners and to seek and save the lost (<em><a href='B:470 9:13'>Mat 9:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 18:11'>Mat 18:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:610 1:15'>1Ti 1:15</a></em>).</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 7:8'>Rom 7:8</a></em>&nbsp;<em>But sin, grabbing an opportunity through the commandment</em>- A military term, referring to establishing a base camp. This continues the image of sin as a military leader (see on <em><a href='B:520 6:23'>Rom 6:23</a></em>):&nbsp;</p><p><em>Worked in me</em>- In direct opposition to the common Jewish idea that the Law curbed sin. Indeed the Talmud in&nbsp;<em>b. Qidd. 30b</em>&nbsp;claimed that God said at Sinai: “I created the evil desire but I also created the Torah as its antidote; if you occupy yourselves with the Torah, you will not be delivered into its hand” (1). Paul is arguing from experience- both Israel’s over the years and his own- that the reverse is true. The very existence of commandment tends to lead to that commandment being broken, as every parent soon learns (or re-learns) in the parenting process.</p><p><em>All manner of coveting-&nbsp;</em>AV "concupiscence". In gripping autobiography, Paul relates the innocent days when (as a child) he lived without the knowledge of law and therefore sin. But then, the concept of commandments registered with him; and this "wrought in me all manner of concupiscence" (<em><a href='B:520 7:8'>Rom 7:8</a></em>). "Concupiscence" is a conveniently archaic word for lust; and in the thinking and writing of Paul, the Greek&nbsp;<em>epithumia</em>&nbsp;is invariably used in a sexual context. See on <em><a href='B:540 12:7'>2Co 12:7</a></em>.</p><p><em>For apart from the Law, sin is dead and powerless</em>- This connects with the fact that through baptism into Christ, we are “dead indeed unto sin” (<em><a href='B:520 6:11'>Rom 6:11</a></em>). Sin depends upon the law for strength; but the Law died with Jesus; He fulfilled it perfectly, He achieved the intention, for Him, the Law was indeed ordained to life (<em><a href='B:520 7:10'>Rom 7:10</a></em>). If the law is really dead, then sin is powerless- for those who are in Christ, who fulfilled the Law. It’s almost too good news; that the end of law means the end of the power of sin. This was all especially radical for Jewish ears. The ‘death’ of the Law is a strong concept- and it challenges not only Sabbath keepers, but all of us who think that surely obedience to Divine law must have some role to play in our salvation.</p><p>A case can be made, especially from <em><a href='B:520 7:8-10'>Rom 7:8-10</a></em>, that the whole of <em><a href='B:520 7:7-25'>Rom 7:7-25</a></em> is Paul talking about Israel- we have shown in notes on <em><a href='B:520 7:1'>Rom 7:1</a></em> that Paul is speaking in this section specifically to Jews. In this case, Paul would have so identified himself with Israel that he speaks in the first person, as if he personally ‘is’ them. He so loved his people that he saw all Israel’s history personified as it were in himself. Another approach to bear in mind is that it was quite possible in first century literature to use&nbsp;<em>ego</em>, the first person singular, as a literary or rhetorical device without any reference to the author’s personal situation. Thus it could be argued that the “And if I…” phrases in <em><a href='B:530 13:1-3'>1Co 13:1-3</a></em> are an example of this, rather than Paul talking about himself (2):&nbsp;</p><p>The way in which Adam is to be seen as everyman is exemplified by how Paul speaks of his own spiritual life and failure in terms of Adam’s encounter with sin in the form of the serpent. Note the allusions to Adam’s fall in <em><a href='B:520 7:8-11'>Rom 7:8-11</a></em>: “But sin cp. The snake, seizing an opportunity in the commandment singular – there was only one commandment in Eden, produced in me all kinds of covetousness the essence of the temptation to eat the fruit... I as Adam was once alive apart from the law Adam was the only person to ever truly exist for a time without any law, but when the commandment singular – to not eat the fruit came, sin sprang to life and I died as Adam, and the very commandment that seemed to promised life cp. The hope of eating of the tree of life proved to be death to me. For sin cp. the snake seizing an opportunity in the commandment, deceived me s:w. <em><a href='B:540 11:3'>2Co 11:3</a></em> about the serpent deceiving Eve and through it killed me”. Note how <em><a href='B:520 7:7-13'>Rom 7:7-13</a></em>, with all the Adam allusions, speaks in the past tense; but in the autobiographical section which follows in <em><a href='B:520 7:14-25'>Rom 7:14-25</a></em>, Paul uses the present tense – as if to suggest that both Paul and by extension all of us live out the essence of Adam’s failure. He was everyman, and his salvation through the seed of the woman, the Lord Jesus, can be everyman’s salvation if he so chooses. But in our context we note the pointed – and it is pointed – omission by Paul of any reference to a Satan figure.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 7:9'>Rom 7:9</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And I once was alive apart from the law</em>- Paul presumably refers to his earliest childhood or babyhood, when he wasn’t accountable to the Law. <em><a href='B:520 7:9-10'>Rom 7:9-10</a></em> appear to be alluding to God giving the Law to Israel. See on <em><a href='B:520 7:8'>Rom 7:8</a></em>. In this case, Paul is speaking of himself in solidarity with Israel; for it could never be really said that a Jewish child was once without the Law. Indeed, first century Judaism emphasized this point- that Jewish children are under the Law (3). Throughout Romans 1-8, Paul is provocatively seeking to answer potential Jewish objections and strengthen the case of Christ’s Gospel against them. We have pointed out many examples of how he alludes to and deconstructs contemporary Jewish writings and opinions, sometimes at the cost of writing in a way which is apparently obtuse and difficult for Gentile readers to understand. And yet he now openly identifies himself with his beloved people. This, surely, is our pattern in seeking to persuade others- to identify with them, rather than merely lecture them. It almost seems that in the same way as Adam is set up as everyman, so Paul wishes himself personally to seen as every Jew. The way he elsewhere describes himself as a “Hebrew of the Hebrews” with impeccable Jewishness would confirm this (<em><a href='B:570 3:5'>Phi 3:5</a></em>). See on <em><a href='B:520 7:11'>Rom 7:11</a></em>.</p><p><em>But when the commandment came</em>- A reference to Paul’s Bar-Mitzvah, or his attaining the age of responsibility to God.</p><p><em>Sin revived</em>- The only other time the word is used in Romans is in <em><a href='B:520 14:9'>Rom 14:9</a></em>, where we read of the Lord’s resurrection as Him ‘reviving’. Clearly the personified ‘sin’ here is being set up as the very antithesis to the Lord Jesus.</p><p><em>And I died</em>- A reference to being in the dock before God, tried and condemned as a sinner. So certain is that sentence of ultimate death that it was as if Paul had died. This interpretation is, I suggest, in keeping with the previous metaphors in Romans with regard to death. So instead of tending to life and blessing, and curbing sin, the Law instead accented sin and led to the condemnation of death.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 7:10'>Rom 7:10</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And the commandment, which was intended to life</em>- This presumably implies that perfect keeping of the law would have resulted in a person living the life of God, the kind of life which will be lived in the eternal life (which might also be implied in <em><a href='B:30 18:5'>Lev 18:5</a></em> cp. <em><a href='B:520 10:5'>Rom 10:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 19:7-10'>Psa 19:7-10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:330 20:11'>Eze 20:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:490 20:28'>Luk 20:28</a></em>). Death for such a person would therefore be necessary because of their relation with Adam, but would in another sense be unjust, in that they had not sinned. The perfect obedience of the Lord Jesus therefore required His resurrection. His eternal life wasn’t given to Him by grace, but He was entitled to it by obedience. He had no pre-existent eternal life; He was given eternal life because of His obedience. And His life is counted to us who are “in Him” by grace. See on <em><a href='B:520 7:12'>Rom 7:12</a></em>.</p><p><em>This I found to be to death</em>- “Found” is s:w. <em><a href='B:520 7:18'>Rom 7:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 7:21'>Rom 7:21</a></em>. Paul obviously examined his life and therefore can speak of what he had found / discovered about himself. This level of self-knowledge is surely our pattern… for the unexamined life isn’t life but mere existence:&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 7:11'>Rom 7:11</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For sin, grabbing an opportunity through the commandment, deceived me, and through it- slew me</em>- Alluding to <em><a href='B:10 3:13'>Gen 3:13</a></em>: “The serpent deceived me, and I ate”. The allusion is to Adam and Eve in Eden. In chapter 5 (and see on <em><a href='B:520 3:23'>Rom 3:23</a></em>), Paul has repeatedly taught that Adam is everyman. And now he includes himself in this, by applying the language of the failure in Eden to himself. Likewise his finding the commandment ordained to life becoming the means of death (<em><a href='B:520 7:10'>Rom 7:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 7:13'>Rom 7:13</a></em>) may reference <em><a href='B:10 2:16-17'>Gen 2:16-17</a></em>. Yet whilst Adam is indeed everyman to Paul, Adam was perceived as Israel in much Rabbinic writing; and Paul saw himself as the personification and epitome of Israel (see on <em><a href='B:520 7:9-10'>Rom 7:9-10</a></em>). The Greek translated “deceived” really means to seduce. How did sin seduce Paul through or by means of the Law of Moses? Surely in the sense that Paul fell for the temptation to justify himself by means of obedience to that Law. But because he didn’t keep the Law perfectly, he was therefore condemned to death, and in a sense, received the sentence- and in that sense sin by means of the Law “slew” Paul. The only other time the word for ‘deceived / seduced’ occurs in Romans is in the practical section, which in this case again alludes to this doctrinal section: “the Judaizers by fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple”, as the serpent deceived Eve (<em><a href='B:540 11:3'>2Co 11:3</a></em> s:w:). Just as Paul deceived himself, fell to the seductive idea that we can be justified by works of obedience to the Law, so the Judaizers were teaching the same. By so doing, they were sin personified- they were doing the work of “sin”- using the attraction of obedience to a legal code to seduce believers into a position where they were in fact going to be condemned to death- because under that sphere, there can be no justification, no declaring right, for those who have in even one sense infringed Divine law. It’s all a complicated yet powerful way of saying that we simply must not and cannot be in the sphere of relying upon works; which means we have to just accept the gift of salvation by grace, much as all within us cries out against it.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 7:12'>Rom 7:12</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Thus the law is holy and the commandment is holy, righteous and good-&nbsp;</em>Paul hastens here to emphasize that the Law itself isn’t sinful or wrong in itself; it is indeed “holy, just and good” (a common Jewish description of their Law); but the knowledge of any legal code creates accountability for sin. Only in that is there the connection between the Law and sin. The Law was “ordained to life”, and I have suggested under <em><a href='B:520 7:10'>Rom 7:10</a></em> that this could mean that perfect obedience to the Law would have led to living the life of God, to moral perfection. The Law could not of itself give eternal life, in that it could not undo the mortality which was to pass upon all Adam’s descendants. The Law sought to inculcate a culture of kindness toward others and devotion to God. Significantly, the Lord Jesus is described in the same words- the Holy and Just One (<em><a href='B:510 3:14'>Act 3:14</a></em>), as if He was such on account of the way His obedience to the Law developed such a character:&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 7:13'>Rom 7:13</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Did then that which is good become death&nbsp;to me? God forbid But sin was shown to be sin, by the way it worked death in me through that which is good; and thus through the commandment, sin became shown as indeed exceedingly sinful-&nbsp;</em>There was no actual change in the Law, in that it didn’t once offer life and then changed to offer death. The Law was of itself holy, just and good- but it was used by God? to make sin “appear” as sin, to accent and highlight sin for what it is; and through man’s failure to keep the Law, sin was indeed shown to be an exceedingly great sinner (this is how the Greek behind “might become exceeding sinful” can be translated”). I find it significant that in Paul’s sustained personification of sin in these passages, he never once uses the terms “devil” or “satan”. He clearly saw the problem as human sin, which he personifies because one cannot have abstract “sin”, in that according to the Bible, sin is committed by and within the minds of personal beings, and in no other realm or dimension. It’s appropriate therefore that sin be personified:&nbsp;</p><p>We must doggedly hold on to the interconnections of thought within Paul's argument in Romans. Chapters 1-5 convict all of sin, demonstrating that works can in no way save us. Chapter 6 then outlines how we can be saved; through association with Christ through baptism and a life “in Christ", which will result in God seeing us in the exalted way He does. Chapter 7 basically goes on to say 'But, of course, you'll still sin, even though chapter 6 has explained how God doesn't look at that side of you if you truly try to live "in Christ" '. Paul says many things about his life in Romans 7 which seem to consciously connect with his description of life before baptism in Chapter 6&nbsp; (e.g. <em><a href='B:520 7:13'>Rom 7:13</a></em> = <em><a href='B:520 6:23'>Rom 6:23</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 7:14'>Rom 7:14</a></em> = <em><a href='B:520 6:17'>Rom 6:17</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 7:23'>Rom 7:23</a></em> = <em><a href='B:520 6:12-13'>Rom 6:12-13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 7:24'>Rom 7:24</a></em> = <em><a href='B:520 6:6'>Rom 6:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 7:25'>Rom 7:25</a></em> = <em><a href='B:520 6:16-17'>Rom 6:16-17</a></em>). The reason for this is that after baptism, we have two people within us; the man of the flesh, who totally dominated our pre-baptismal life, is still within us; but (as Chapter 7 so graphically shows) he is now in mortal conflict with the man of the Spirit, with whom we identify our real selves. Chapter 8 then goes on to encourage us that despite this conflict, sin is dead in Christ, and if we are in Him, then this is really how God sees us. Therefore Romans 8 stresses that our state of mind is so crucial; if we are led of the Spirit-man, then we are assured of salvation at that point in time. Romans 9-11 then appeals specifically to Israel to accept the glorious truth of all this, and then Chapters 12-16 show the practical response we should all make. Recognizing the existence of the new and old men within him, Paul can speak in Romans 7 as if he is two different people; “I myself serve the law of God”, but “my flesh” serves sin. Likewise David asked God not to hide His face from him, David&nbsp;<em>personally</em>, (<em><a href='B:230 27:9'>Psa 27:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 69:17'>Psa 69:17</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 102:2'>Psa 102:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 143:7'>Psa 143:7</a></em>), but to hide His face from David’s&nbsp;<em>sins&nbsp;</em>(<em><a href='B:230 51:9'>Psa 51:9</a></em>). And one wonders whether the way the records of the Lord’s temptations are written implies some similar recognition by the Spirit of the two ‘men’ within the Lord.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 7:14'>Rom 7:14</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For we know that the law is spiritual; but I am carnal</em>- But “in Christ” he was not carnal (<em><a href='B:530 3:1'>1Co 3:1</a></em> s:w:). Again he has in mind states, positions, spheres. “Carnal” is literally ‘fleshly’. He points up the contrast between the flesh and Spirit. We cannot get into the ‘Spirit’ sphere by obeying the Law, even though the Law is “spiritual”, given by and of the Holy Spirit. The way to get into the sphere or status of the Spirit isn’t by obedience to a spiritual Law, because we keep failing to be obedient. We enter the sphere of the Spirit by baptism into Christ, “the Lord the Spirit” (<em><a href='B:540 3:18'>2Co 3:18</a></em> RV). He is “the Spirit” in that He embodies the Spirit of God- and therefore this is His title in <em><a href='B:520 8:26'>Rom 8:26</a></em>. And Romans 8 will argue further that it is by our acceptance of our new status by grace, believing that we really are “in Christ” and justified by God’s grace, that the Spirit will work in our lives; so that we are indeed in the Spirit and not in the flesh:&nbsp;</p><p><em>Sold unto sin</em>- As if he was a slave to the “sin” master. This is how the word is used in <em><a href='B:470 18:25'>Mat 18:25</a></em> and many times in its LXX usage. Yet in chapter 6 he has exalted that in Christ, we died to the power of sin (<em><a href='B:520 6:2'>Rom 6:2</a></em>) and are not under sin (<em><a href='B:520 6:18'>Rom 6:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 6:22'>Rom 6:22</a></em>). So what does Paul mean? He may mean that he&nbsp;<em>had been</em>&nbsp;sold under sin; maybe using a literary rhetorical device which is relevant to the unredeemed Jews rather than himself personally; maybe he is at this point totally identified with Israel and is personifying Israel under the Law without Christ; or is it that he is admitting his personal failure to walk the talk he has outlined so eloquently in chapter 6; or is he recognizing that although we have changed status and masters with our real self, the inward man who delights in God’s law (<em><a href='B:520 7:22'>Rom 7:22</a></em>), we are still human and that human side of us still sins? My own suggestion is that Paul is here quoting a phrase from Rabbinic writings, although it would seem that the source has been lost to us. This would be in keeping with his style throughout Romans 1-8. He would then be using the Jewish writings themselves to demonstrate the misery of the human position without Christ; and this would fit in with the way at times in <em><a href='B:520 7:7-25'>Rom 7:7-25</a></em> he appears to be consciously personifying Israel:&nbsp;&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 7:15'>Rom 7:15</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For why I do what I do,</em>&nbsp;<em>I do not understand</em>- Gk. to know, recognize, perceive, approve. The word has a wide range of meaning, so interpretation cannot be too forcefully pressed here, but the idea may be that Paul is sharing his impression that the sinful things he does, he performs almost unawares, almost unconsciously, and he may be alluding to the image of slavery- mindless obedience, actions performed as automatisms. This is not to justify nor minimize human sin, but to rather make the point that it is performed within the context of being a slave to sin; and by status, we have changed masters. Note that Paul concludes this section by saying that in his mind he serves as a slave the law of God, whilst with his flesh he is still the slave of sin (<em><a href='B:520 7:25'>Rom 7:25</a></em>). Yet all the same, we are ultimately “in Christ”, with no condemnation possible, because we serve Him (<em><a href='B:520 8:1'>Rom 8:1</a></em>):&nbsp;</p><p>Ps. 139 reminds us how God knows us so well, psychologically as well as physically. David's response to this is that such knowledge is too wonderful for him and he cannot attain it (Ps. 139:6). The simple point being made is that we cannot know the extent to which God knows us. Nor do we know all God knows about us. He knows us better than we know ourselves. This is a huge comfort in a world where we beg more than anything: "Please understand me". It is common to throw in to our sentences: "Do you get what I mean? You get me?". And this desire is often ultimately not met in our human relationships. The priceless comfort of this Psalm is that this most basic human need is met in God's knowledge of us. Even our eternal future is unknown to us- "It does not yet appear what we shall be" (1 Jn. 3:2) but believing the truth expressed in this Psalm, we can be at peace about that too. We do not in fact know ourselves; God does. This is why the Psalm concludes with a request for God to "search me" and correct me- because it is outside my own ability to do so. Paul laments that he doesn't understand his own actions: "For why I do what I do, I do not understand. For I do not do what I intend, but instead I do what I hate" (Rom. 7:15). Paul admits that "I know nothing against myself" but he is not thereby justified (1 Cor. 4:4). We see ourselves in a darkened mirror ["through a glass darkly"] but only then, at the Lord's coming, face to face- with ourselves: "For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part, but then shall I know fully, even as also I have been fully known" (1 Cor. 13:12). Only then shall we see ourselves as God sees us. And that is surely the function of the day of judgment- it is for our benefit. All searching to 'find yourself' in this life is vain, because our natures are intrinsically limited so that we cannot, at least not ultimately. The wonder of salvation is that we shall find ourselves, we shall know ourselves as God knows. </p><p><em><br/>For I do not do what I intend</em>- AV “would”, which means ‘to will’, and occurs frequently in this section (<em><a href='B:520 7:15-16'>Rom 7:15-16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 7:18-21'>Rom 7:18-21</a></em>). Paul is saying that what he wills to do, he simply lacks the will to do; he laments the weakness of his will in being obedient. The interlude about the election of Israel in Romans 9-11 practically exemplifies the theology of Romans 1-8; and this theme of Paul’s weak will is commented upon in <em><a href='B:520 9:16'>Rom 9:16</a></em>: “So then it is not of him that wills, nor of him that runs, but of God that shows mercy”. It’s not that salvation is only for he or she who somehow finds within themselves some steel will against sin. It is not of him that wills, but of God’s grace. Were it a question of steel will, it would be a matter of works; but due to our change of status, it isn’t a matter of steel, but rather of God’s grace and our acceptance of it. In fact, <em><a href='B:520 9:18'>Rom 9:18</a></em> goes further, and states that it’s not a question of&nbsp;<em>our</em>&nbsp;will but of God’s will. Some He has mercy upon, as He wills; others He hardens, as He wills. And we in Christ are for sure those whom He has ‘willed’ to have mercy upon. And as exemplified by the choice of unspiritual Jacob over nice guy, man of the world Esau- that Divine will in election simply doesn’t depend upon works. Otherwise it wouldn’t be grace; indeed, the whole concept of predestination and Divine calling regardless of works is raised by Paul to demonstrate the principle- that it’s not by works or lack of them that we are acceptable to God:&nbsp;</p><p><em>But instead I do what I hate-&nbsp;</em>This contrasts with the triumphant passages in Romans 6 which speak of our change of status from being under sin to being under Christ. That contrast is surely intentional. We could say that Paul is now in chapter 7 talking of our practical experience, of how things are on the ground. They’re bad; sin is strong and we are weak. But he emphasizes this in such a graphic manner in order to point up the wonder of the fact that all this notwithstanding, we are by&nbsp;<em>status</em>&nbsp;justified, declared right before God, have left the sphere of the flesh and are in that of the Spirit. The reality of present failure makes our changed status all the more wonderful. Perhaps another comfort from all this is that if we truly&nbsp;<em>hate</em>&nbsp;sin (cp. <em><a href='B:730 2:6'>Rev 2:6</a></em>) rather than love every moment of it, then we are somehow on the right track and are in fact like Paul within the sphere of the Spirit in our hearts.</p><p>Paul's autobiographical passage in Romans 7, where he describes his sinfulness and the results of it, is actually expressed in terms of Adam's fall in Eden. So many phrases which he uses are lifted out of the LXX of Genesis 3. The evident examples are: "I would never have known what it is to covet, if the Law had not said, You must not covet cp. Eve coveting the fruit... when the command came... sin cp. the serpent beguiled me... to kill me... sin resulted in death for me by making use of this good thing... who will rescue me now from the body of death?". Adam is presented to us as 'every man'; and so Paul applies this to himself, and yet through the allusion to 'every man' in Adam, he sets himself up also as our example.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 7:16'>Rom 7:16</a></em>&nbsp;<em>But if I do what I would rather not do, then I agree that the law is good</em>- Gk. ‘to speak together with’. The very fact we struggle against sin, we have a will not to disobey the Law, is in fact speaking together with the Law, agreeing that it is good. Whilst in the primary context Paul is writing to Jewish Christians with the Mosaic Law in view, the principles are the same for any Divine law at any time. The comfort is that if we feel we ‘would not’ sin / break the Law but end up doing so, then actually, we are speaking in unison with the Law, we are not actually in disagreement with it:&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 7:17'>Rom 7:17</a></em>&nbsp;<em>So now it is not I that do it</em>- The same Greek as in <em><a href='B:520 6:9'>Rom 6:9</a></em>, where “no more” means ‘not any longer’, as in <em><a href='B:520 7:20'>Rom 7:20</a></em>. For those in Christ, like Paul, our sins are no longer done by us but are considered as committed by the old man, the Adam, the status, sphere and person we are no longer identified with. We are to understand our sins as somehow separate from the real me, the ‘me’ with whom we finally identify. ‘It’s no longer me, but sin who sins’ seems to be the idea… as if Paul is dissociating himself from himself; and that’s a position which surely all true believers can identify with.</p><p><em>But the sin which dwells in me</em>- An allusion to the Jewish concept of the&nbsp;<em>yetser ha ra</em>, the inclination to evil. The Rabbis taught that this can be curbed by the Law. But Paul is saying that the Law actually empowers this inclination, and the victory is through God’s gracious counting of us as right in Christ. See on <em><a href='B:520 7:19'>Rom 7:19</a></em>&nbsp;<em>the good that I would</em>- a reference to the supposed good inclination in man, the&nbsp;<em>yetser ha tob</em>. The very idea of sin dwelling within me suggests that “sin” and “me” are different categories, even if they are related:&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 7:18'>Rom 7:18</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For I know&nbsp;that in me, that is, in my flesh, dwells no good thing</em>- The idea could be ‘I have come to realize’. Do we analyse our own sinfulness as deeply as Paul did? See on <em><a href='B:520 7:7'>Rom 7:7</a></em>.</p><p><em>For the will to do good is present with me</em>- Surely an allusion to the disciples in Gethsemane, with willing spirits but weak flesh (<em><a href='B:470 26:41'>Mat 26:41</a></em>). They were in the wrong, their weakness in stark contrast to the watchful, sweating Lord Jesus as He struggled against sin. And Paul invites us to feel the same. The Greek for “present” occurs only here and in <em><a href='B:520 7:21'>Rom 7:21</a></em>. It means literally ‘to lie near’ and could have in mind the language of <em><a href='B:10 4:7'>Gen 4:7</a></em>, where sinful Cain was encouraged that a sin offering lay near him, outside the door, ready for him to confess his sin over and sacrifice:&nbsp;</p><p><em>But to actually do</em>- Paul confessed to an inability to translate his will into action. Yet in <em><a href='B:520 7:25'>Rom 7:25</a></em> he will soon rejoice that he had found the answer in Christ, which we have consistently interpreted as a reference to our being “in Christ” by status in Him. The Greek for “perform” occurs later in Romans, where Paul glories of the many things “which Christ has&nbsp;<em>wrought</em>&nbsp;s:w. ‘perform’ by me” (<em><a href='B:520 15:18'>Rom 15:18</a></em>). For that not to be a statement of pride nor trust in the works which Paul has so often exposed as valueless before God, we must understand Paul as totally committed to the idea of Christ working or performing through him. He has finally found “how to perform” the works he had so wished to- by believing totally in his “in Christ” status, feeling the extent to which he was now at one with Christ, and thereby sensing the extent to which Christ was working His works through him, the works he would love to have performed whilst under the Law, but found himself simply not strong willed enough to perform.</p><p><em>What is good is not present</em>- In the context must surely refer to the Jewish Law which was the “good thing” (<em><a href='B:520 7:12-13'>Rom 7:12-13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 7:16'>Rom 7:16</a></em>). There was no “good thing” within Paul’s flesh, no natural tendency to fulfil that Law; and so he found no way to totally obey that Law as he had so desperately wanted to in his youth.</p><p>When Paul laments that he cannot find “how to perform that which is good”, he is speaking about the Law of Moses. For the context of Romans 7 repeatedly defines the Mosaic Law as that which is “holy, just and good… the law is the good thing”, the law of God in which Paul delighted (<em><a href='B:520 7:12'>Rom 7:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 7:16'>Rom 7:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 7:22'>Rom 7:22</a></em>). The “no good thing” which dwelt within Paul was therefore a description of his inability to keep the Mosaic Law, rather than any reference to human nature- for the “good thing” has just been defined as the Mosaic Law (<em><a href='B:520 7:18'>Rom 7:18</a></em>). But all this was to create the lead in to the realization that now in Christ, there is now no condemnation.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 7:19'>Rom 7:19</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For the good which I would like to do I do not do</em>- A reference to the supposed good inclination in man, the&nbsp;<em>yetser ha tob</em>&nbsp;, which the Rabbis said was strengthened by the Law (see on <em><a href='B:520 7:17'>Rom 7:17</a></em>). Paul seems to be saying that this good inclination is a myth, or if it exists, it has little cash value in the battle against temptation. The way of escape is through God’s grace in Christ. W:D. Davies demonstrates beyond cavil that Paul in this section of Romans is constantly alluding to and critiquing the Rabbinic ideas of the&nbsp;<em>yetser ha tob</em>&nbsp;and the&nbsp;<em>yetser ha ra&nbsp;</em>(4). “The good” must connect with the same word being used in <em><a href='B:520 7:12-13'>Rom 7:12-13</a></em> to describe the Law of Moses as “good”. Paul so wished to be perfectly obedient to the Law- but found it impossible.</p><p><em>But the evil which I would not do, that I practice</em>- The same words are to be found in Paul’s warning that Divine condemnation, “tribulation and anguish”, awaits every man who ‘does evil’ (<em><a href='B:520 2:9'>Rom 2:9</a></em>). Paul was so aware that his sin did in fact merit the term “evil”, and condemnation before God’s judgment; and he practiced it, he is not referring to an occasional slip up. The more we appreciate the extent and implications of our sin, the deeper will be our sense of relief and glory at the wonderful way we are ‘declared right’ by God.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 7:20'>Rom 7:20</a></em>&nbsp;<em>But if do what I would not wish to do, it is no more I that do it, but sin which dwells in me</em>- See on <em><a href='B:520 7:17'>Rom 7:17</a></em>. He sees fit to repeat the teaching of v. 17, so important is this- that we are not to identify our real self with our sinful side. The old self is dead in baptism, as explained in chapter 6.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 7:21'>Rom 7:21</a></em>&nbsp;<em>So I find then a principle</em>- A “law”, which often in the context refers to the Law of Moses. Paul may mean ‘I find then with respect to the Law’. He could conceivably be using “law” merely in the sense of “principle.</p><p><em><br/>That evil is present, although I wish to do good</em>- The same word has just been used in <em><a href='B:520 7:18'>Rom 7:18</a></em>, where the desire to do good is likewise “present” or lying next to Paul. The impression is of the two desires, to do good and to do evil, are lying next to Paul; he must decide which one to take up, but he almost automatically seems to pick up the “evil”:&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 7:22'>Rom 7:22</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For I delight in the law of God after the inward man</em>- Hating the evil, delighting in God’s law, yet finding oneself doing exactly what we don’t wish to do… all this is exactly the experience of believers in Christ today. We really are in Paul’s position, and have every reason to share in his later positivism- for it is based on the fact that we don’t do the works we need to, yet we are saved by grace.</p><p>Paul had an amazing commitment to unity in the brotherhood. One could say that it was this which led him to his death, and certainly to political self-destruction in the politics of the early church. For his desire to unite Jewish and Gentile Christians was humanly speaking a loser- the Jewish converts simply would not give up their allegiance to the synagogue, with all the political and economic benefits this involved; nor would they really accept Gentiles. And Gentiles were never going to accept Jewish observances, indeed Paul knew this to be spiritually wrong. I submit that the whole epistle to the Romans is an exposition of the Gospel which has Jewish-Gentile unity as its underlying burden. This becomes apparent in the opening chapters. This to me is the key to understanding Romans 7. There Paul opens his heart and speaks frankly of his own inner conflicts. He says that he delights in keeping the law of God, yet he has a principle within him which seeks to make him captive to the law of sin (<em><a href='B:520 7:22'>Rom 7:22</a></em>). I suggest he may be referring to his love, as an ex-Pharisee, of the Law of Moses, but this leads him to desire to keep the whole Law, including the&nbsp;<em>halakah</em>&nbsp;the ordinances of the Rabbis. He speaks of his struggle to both ignore the Jewish laws, and yet keep them. He concludes that he cannot keep them adequately, and so he surrenders to justification by faith in Christ alone. I read Paul as saying that he initially accepted justification in Christ, but then after his conversion he went through a period of seeking to keep the Law, and “sin revived”. And so he strongly concluded that he must throw himself solely upon Christ’s grace.</p><p><em><a href='B:670 3:4'>1Pe 3:4</a></em> speaks of the spiritual man within us as "the hidden man of the heart... a meek and quiet spirit". This confirms that this "man" is the personification of a spirit, or attitude of mind. Thus our real spiritual person is "hidden". The world therefore cannot understand us, or be truly close to the believer who has the spiritual man utmost in their heart. The Gospel itself is a "mystery" ('something hidden'), yet this hidden mystery is the dynamic power in our "hidden man" of the Spirit. All that is hidden will be openly revealed in the Kingdom (<em><a href='B:470 10:26'>Mat 10:26</a></em>). The inward man of <em><a href='B:520 7:22'>Rom 7:22</a></em> is what is so important; yet the LXX in <em><a href='B:30 3:14-16'>Lev 3:14-16</a></em> uses the same word to describe the fat surrounding the intestines, which God appeared to so value in the sacrifices. It was not that He wanted that fat in itself; but rather He saw that fat as representing a man's essential spirituality, that which is developed close to the heart, unseen by others, but revealed after death.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 7:23'>Rom 7:23</a></em>&nbsp;<em>But I see</em>- Gk. to behold, view. Paul is speaking as it were from outside of himself, or more accurately, from outside of the hopeless sinner whose behaviour and weakness he so laments. This device serves to indicate the degree to which he chose to be identified not with that ‘person’, but with the man Christ Jesus to whom in his mind, in his deepest heart, he belonged and ultimately identified with. Looking at our position this way, it becomes apparent that what I would term ‘ultimate identity’ is the ultimate question of our whole existence- who in our hearts do we identify with, wish to be with, love rather than hate? Christ, or sin? We see in this whole passage the very clear answer in the case of Paul. I can say at this time, it’s clear in my own case. And I know it is in that of so many believers.</p><p><em>A different law in my limbs-</em>&nbsp;Paul speaks of a battle between two laws. A battle is usually unto death, but in this case, Paul is taken captive, and captives taken in battle if they were spared always entered slavery. So Paul implies he is in slavery- at least, in the flesh. The ‘law’ is perhaps that of <em><a href='B:520 7:21'>Rom 7:21</a></em> - the principle that whenever he would do good, there is another reasoning which appears next to “present” AV that desire to do good. And this principle invariably wins. But we are tempted to see an association between that law / principle and the Law of Moses. For the very same word is used, and if Paul simply meant ‘principle’, he could have used such a word in Greek.</p><p><em>Warring&nbsp;against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity under the law of sin which is in my limbs</em>- A related word is used in <em><a href='B:660 4:1'>Jas 4:1</a></em>, about lusts warring in our bodies. The existence of such warring isn’t wrong in itself, it’s part of being human; it’s which side wins the battle which counts; and even more so, which side we in our deepest hearts identify ourselves with.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 7:24'>Rom 7:24</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Wretched man that I am</em>- The Greek word is elsewhere used about the feelings of the rejected before God’s judgment (<em><a href='B:660 5:1'>Jas 5:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:730 3:17'>Rev 3:17</a></em>), likewise in the LXX (<em><a href='B:290 47:11'>Isa 47:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:400 2:4'>Mic 2:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:360 1:15'>Joe 1:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:430 1:15'>Zep 1:15</a></em>). Paul feels as if he is even now standing before the judgment seat of God, and is condemned- yet suddenly he rejoices that he is in fact amazingly saved by Christ. This is the very theme of the earlier sections of Romans- that we are suddenly declared right, justified, as we stand condemned in the dock before God. This lends weight to the suggestion that Romans 7 is indeed autobiographical of Paul, declaring the process of his own conversion, yet telling the story, as it were, in terms which present him as personifying every Jew under the Law.</p><p><em>Who shall deliver me</em>– The same word occurs in Romans in the excursus about Israel in <em><a href='B:520 11:26'>Rom 11:26</a></em> - where Christ is “the deliverer” who comes to deliver hopelessly sinful Israel, whom Paul embodies in this section in Romans 7.</p><p><em>Out of the body of this death?</em>- Yet Paul has argued at the beginning of Romans 7 and elsewhere that just as the body of the Lord Jesus died on the cross, so every believer has already died with Christ. And yet clearly Paul still feels trapped within the body, with all the temptations which are part of being human.</p><p>Romans 7, 8 are so opposed to each on surface level reading. At the end of Romans 7, Paul is lamenting ‘Oh wretched man that I am’. At the end of Romans 8, he is rejoicing in the utter certainty of salvation, apparently lost for words even under inspiration to gasp out the wonder of it all. So huge is the difference of spirit that expositor after expositor has concluded that this must all be read biographically- as if in Romans 7 Paul is speaking of his life before conversion, and goes on in Romans 8 to describe his life afterwards. But Greek tenses unlike Hebrew ones are precise. The tenses in Romans 7 make that a very strained reading. Paul is saying that he&nbsp;<em>right now</em>&nbsp;feels utterly frustrated by his constant doing that which he doesn’t want to do, his apparent inability to do good, and his wretchedness. I submit that the two chapters dovetail together. It was only though the appreciation of personal sin which we meet in Romans 7 that Paul could reason through to the paean of praise and confidence which he reaches by the end of Romans 8:&nbsp;</p><p>The Bible has so much to say about death, depicting us as having a “body of death” (<em><a href='B:520 7:24'>Rom 7:24</a></em>). And yet humanity generally doesn’t want to seriously consider death. Yet death is the moment of final truth, which makes all men and women ultimately equal, destroying all the categories into which we place people during our or their lives. If we regularly read and accept the Bible’s message, death, with all its intensity and revelation of truth and the ultimate nature of human issues, is something which is constantly before us, something we realistically face and know, not only in sickness or at funerals. And the realness, the intensity, the truth… which comes from this will be apparent in our lives.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 7:25'>Rom 7:25</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Thanks be to God- through Jesus Christ our Lord</em>- In the sense that we can become “in Christ” and all that is true of Him becomes true of us.</p><p><em>So then, I myself serve the law of God with my mind, but with my flesh I serve the law of sin</em>- The classic statement of personal identity, the climax of the whole exclamation of relief, the answer to all the spiritual frustration and anguish of this chapter. He himself, his real self. Identified with being a slave of God; but his flesh continued to serve sin.</p><p>Notes&nbsp;<br/>(1) See E:E. Urbach,&nbsp;<em>The Sages: Their Concepts and Beliefs</em>&nbsp;(Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1979) Vol. 2 pp. 425-428.<br/>(2) Other possible examples from the NT and from throughout contemporary writings are given in R:H. Gundry,&nbsp;<em>The Old is Better: New Testament Essays</em>&nbsp;(T<em>ü</em>bingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2005) pp. 229,230 and J. Lambrecht,&nbsp;<em>The Wretched “I” and Its Liberation</em>&nbsp;(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1992) pp. 73-91:&nbsp;<br/>(3) See S. Safrai and M. Stern, eds:,&nbsp;<em>The Jewish People in the First Century</em>&nbsp;(Philadelphia: Fortress, 1976) Vol. 2 p. 771.</p><p>(4) W:D. Davies,&nbsp;<em>Paul</em>&nbsp;and&nbsp;<em>Rabbinic Judaism</em>:&nbsp;<em>Some Rabbinic Elements in Pauline Theology</em>&nbsp;(New York: Harper & Row, 1948) pp. 19-27.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 8:1'>Rom 8:1</a></em>&nbsp;<em>There is therefore now no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus</em>– Referring back to the idea of <em><a href='B:520 5:16'>Rom 5:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 5:18'>Rom 5:18</a></em>, which are the only other places in the NT where the word occurs. We have been declared right before God’s judgment; there is now no condemnation any more. Even though in <em><a href='B:520 7:24'>Rom 7:24</a></em> Paul has been saying he feels the wretchedness of condemnation as a sinner (see note there).</p><p><em>Who walk not after the flesh</em>- Added by AV. Too easily the wonderful promise that there is no condemnation for those in Christ can become muted by this apparent rider, that we must walk after the Spirit and not after the flesh. Yet Paul has been lamenting throughout the preceding chapter 7 that he walks after the flesh. His argument throughout the letter so far has been that although we continue committing sin, by status we are in Christ. The condemnation, the adverse verdict, has been removed. We are justified, declared righteous. And this is because we are located “in Christ”. Paul is surely aware of the apparent contradictions and tensions within his argument- so he’s surely foreseeing our objection, that we still walk after the flesh. And he states that we who are in Christ Jesus do not walk after the flesh. It’s not a condition- as if to say ‘There is no condemnation for us who are in Christ&nbsp;<em>if&nbsp;</em>&nbsp;we walk after the Spirit and not after the flesh’. For this would make salvation contingent upon our ‘walking’, our works- and his whole argument has been that salvation is by grace and not works. Those who walk after the Spirit and not after the flesh is therefore a description of, rather than an exhortation to, those who are in Christ. His Spirituality is counted to them. By status we are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, and this is confirmed by the Spirit dwelling in us (<em><a href='B:520 8:9'>Rom 8:9</a></em>). <em><a href='B:520 7:5'>Rom 7:5</a></em> likewise speaks of our being “in the flesh” as something in the past, our previous status. Another possibility is that “walk after” here describes not to a total way of life, but rather a following after, an inclination towards, rather than a final arriving at the destination. And that again fits in so precisely with our position as believers in Christ today- as Paul has been saying in Romans 7, we incline after, follow after, dearly aspire to, the things of the Spirit; even if we don’t attain them as we would wish.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 8:2'>Rom 8:2</a></em> Paul starts to speak here in chapter 8 about the Spirit. He has explained that we are declared right by God, even as we stand in the dock condemned; he has said that we must believe this, and that faith in this rather than any works is what makes it true for us. He has then started to explore the mechanics of how it all works out- that we believe “into Christ” by baptism into Him, whereby we are counted as Him; and so we have changed spheres, positions, identities, from “sin” to “Christ”. He has observed that this doesn’t mean that we don’t sin, and he laments the power of sin within him, always eager to point out the Law has strengthened sin rather than helped us overcome it, and that therefore grace is the all important basis of our salvation. He characterizes the two positions or spheres in various terms, and in chapter 7 he starts speaking of them as “flesh” and “spirit”. He observes that there is in himself a struggle between the two, but his real self definitely identifies himself with the Spirit rather than the flesh. Being in the Spirit is the same as being “in Christ”, and “the Spirit” is a title of Christ in <em><a href='B:520 8:26-27'>Rom 8:26-27</a></em>. Romans 8 now proceeds to explore the function of “the Spirit” in more depth.</p><p><em>For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has made me free</em>- The spirit of life in Christ sets us free from sin (<em><a href='B:520 8:2'>Rom 8:2</a></em>); but <em><a href='B:550 5:1'>Gal 5:1</a></em> simply says that “Christ” has set us free the same Greek phrase from sin. The Man Christ Jesus is His “spirit of life”; the man and His way of life were in perfect congruence. They always were; for in Him the word was made flesh. <em><a href='B:520 6:18'>Rom 6:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 6:22'>Rom 6:22</a></em> explain simply that we are “made free from sin” by baptism into Christ. Here we are given more detail; we were made free from the principle of sin and death, the law which Paul had observed at work within him in chapter 7, that our sinful desires are stronger than our spiritual intentions, and therefore “in the flesh” we are condemned to death. Our slavery to this principle has been overcome by “the spirit of life in Christ”. <em><a href='B:520 6:18'>Rom 6:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 6:22'>Rom 6:22</a></em> says that we were simply freed from sin by becoming “in Christ” by baptism and belief into Him. <em><a href='B:520 8:2'>Rom 8:2</a></em> is saying that this operates, is effectual, by “the spirit of life in Christ”. This could mean that the spirit of life which was in the Lord Jesus Christ as a person- the perfection of spirit or character which was His, which was like God- is counted to us by our status “in Christ”. It could also, or alternatively, mean that this status we have is as it were mechanically made effective by the work of the Spirit, which sanctifies us before God. It’s not so much that the Spirit enters our hearts and makes us righteous, for in chapter 7 Paul has been lamenting how we still sin and are in one sense still enslaved to sin. Rather it could be that “the Spirit” works in our lives to make us sanctified before God, rather than in the realities of daily life. The “sanctification of the Spirit” which we read of elsewhere in the NT (e.g. <em><a href='B:590 5:23'>1Th 5:23</a></em>; <em><a href='B:600 2:13'>2Th 2:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 10:29'>Heb 10:29</a></em>; <em><a href='B:670 1:2'>1Pe 1:2</a></em>) would therefore refer to&nbsp;<em>how</em>&nbsp;God counts us as righteous, as in Christ, with a spirit like his. In this sense Christ is made unto us sanctification (<em><a href='B:530 1:30'>1Co 1:30</a></em>). It’s by the working of the Spirit. We can on one hand simply accept that God counts us as righteous, as Christ, because we are “in Him”. But probing further as to how, mechanically as it were, this is the case- the answer is, ‘Through the work of the Spirit sanctifying us, making us holy in His sight’:&nbsp;</p><p>Paul’s writings are packed with allusions to the Jewish ideas about the “ages” ending in the Messianic Kingdom and the destruction of Satan. Paul was correcting their interpretations – by saying that the “ages” had ended in Christ’s death, and the things the Jewish writings claimed for the future Messianic Kingdom were in fact already possible for those in Christ. Thus when 1 Enoch <em><a href='B:520 5:7-8'>Rom 5:7-8</a></em> speaks of ‘freedom from sin’ coming then, Paul applies that phrase to the experience of the Christian believer&nbsp;<em>now</em>&nbsp;(<em><a href='B:520 6:18-22'>Rom 6:18-22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 8:2'>Rom 8:2</a></em>).</p><p><em>From the law of sin and death</em>- As lamented in <em><a href='B:520 7:23'>Rom 7:23</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 7:25'>Rom 7:25</a></em>. The law of sin there refers to the principle of sin within us that keeps on beating us, winning the struggle against our weak spirituality. But&nbsp;<em>even this</em>&nbsp;has been overcome because of the status we have “in Christ” and by the work of the Spirit this involves.</p><p>The New Testament develops the theme of ‘living in the spirit’. We can often understand ‘spirit’ in the NT to mean the dominant desire, the way of life, the essential intention, the ambience of a man’s life. The idea of life in the Spirit is often placed in opposition to that of living under a legal code. We are asked to live a way of life, rather than mere obedience to a certain number of specific propositions. And yet whilst we are free from legal codes, we aren’t free to do as we like. We are under “the law of the spirit” (<em><a href='B:520 8:2'>Rom 8:2</a></em>), “the law of Christ” (<em><a href='B:530 9:21'>1Co 9:21</a></em>). The law of Christ isn’t only His specific teaching, but the person of the real, historical Jesus. This is the standard of appeal which should mould the spirit of our lives. We must live “according to Christ” (<em><a href='B:520 15:5'>Rom 15:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:580 2:8'>Col 2:8</a></em>), and the character of Jesus is the basis of Paul’s appeals to us to live a spiritual life (<em><a href='B:520 15:3'>Rom 15:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 15:7-8'>Rom 15:7-8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:530 11:1'>1Co 11:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:560 5:2'>Eph 5:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:560 5:25'>Eph 5:25</a></em>; <em><a href='B:570 2:5-11'>Phi 2:5-11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:590 1:6'>1Th 1:6</a></em>).</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 8:3'>Rom 8:3</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For what the law</em>- Obedience to the Law.</p><p><em>Could not do</em>- S:w. in Romans only at <em><a href='B:520 15:1'>Rom 15:1</a></em>: “We then that are strong ought to bear the infirmities of the&nbsp;<em>weak</em>”, those who ‘can not’. The connections between the doctrinal and practical sections of Romans are so frequent that this link too is surely intended. The “weak” Paul had in mind were therefore the Jewish believers who still trusted in the Law; patience with the legalistic, acceptance of those whose faith in Christ’s grace is weak, bearing with the ungracious, is really the test of our Christ-likeness. For He does this with us so very often.</p><p><em>In that it was weak through the flesh</em>- “Weak” is s:w. <em><a href='B:470 25:36'>Mat 25:36</a></em> “sick”. Our attitude to the weak / spiritually sick is our attitude to Christ personally- because amazingly, they especially represent Him. “Weak through the flesh” is surely alluding to the essence of what Paul has been writing in Romans 7 - that our flesh is so weak. The implication is that our weakness is related to an attitude that keeping the Law would lead to justification. And this in turn confirms my suggestion that Romans 7 is a section specifically written to first century Jewish converts who had once been under the Law of Moses. The same word occurs in <em><a href='B:520 5:6'>Rom 5:6</a></em> - when we were “without strength”, weak, Christ died for us. Our weakness, our spiritual weakness, is therefore no barrier to God’s love and Christ’s devotion to us. Amazing, but true.</p><p><em>God, sending His own son</em>- The connection with <em><a href='B:570 2:7-8'>Phi 2:7-8</a></em> suggests this ‘sending’ was specifically in the crucifixion. Likewise God so loved the world that He gave His Son to die on the cross (<em><a href='B:500 3:16'>Joh 3:16</a></em>).</p><p><em>In the likeness of sinful flesh</em>- This seems to be parallel with “in the likeness of men” and “in fashion as a man” (<em><a href='B:570 2:7-8'>Phi 2:7-8</a></em>). “Sinful flesh” refers therefore to ‘sinful humanity’, rather than implying that we are sinful and offensive to God simply by reason of being human beings. The spotless lamb of God had full human nature, He looked like a man because He was a man, and therefore He looked just like the same men who regularly perform sinful actions. Whatever we say about ‘human nature’, we say about the Lord Jesus- for He bore our ‘nature’ and yet was holy, harmless, undefiled, and separate from sinners. It’s actually very hard to Biblically define what we mean by ‘human nature’; it’s not some intrinsic piece of ‘sin’ that somehow is metaphysically ingrained into us, upon which the wrath of God abides. So I prefer to speak rather of ‘the human condition’ to avoid this impression. In passing, let’s get it clear that <em><a href='B:520 8:3'>Rom 8:3</a></em> doesn’t speak of something called ‘sin-in-the-flesh’. Students as varied as John Carter and Harry Whittaker in&nbsp;<em>The Very Devil</em>&nbsp;have faithfully pointed out that this is neither grammatically nor contextually correct. The Lord Jesus condemned sin; and where and how did He condemn it? In “the flesh”, in that He too lived within the nexus of pressures and influences of this sinful world. He appeared just another man, so much so that when He stood up and indirectly proclaimed Himself Messiah, those who knew Him were amazed; because He had appeared so very ordinary. Truly He was in “the likeness of sinful flesh”, yet without personal sin. See on <em><a href='B:540 7:1'>2Co 7:1</a></em>.</p><p>It could even be argued from <em><a href='B:520 8:3'>Rom 8:3</a></em> ("in the likeness of sinful flesh") that the Lord Jesus appeared to be a normal sinful human being, although He was not a sinner (see on <em><a href='B:500 2:5'>Joh 2:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 2:10'>Joh 2:10</a></em>). This would explain the amazement of the townspeople who knew Him, when He indirectly declared Himself to be Messiah. Grammatically, "it is not the noun "flesh" but the adjective "sinful" that demands the addition of "likeness"" (1). He appeared as a sinner, without being one. Of course we can conveniently misunderstand this, to justify our involvement with sinful things and appearing just like the surrounding world, in order to convert them. But all the same, it was exactly because the Lord Jesus appeared so normal, so closely part of sinful humanity, that He was and is our Saviour and compelling example. I have elsewhere argued that <em><a href='B:520 8:3'>Rom 8:3</a></em> is alluding specifically to the Lord's death, where He was treated as a sinner, strung up upon a tree like all those cursed by sinful behaviour, although in His case He was innocent. <em><a href='B:520 8:3'>Rom 8:3</a></em> speaks of the Lord Jesus as being “in the likeness of sinful flesh” in order to achieve our redemption. The Greek word translated “likeness” elsewhere is used to express identity and correspondence- not mere external ‘appearance’ (consider its usage in <em><a href='B:520 1:23'>Rom 1:23</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 5:14'>Rom 5:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 6:5'>Rom 6:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:570 2:7'>Phi 2:7</a></em>). Scholars, even Trinitarian ones, are generally in agreement on this point. Two examples, both from Trinitarian writers commenting upon this word in <em><a href='B:520 8:3'>Rom 8:3</a></em>: “Paul consistently used “likeness” to denote appropriate correspondence or congruity. Thus Paul affirmed Jesus’ radical conformity to and solidarity with our sinful flesh (<em>sarx</em>)” (2). “The sense of the word (likeness) in <em><a href='B:520 8:3'>Rom 8:3</a></em> by no means marks a distinction or a difference between Christ and sinful flesh. If Christ comes&nbsp;<em>en homoiomati</em>&nbsp;of sinful flesh, he comes as the full expression of that sinful flesh. He manifests it for what it is” (3). The total identity of the Lord with our sinfulness is brought out in passages like <em><a href='B:520 8:3'>Rom 8:3</a></em>, describing Jesus as being “in the likeness of sinful flesh" when He was made a sin offering; and <em><a href='B:670 2:24'>1Pe 2:24</a></em>, which speaks of how He “his own self… in his own body" bore our sins “upon the tree". Note that it was at the time of His death that He was especially like this. I believe that these passages speak more of the Lord’s moral association with sinners, which reached a climax in His death, than they do of His ‘nature’.</p><p>“For what the Law could not do in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin” (<em><a href='B:520 8:3'>Rom 8:3</a></em>) – cp. <em><a href='B:550 4:4-5'>Gal 4:4-5</a></em>, “Made of a woman, made under the Law (cp. “sinful flesh”) to redeem them that were under the Law”. The drive of Paul’s argument in its primary context was that having been baptized, they should leave the Law, as that was connected with the sin from which baptism saved them – it introduced them to salvation by pure grace in Jesus. The Hebrew writer had the connection in mind when he wrote of “<em>carnal</em>&nbsp;ordinances” (<em><a href='B:650 9:10'>Heb 9:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 7:16'>Heb 7:16</a></em>). To be justified by the Law was to be “made perfect by the flesh”, so close is the connection between Law and flesh (<em><a href='B:550 3:2-3'>Gal 3:2-3</a></em>). “We (who have left the Law)... have no confidence in the flesh (i:e. the Law). Though I might also have confidence in the flesh..." (<em><a href='B:570 3:3-4'>Phi 3:3-4</a></em>), and then Paul goes on to list all the things which gave him high standing in the eyes of the Law and the Jewish system. These things he associates with “the flesh”. See on <em><a href='B:580 2:14'>Col 2:14</a></em>.</p><p>“Likeness” is s:w. <em><a href='B:520 6:5'>Rom 6:5</a></em>, we are planted together in the “likeness” of Christ’s death. His being made like us is to be responded to by our being made like Him, starting in a baptism into His likeness.</p><p>“Sinful flesh” has just been used by Paul in <em><a href='B:520 7:25'>Rom 7:25</a></em> also <em><a href='B:520 7:5'>Rom 7:5</a></em>, in lamenting how in our ‘flesh’ status, we seem to so easily serve sin as our master. The Lord Jesus had our nature, the same struggle against a tendency to unspirituality, egged on by living in a social environment where sin is everywhere and ever present.</p><p><em>And for a sin offering</em>- The Greek&nbsp;<em>peri hamartias</em>&nbsp;“is the Septuagint’s technical term for the sin offering” (4):&nbsp;</p><p><em>Condemned sin, in the flesh</em>- As a judicial action, the passing of sentence, s:w. <em><a href='B:480 14:64'>Mar 14:64</a></em> “they all condemned Him to be worthy of death”. This is how and why there is no condemnation for those in Christ (<em><a href='B:520 8:1'>Rom 8:1</a></em>). In the earlier chapters of Romans, Paul likened us as standing ashamed and condemned in the dock before the judgment seat of God; but then declared right, justified, by grace. And if we believe in that grace, it shall be true for us at the final judgment. But here the image changes slightly- for it is “sin”, not just ourselves personally, which was condemned on the cross by the fact that Christ died there as a human who never yielded to sin. Remember that someone or something can be “condemned” by someone else in the sense that that person shows the condemned party to be in the wrong in comparison with their behaviour, e.g. Noah condemning the world around him (<em><a href='B:470 12:41-42'>Mat 12:41-42</a></em>; <em><a href='B:490 11:31-32'>Luk 11:31-32</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 11:7'>Heb 11:7</a></em>). It was perhaps in this sense that the Lord condemned sin by His sinlessness and obedience unto death. The context of this phrase “condemned sin” in <em><a href='B:520 8:3'>Rom 8:3</a></em> is to be found in <em><a href='B:520 8:1'>Rom 8:1</a></em> - there is “no condemnation for those who are in Christ”, and Paul is explaining why- because not only have they been declared right, but as “in Christ”, all that is true of Him becomes true of us. He was not only uncondemned by sin, but He went onto the offensive- and condemned sin.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 8:4'>Rom 8:4</a></em>&nbsp;<em>That the just requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us</em>- Paul explores how in fact we have been declared righteous, justified in a legal sense. All that is true of Christ becomes true of those who are in Him. He perfectly fulfilled the Law, and I have suggested earlier that this in a sense entitled Him not to have to die. No longer was Adam literally everyman; there was one Man, the Lord Jesus, who did not sin like Adam did. The righteousness or “requirement” of the Law was ultimately love, love unto death, even the death of the cross. Both “love” and Christ’s death on the cross are elsewhere stated to be the fulfilment of the Law (<em><a href='B:520 13:8-10'>Rom 13:8-10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:550 5:14'>Gal 5:14</a></em>). We who have broken the Law are counted as in Christ, and therefore we are counted as having fulfilled it to its’ ultimate term- love unto the death of the cross. The passive verb form of “might be fulfilled” suggests that we are reading here about something being done for or in us; the fact it is fulfilled “<em>in&nbsp;</em>us” rather than&nbsp;<em>by</em>&nbsp;us confirms that we aren’t reading here some exhortation to do the righteousness of the Law, but rather a statement about what has been fulfilled in us- by the representative death of Christ for us and our identification with it. Thus we are changed by status from being condemned lawbreakers to being counted as having ultimately fulfilled it. In a clearly parallel passage in terms of thought, <em><a href='B:540 5:21'>2Co 5:21</a></em> says that God made Christ “sin” for us “that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him”. The Law was fulfilled in the perfect character of the Lord Jesus and finally in His death. Baptism into death means that we are counted as having died with Him- and therefore we too fulfilled the Law to perfection:&nbsp;</p><p><em>Who walk not after the flesh but after the Spirit</em>- cannot mean, given the context, that our righteous ‘walk’ fulfils the Law- for we stand condemned by it. Rather is this again a reference to the two spheres of life- flesh and Spirit, Adam or Christ, out of Christ or in Christ, condemned or justified. We are to “walk”, to practically live, in the sphere of the Spirit:&nbsp; I am inclined to interpret the idea of “walk after” as meaning ‘to be occupied with’, as the Greek is indeed elsewhere translated in the AV. If our orientation is around the Spirit and not the flesh, then we are demonstrating that indeed our change of status has been for real. Because we are “in Christ”, the righteousness of the Law is fulfilled in us insofar as it was fulfilled in Christ and has been counted to us.</p><p>Paul states that because of the Lord's death "as an offering for sin", thereby the 'commandment "requirement" RVmg. of the Law is fulfilled in us' (<em><a href='B:520 8:3-4'>Rom 8:3-4</a></em>). But in the practical part of that same letter, Paul defines the requirement / commandment of the Law to be one thing- simply "love" (<em><a href='B:520 13:10'>Rom 13:10</a></em>). Love as God understands it is that we keep or fulfil His commandments (<em><a href='B:690 5:3'>1Jn 5:3</a></em>). What, then, is the connection? How could the Lord's death on the cross lead to the fulfilment&nbsp;<em>in us&nbsp;</em>of the Law's commandment / requirement of love? Quite simply, because it is now impossible for a man to be passive before the cross, and not to be inspired by Him there towards a life of genuine love. Paul isn't simply making some mechanistic, theological statement- that the cross fulfilled the Law, because it fulfilled all the types etc. It fulfilled the Law in that the Law intended to teach&nbsp;<em>love</em>; and the cross and dying of the Lord Jesus is now the means by which we can powerfully be inspired to the life of love which fulfils the entire Law.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 8:5'>Rom 8:5</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For they that are after the flesh mind the things of the flesh</em>– Where our mind is becomes the crucial definition of whether we are in the Spirit status or that of the flesh. The definition of ‘minding’ the things of God or of the flesh is therefore important. The Lord Jesus rebuked Peter for ‘savouring’ the things of men rather than God (<em><a href='B:470 16:23'>Mat 16:23</a></em>); <em><a href='B:570 4:10'>Phi 4:10</a></em> translates the word as ‘to care for’, <em><a href='B:580 3:2'>Col 3:2</a></em> as ‘affection’. Being spiritually minded isn’t therefore a question of not sinning- for Romans 7 has made it clear enough that believers do continue sinning after baptism and yet can still confidently rejoice in hope of the final redemption. It’s rather a question of wanting spiritual things, loving them, savouring them, having them in our heart, just as Paul could say that in his heart he loved and rejoiced in God’s law, although in practice he continued sinning. This I believe is where most believers stand. So loving, admiring and delighting in spiritual things, but feeling bad because their flesh still so easily gives way to temptation. That failure isn’t excusable, for Paul began Romans by pointing out that the perfect, sinless Lord Jesus all the same lived in our flesh.</p><p><em>But they that are after the Spirit, the things of the Spirit</em>- As in “after the flesh”, the Greek word&nbsp;<em>kata</em>&nbsp;is used. This really means in this kind of context ‘to be concerned with, to be around, in the sphere of’. This is exactly the idea we have been trying to express- we are to be concerned with, have in our hearts, the Spirit rather than the flesh.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 8:6'>Rom 8:6</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For the mind of the flesh is death, but to be spiritually minded is life and peace</em>- The definition of ‘walking after’ the flesh or spirit spoken of in <em><a href='B:520 8:5'>Rom 8:5</a></em>. If we are in the sphere or realm of the Spirit, of Christ, then we will think about those things in our hearts. If we have believed, known to be true and felt the truth of those things which Paul has so far explained- we will have these things uttermost in our hearts, be enveloped by them. I take what Paul writes here to be a description of our status, rather than a command to be spiritually minded rather than carnally minded. For by status we are no longer in the flesh but in the Spirit (<em><a href='B:520 8:9'>Rom 8:9</a></em>). This fits the context of the argument so far in Romans- which has always been about a change of status, and our living in ever growing appreciation of that status change that has occurred. The mind of the flesh “is death”, here and now; whereas the mind or&nbsp;<em>phronema</em>&nbsp;of the Spirit “is life” here and now:&nbsp;<em>Phronema</em>&nbsp;means the inclination, the purpose, the intention. It doesn’t mean that we will consciously think of spiritual things all the time (not that this is any bad aim or desire). Rather our intentions, inclinations, should be to the Spirit and not the flesh.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 8:7'>Rom 8:7</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Because the mind of the flesh is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can it be</em>- This is defined in <em><a href='B:520 8:5-6'>Rom 8:5-6</a></em> as the mindset which inclines to flesh rather than Spirit; that reads trashy novels rather than God’s word; than thinks of money and cars and holidays and restaurants and fine clothes and expensive jewellery... rather than the things of God’s people and His service. That willingly thinks about banality rather than the things of Jesus and the Spirit. That doesn’t really think much about the things of God’s Kingdom but rather the things of this world. This kind of mindset is hatred towards God. So says Paul. This is the mindset of those who are in the flesh status, who mind the things of the flesh (<em><a href='B:520 8:5'>Rom 8:5</a></em>). Note that Paul is here talking mindsets, not total sin nor total righteousness. This kind of mindset of the flesh can never be “subject” to God’s law, His principles, His Spirit. It is self-centred rather than God cantered. Yet the same Greek word for “subject to” occurs in <em><a href='B:520 8:20'>Rom 8:20</a></em>, where we read that we have been subjected beneath the state of vanity which there is in this fallen world, and yet we in Christ have been subjected to this in hope. The point is, whatever sense we have of being ‘subjected under’ the things of the flesh and indeed this present world, this is involuntary. It’s not what our real self would wish for. We have subjected ourselves under the righteousness of God (<em><a href='B:520 10:3'>Rom 10:3</a></em>), become servants to that wonderful concept that His righteousness has been imputed to us. We find ourselves therefore in subjection to this righteousness and yet involuntarily living in subjection to the sinful state we find ourselves in.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 8:8'>Rom 8:8</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And they that are in the flesh</em>- Not so much in status, for we are all still “in the flesh” in the sense Paul describes in Romans 7. Paul is surely speaking of being fleshly minded, having a mindset which is of the flesh not the Spirit. This simply cannot please God.</p><p><em>Cannot please God</em>- The Greek definitely suggests that God Himself has emotions which can be excited. And this is an amazing idea- that we here on earth, so very far from Him in so many ways, can touch the heart of God. Notice that the other references to ‘pleasing’ in Romans are to pleasing our neighbour (<em><a href='B:520 15:1-3'>Rom 15:1-3</a></em>)- our attitude to God, and His pleasure in us, is related to our attitude to our neighbour and our pleasure in him or her.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 8:9'>Rom 8:9</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:520 6:12'>Rom 6:12</a></em>.</p><p><em>But you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit-&nbsp;</em>By status, by position. Note from <em><a href='B:530 3:16'>1Co 3:16</a></em> that believers, even those who have the gifts of the Spirit, can still be “carnal” or fleshly in some aspects of their actual behaviour. Hence Paul must be talking here in positional terms.</p><p><em>If&nbsp;the Spirit of God dwells in you. But if anyone has not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his</em>- This could imply that Paul doubted whether some of his readership really were in the sphere of the Spirit. However, this would contradict the entire tone of this section and the argument so far- that all those baptized into Christ must be considered by us as unquestioningly “in the Spirit”:&nbsp; It would also jar with the otherwise positive tone Paul takes towards the Roman believers, speaking in <em><a href='B:520 8:12'>Rom 8:12</a></em> as if “we”, he and his readership, are all in the same status. “If so be” can be read quite comfortably as meaning ‘Seeing that’. This is how it is translated in <em><a href='B:600 1:6'>2Th 1:6</a></em>, “<em>Seeing that</em>&nbsp;it is…”. &nbsp;We can be assured that our status is “in the Spirit” rather than “in the flesh” by the fact that the Spirit dwells in us. If we don’t have the Spirit of Christ, then we are not “his”- and the Greek for “his” would I suggest better be translated “Him”, or even “He himself”. We are reckoned as Christ Himself because we are in Him by faith and baptism into Him. His Spirit is counted as our spirit, in the sense that His character, His personality, His totally obedient mind, are counted as ours. So we aren’t so much as reading that we had better ensure we are spiritually minded and have the mind of Christ; we are being assured that we can be sure we are “in Him” because we are counted as Him, His perfect mind and character, His spirit, are counted as ours. Hence Paul can write with such confidence that “we have the mind of Christ” (<em><a href='B:530 2:16'>1Co 2:16</a></em>). We do not in fact think like Him, at least, our mind and spirit are not of themselves like His were and are. But His mind / spirit is counted to us, because of our status in Him. And “the spirit of God” is paralleled with the spirit of Christ in the sense that Jesus was perfectly like God in the way He thought, felt and acted. And this is counted to us. We thereby have also the mind of God counted to us- the family spirit is counted to us as we have been adopted into that family of Father and Son (<em><a href='B:520 8:15'>Rom 8:15</a></em>):&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 8:10'>Rom 8:10</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And if Christ is in you</em>- Note the parallel with the spirit of God and the spirit of Christ (<em><a href='B:520 8:9'>Rom 8:9</a></em>) and “the spirit” later here in <em><a href='B:520 8:10'>Rom 8:10</a></em>. Paul is now exploring what it means to be “in Christ”. It’s not just that we opted into Him through baptism; He is in us as much as we are in Him. “Christ in you” is an idea Paul elsewhere uses (<em><a href='B:540 13:5'>2Co 13:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:550 2:20'>Gal 2:20</a></em>; <em><a href='B:550 4:19'>Gal 4:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:560 3:17'>Eph 3:17</a></em>; <em><a href='B:580 1:27'>Col 1:27</a></em>). The exposition of the Spirit which follows in Romans 8 is further insight into what it means to be “in Christ”, to be declared right by God, and to believe it insofar as believe into Christ by baptism. The words “in” and “Christ” have been frequently used already by Paul in describing us as “in Christ”. But there’s a mutuality in our position- we are in Him, but He is also in us. Whilst we need exhortation to live as “in Him”, Paul here isn’t exhorting us- rather is he rejoicing in our status, and seeking to persuade us of it. “If Christ be in you” shouldn’t be read as something uncertain- the idea is clearly “Seeing that Christ is in you”.</p><p><em>The body is dead because of sin</em>- Because we are in Christ and He is in us, our body is counted as His dead body. The idea has been common throughout Romans 6 - because of our baptism into Him, we are “dead to sin” (<em><a href='B:520 6:2'>Rom 6:2</a></em>), “he that is dead is freed from sin” (<em><a href='B:520 6:7'>Rom 6:7</a></em>), “truly we are dead to sin” (<em><a href='B:520 6:11'>Rom 6:11</a></em>). It’s as if the day of judgment has come already for us- it was the day of our baptism into Christ. We have sinned and so were counted as if we had already died. How did we die? In that we symbolically connected ourselves with the death of Christ. In going under the water, therefore, we not only align ourselves with Christ’s death; we also state our recognition that we have sinned, and that sin brings death. Through doing so, we are enabled to rise again with Christ- as if our final, literal justification in resurrection to eternal life will just as surely take place. In this sense, it can be said that baptism is related to salvation. Not that dipping in water as a ritual can itself save anyone, but because that association with the death and resurrection of Christ really does save-&nbsp; involving as it does a willing recognition of our sinfulness and just condemnation, and only thereby resulting in a part in the resurrection. All this indicates the importance of repentance before baptism; it outlaws any kind of infant baptism, and likewise any attempt to claim a consciously performed baptism into the Lord’s death and resurrection, after repentance, is in any sense invalid and requires rebaptism by other hands.</p><p><em>But the Spirit is life because of righteousness</em>- This surely uses “righteousness” in the way it has been earlier used in the letter, with reference to the righteousness of Christ which is reckoned to all those in Him. It is from the Spirit that we shall reap life eternal when Christ returns (<em><a href='B:550 6:8'>Gal 6:8</a></em>), but through association with the death and resurrection of Jesus in baptism, His righteousness really is counted to us. But as His spirit is counted to us, so in a sense it does actually become our spirit- as Paul has been saying in Romans 7, although in the flesh we sadly do sin, yet in our spirit, which is the spirit / mind of Christ, we delight in God’s law.</p><p>We feel at home with Paul's matchless confession of his innate tendency to sin, so strong that "When I would do good, evil is present with me... how to perform that which is good I find not". Yet it is no accident that this dire recognition of the seriousness of our spiritual position in Romans 7 should lead straight on to Romans 8, one of the most positive passages in all Scripture. It is instructive to trace the parallels between these two chapters. For example, Paul's lament "I am carnal" (<em><a href='B:520 7:14'>Rom 7:14</a></em>) is matched by "To be carnally minded is death" (<em><a href='B:520 8:6'>Rom 8:6</a></em>). His argument in Romans 6-8 runs along these lines: 'We are all carnally minded by nature; but Christ had our nature, yet achieved perfection. If we are in Christ by baptism and by His spirit/disposition being seen in us, then God will count us as Christ, and will therefore raise up our bodies to immortality, as His was'. The fact we still retain the old nature in this life means that we will be aware of the tremendous conflict within us between flesh and spirit. "If Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin" (<em><a href='B:520 8:10'>Rom 8:10</a></em>). Paul obviously didn’t mean that we would not have the power of sin active in our natures any more- the preceding chapter 7 makes that crystal clear. The obvious connection with <em><a href='B:520 6:11'>Rom 6:11</a></em> explains the point: "Reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin". The apostle recognized his own innate sinfulness and spiritual failures which were solely his own fault ("When I would do good...", Romans 7), yet he was confident of salvation (Romans 8). This was because he intensely believed in Christ's perfection, and that he was in Christ, and that at baptism he had received the condemnation of death which he deserved. "There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus" (<em><a href='B:520 8:1'>Rom 8:1</a></em>). There is the certainty of salvation.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 8:11'>Rom 8:11</a></em>&nbsp;<em>But if the Spirit</em>- Seeing Paul is talking about positions, status, and rejoicing so positively about it all, it seems appropriate to choose the equally valid translation “Seeing that the Spirit…”.</p><p><em>Of Him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwells in you</em>- As often in the NT, the Spirit of God is paralleled with the spirit of Christ which was mentioned in v. 10 and previously. Interpretation becomes difficult largely because of the very wide range of meaning in the word “spirit”. I don’t mean so much that the same word has many different meanings, but rather that within that one word is a range of meaning. God’s “spirit” refers to both His power and His mind, His thinking, His attitude, His character, personality. All He does is a reflection of His mind, just as human actions, the use of human ‘power’, is a reflection of the spirit within the person. Hence to think thoughts is judged by God as if the action has been done. The spirit of God and the spirit of Jesus are therefore parallel- because Jesus was at one with the Father. Yet as His prayer of John 17 demonstrates, that unity of spirit between the Father and Son is now shared with us who are in Him. It was the Spirit of God which raised up Jesus from the dead, and that same spirit / disposition of mind is counted to us, and is indeed in us- Paul has said this in Romans 7, where he rejoices that despite his lamentable practical failures, in his heart, in his spirit, in his deepest person, he is without doubt with God and delights in His ways. Paul, and all true believers, have a heart or, a spirit for God- despite the failures of the flesh. So the spirit / personality of Jesus- which is and was the very essence of righteousness- is counted to us, as if we are Him; and yet in our deepest selves, as believers, His spirit&nbsp;<em>is</em>&nbsp;in fact&nbsp;<em>our</em>&nbsp;spirit. Because this spirit within us is the spirit of Jesus and God, we can be assured of a resurrection like Christ’s- for the spirit of God raised up Christ from the dead, and we have identified with that hope through baptism into His death and resurrection. The spirit / mind of God is also His power; not naked power, like electricity, but a power which is at one with His mind, which acts in congruence with what He really thinks and is, without posturing or hypocrisy. It’s therefore the case that since that spirit dwells in us- because we are in Christ and His spirit is counted as ours, and because we have a spirit / heart for God as outlined in Romans 7 - therefore we shall surely be raised from the dead as Christ was. This is what Paul has said in Romans 6; but he explains here on what basis that happens. It happens on the basis of the spirit of God, or the spirit of Christ, which is counted as ours, and which is in fact actually ours within our deepest heart, the weakness of the flesh notwithstanding. The spirit of God is not just a mental attitude, it is also His power, and it was that same spirit which raised the dead body of Christ from the dead. And it shall do the same for us at the last day. The Spirit of Jesus, His disposition, His mindset, His way of thinking and being, is paralleled with His words and His person. They both ‘quicken’ or give eternal life, right now. “It is the Spirit that quickeneth present tense… the words that I speak unto you, they are right now spirit, and they are life… thou hast right now the words of eternal life” (<em><a href='B:500 6:63'>Joh 6:63</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 6:68'>Joh 6:68</a></em>). Yet at the last day, God will quicken the dead and physically give them eternal life (<em><a href='B:520 4:17'>Rom 4:17</a></em>; <em><a href='B:530 15:22'>1Co 15:22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:530 15:36'>1Co 15:36</a></em>). But this will be because in this life we had the ‘Spirit’ of the eternal life in us: “He that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by on account of his spirit that dwelleth in you” (<em><a href='B:520 8:11'>Rom 8:11</a></em>). The NT describes our final redemption as our "soul" and "spirit" being "saved"; our innermost being, our essential spiritual personality, who we&nbsp;<em>really</em>&nbsp;are in spiritual terms, will as it were be immortalized (<em><a href='B:670 1:9'>1Pe 1:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:530 5:5'>1Co 5:5</a></em>). This means that our spiritual development in this life is directly proportional to the type of person we will be&nbsp;<em>for evermore</em>. If, for example, we develop a generous spirit now, this is "a good foundation" for our future spiritual experience (<em><a href='B:610 6:19'>1Ti 6:19</a></em>). This is a stupendous conception, and the ultimate fillip to getting serious about our very personal spiritual development. Our mortal bodies will be changed to immortal, Spirit nature bodies according to the Spirit which&nbsp;<em>now</em>&nbsp;dwells in us (<em><a href='B:520 8:11'>Rom 8:11</a></em> Gk:). The attitude which we have to the Lord Jesus&nbsp;<em>now</em>&nbsp;will be the attitude we have to Him at the day of judgment (<em><a href='B:470 7:23'>Mat 7:23</a></em> cp. <em><a href='B:490 6:46'>Luk 6:46</a></em>).</p><p><em><br/>He that raised up Christ Jesus from the dead shall give life also to your mortal bodies</em>-&nbsp;<em>through His Spirit that dwells in you</em>- Paul’s expectation and assumption seems to have been that Christ would return in the lifetime of his readership, and that instead of dying and being resurrected, they would come before the judgment seat of Christ in their current mortal bodies, and then be changed. He hints at the same when he speaks of how mortality shall be swallowed up of life, and our present “vile body” shall be “clothed upon” but not, he hopes, dissolved in death (<em><a href='B:540 5:4'>2Co 5:4</a></em>). How could Paul, writing under inspiration, make an apparent mistake like this? I suggest that he was writing&nbsp;<em>as if</em>&nbsp;the return of Christ was imminent, because that is how we should live; part of the Christian life is to live as if we expect His return imminently. Another option is that perhaps the second coming was indeed scheduled for the first century; but the failure of various human preconditions resulted in this not happening and it being deferred perhaps issues like the repentance of Israel, the spiritual maturity and unity of the body of Christ, or their spreading of the Gospel and making converts from all nations.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 8:12'>Rom 8:12</a></em>&nbsp;<em>So then brothers, we are debtors</em>- Note the positive tone Paul takes towards the Roman believers, speaking here as&nbsp;if “we”, he and his readership, are all in the same status. Given the wonderful certainty of our salvation, we can’t be passive. The Greek translated “debtor” is usually translated ‘sinner’ in the sense of having a debt to God. Paul has said that his debt is to preach the Gospel to others <em><a href='B:520 1:14'>Rom 1:14</a></em> s:w:. The fact we truly shall be raised to eternal life, have been counted right, as having the spirit of Christ Himself- cannot be merely passively accepted. We have a debt to live appropriately, and one aspect of that debt is to share the great hope with others. And in our personal lives we likewise cannot be passive to this great salvation. We must make some realistic effort to bring our life spirit into conformity with the spirit and works of the Father and Son. We cannot go on living for the flesh, just indulging ourselves.</p><p><em>But not to the flesh, to live after the flesh&nbsp;</em>- This verse is really saying the same as <em><a href='B:520 6:1'>Rom 6:1</a></em> - we cannot continue living fleshly lives on the basis that we shall be saved by grace anyway. This is a repeated concern of Paul’s- that his bold, positive message that we who are in Christ shall be saved by grace regardless of our works could so easily be misunderstood, leading to passivity and sin rather than the vigorous, joyful practical response which is really the only thing we can do if we really ‘get it’. The practical section of Romans uses the same word in saying that Gentile believers have a debt to help their poorer Jewish brethren (<em><a href='B:520 15:27'>Rom 15:27</a></em>). Be it in preaching the Gospel or in practical care for others, we are paying back our debt to God through paying to others- as if the debt to Him has been transmuted, and we are to pay Him back through giving to others, both spiritually and practically.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 8:13'>Rom 8:13</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For if you live after the flesh</em>- Paul happens to use this same phrase ‘to live after’ in describing his life ‘living after’ Judaism (<em><a href='B:510 26:5'>Act 26:5</a></em>). As he has implied elsewhere in his argument, to live according to law, hoping for justification by works, is in fact not spiritual but fleshly. Again, the point is made that legalism doesn’t defend the law and curb sin, rather does it encourage unrighteousness and spiritual failure.</p><p><em>You must die</em>- Note the change from the otherwise positive spirit earlier in this section “we”. As all believers have the “mortal body” of which Paul spoke in <em><a href='B:520 6:12'>Rom 6:12</a></em>, it would seem that Paul is here threatening some kind of spiritual death; or, ‘you shall die eternally at the coming day of judgment’. He starts to balance out all his positive talk with this warning that we cannot just continue in sin, unaffected by the change in status and justification we have received by grace. Perhaps Paul here is alluding to the serpent’s lie: “You shall&nbsp;<em>not</em>&nbsp;surely die”, and putting the record straight again.</p><p><em><br/>But if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body</em>- See on <em><a href='B:520 8:14'>Rom 8:14</a></em>&nbsp;<em>led by the Spirit</em>.</p><p><em>You shall live</em>- Yet the whole tenor of Paul’s argument has been that it is not by steel willed battle against the flesh that we shall attain the life eternal. He laments in Romans 7 that we simply don’t have that strength of ourselves, but rather are we saved by our status in Christ. We “shall live” only because of the life of Christ being given to us at our resurrection, because we are in Him. The deeds of the body are therefore ‘mortified’ not in our own strength- as Paul makes clear in Romans 7, we simply lack the power to do this- but on account of the Spirit. We are made dead to the law by our participation in the body of Christ (<em><a href='B:520 7:4'>Rom 7:4</a></em> s:w:). Here in <em><a href='B:520 8:13'>Rom 8:13</a></em> we learn that we mortify the flesh by “the Spirit”. The spirit of Christ in this sense&nbsp;<em>is&nbsp;</em>Christ personally. Hence “the spirit” is used as a title of Christ later in this chapter (<em><a href='B:520 8:26-27'>Rom 8:26-27</a></em>). “The spirit” isn’t defined, i:e. as to whose spirit it is- because the spirit / mind of God is that of Christ and is that which is to be found in the believers. So I suggest the idea is that we shall live “if”, or ‘because of the fact that’, the Spirit- the Lord Jesus- puts to death the deeds of the flesh in that we are in Him, and in Him was no sin, no deed of the flesh. His death on the cross is counted as our death- several usages of the Greek verb “mortify” used here are actually speaking of the death of Christ on the cross (<em><a href='B:470 26:59'>Mat 26:59</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 27:1'>Mat 27:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:480 14:55'>Mar 14:55</a></em>; <em><a href='B:670 3:18'>1Pe 3:18</a></em>). And significantly, the word occurs a little later in Romans 8 - “For Christ’s sake we are killed ‘mortified’ all day long, we are counted s:w. imputed, reckoned as the sheep for the slaughter i:e. Christ on the cross” (<em><a href='B:520 8:36'>Rom 8:36</a></em>). So we are counted all day long as mortified, put to death, with Christ; for we are counted, 24/7, as being in Him, counted as the sacrificial lamb. His dead body becomes ours. It is in this way that through / on account of our being in “the Spirit”, “the Lord the Spirit” (<em><a href='B:540 3:18'>2Co 3:18</a></em>), we have the deeds of our flesh put to death. As Romans 7 labours, this doesn’t mean that we will not commit the deeds of the flesh. But we have identified ourselves with Christ, with His body, and in this sense those deeds of the flesh are rendered meaningless.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 8:14'>Rom 8:14</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For as many as are led by the Spirit of God</em>- The Greek may not imply mere guidance but something stronger- the Spirit leading us where&nbsp;<em>it</em>&nbsp;chooses. The same word is used about animals being led. It is the Spirit which mortifies the deeds of the body (<em><a href='B:520 8:13'>Rom 8:13</a></em>) more than us doing so. We want to know, of course, whether we really are “in Christ”, whether we really have His spirit. The phrase “led by the spirit” is found only in <em><a href='B:490 4:1'>Luk 4:1</a></em>, where the Lord Jesus was led by the spirit into the place of testing. Perhaps the connection is intentional. As Jesus the son of God, the prototypical child of God, was led by God, into testing, to the cross, and to resurrection- so it will operate in our lives and lead us, who are also the sons of God. The overall impression may be of allowing the Spirit, which operates in the lives of all in the sphere of the Spirit, to lead us and do things in our lives. We who have a heart for God have surely sensed God leading us, over and above our own will; and as Paul goes on to develop, this may involve elements of predestination and Divine calling which were over and above our own will to control. Sensing these things, this Divine leading, is an encouragement that truly we are God’s sons, as Jesus was supremely- for the spirit of the Father works in us His children. In the context, Paul has been arguing that for those in Christ, His death becomes theirs. The Greek word for “led” is repeatedly used about the ‘leading’ of God’s Son to His death (<em><a href='B:490 22:54'>Luk 22:54</a></em>; <em><a href='B:490 23:1'>Luk 23:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:490 23:32'>Luk 23:32</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 18:28'>Joh 18:28</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 19:4'>Joh 19:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 19:13'>Joh 19:13</a></em>), “led as a sheep to the slaughter” (<em><a href='B:510 8:32'>Act 8:32</a></em>). We have commented under <em><a href='B:520 8:13'>Rom 8:13</a></em> that <em><a href='B:520 8:36'>Rom 8:36</a></em> speaks of all those in Christ as likewise being “the sheep for the slaughter”. Every detail of the Lord’s death and sufferings becomes ours. “Led by” could just as well be rendered “led&nbsp;<em>in&nbsp;</em>the Spirit”, with reference to Christ as “the Lord the Spirit”. This would suggest that our status “in Christ” means that we are going to be treated like Him- led as He was, to testing, to the death of the cross, to resurrection. Paul many times during his trials was “led”, just as Christ was. This same Greek word occurs many times in the Acts record regarding Paul. He wrote here from personal experience.</p><p><em>These are children of God</em>- not in the sense that the Spirit makes us sons of God, but that the children of God are characterized (among other things) by the Spirit leading them. “Sons of God” would’ve been understood by the Jewish readers and hearers as a phrase referring specifically to Israel (<em><a href='B:20 4:22'>Exo 4:22</a></em>; Jer. <em><a href='B:300 3:19'>Jer 3:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:300 31:9'>Jer 31:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:350 11:1'>Hos 11:1</a></em>); Paul’s emphasis is that now all in Christ and within the sphere of the Spirit are now God’s children, regardless of their ethnicity. But above all, all who are “in” the Son of God (<em><a href='B:520 8:3'>Rom 8:3</a></em>), in Christ by baptism, are likewise therefore “sons of God”. The spirit that was in Christ must therefore be in us, or rather, be allowed to work in and with us. This phrase is preparing the way for the appeal to be conformed to the image of God’s Son which is coming up in <em><a href='B:520 8:29'>Rom 8:29</a></em>.</p><p>Jesus was led of the Spirit at His time of testing (<em><a href='B:490 4:1'>Luk 4:1</a></em>); and Paul uses just those words of us in our present experience of trial (<em><a href='B:520 8:14'>Rom 8:14</a></em>). &nbsp;His victory in the wilderness therefore becomes a living inspiration for us, who are tempted as He was (<em><a href='B:650 4:15-16'>Heb 4:15-16</a></em>).</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 8:15'>Rom 8:15</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For you did not receive the spirit of bondage again</em>- “Bondage” is associated with the Mosaic law in <em><a href='B:550 4:24'>Gal 4:24</a></em>; <em><a href='B:550 5:1'>Gal 5:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 2:15'>Heb 2:15</a></em>. They received the Spirit at baptism, as all believers do; but it was not a spirit of fear.</p><p><em>To fear</em>- The contrast is between bondage slavery and adoption; and therefore between fear and ‘crying Abba, Father’. The fear Paul has in view must surely be the fear of not being good enough, the phobia about rejection at the day of final judgment. This fear of rejection is associated with bondage to a legalistic system, of obeying rules in order to seek acceptance with God. Such a system is itself bondage, slavery. And the image of slavery has been used by Paul with reference to slavery to sin. Once again, he associates sin with legalism and attempted justification through obedience to the Law- for this is where that mindset leads in practice. The implication seems to be that although Paul’s readership had received the “spirit of adoption”, yet they still feared. Paul is seeking to convince them of their high status in Christ, and to perceive, to the point of it affecting their feelings e.g. of fear or otherwise, that really- it’s all true. The good news that seems too good to believe is really as good as it sounds.</p><p><em>But you received the spirit of adoption</em>- The fact we have become sons of God see on <em><a href='B:520 8:14'>Rom 8:14</a></em> by means of being in Christ, the Son of God, means that God will send His Spirit into our hearts, to make us more natural members of the family we have now joined by status:&nbsp; <em><a href='B:550 4:6'>Gal 4:6</a></em> thus speaks of how “God sent forth the spirit of&nbsp;<em>His&nbsp;</em>Son into&nbsp;<em>our&nbsp;</em>hearts”. Thus&nbsp;<em>our&nbsp;</em>hearts have to become transformed to be like that of&nbsp;<em>His&nbsp;</em>Son. This can be so successful that we even call to God as Abba, daddy. Note that the Spirit and our hearts are connected- this Spirit works on the human heart, miraculous gifts aren’t in view here. The NRSV renders: “When we cry, ‘Abba Father’, it is that very spirit bearing witness” (<em><a href='B:520 8:15-16'>Rom 8:15-16</a></em>). The feeling we have toward God as Abba is proof enough that He has sent His Son into our hearts. The obvious question is begged: Is that how we feel? God wants us to feel like that towards Him. We can and should be able to This is one of the most bottom line questions for us as believers; not what theological position we have on this or that point, not what precise statement of faith we follow with what clarifications or caveats, addendums or amendments; not whom we fellowship; not how smartly we have lived our lives even. But whether we really feel to God as Abba, Father. If it takes a woman three divorces or another <em>Man_1:10</em> years in prison or another a lifetime’s battle with alcohol- this is the end point to which we are being brought. This is the “witness” that we really are God’s dear children, if we feel like that toward Him, if we can call Him “Abba, daddy” just as the Son of God did in prayer. If we do, then “the Spirit itself bears witness with our spirit that we are the children of God” (<em><a href='B:520 8:16'>Rom 8:16</a></em>). And <em><a href='B:550 4:6'>Gal 4:6</a></em> becomes so true of us: “God has sent the Spirit of His Son into our hearts, whereby we cry, Abba, Father”. Roman law legislated that the adopted child took over the full identity of the adoptive father; what was true of that family became legally true of the adopted person- a concept which was apparently foreign to Greek and Jewish culture, but the concept would’ve been appreciated specifically by the Romans. The idea is similar to the concept of righteousness being “imputed”.</p><p>There is only one Spirit- the spirit of God, of Christ, of the true believer, of adoption- is all the same. The statement here that those in Christ received “the spirit of adoption” must therefore surely be paralleled with the frequent comments elsewhere in the NT that the believer has “received” s:w. the Spirit at conversion, just as the apostles “received the Holy Spirit” (<em><a href='B:500 7:39'>Joh 7:39</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 14:17'>Joh 14:17</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 20:22'>Joh 20:22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 1:8'>Act 1:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 2:33'>Act 2:33</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 2:38'>Act 2:38</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 8:15'>Act 8:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 8:17'>Act 8:17</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 10:47'>Act 10:47</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 19:2'>Act 19:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:530 2:12'>1Co 2:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:540 11:4'>2Co 11:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:550 3:2'>Gal 3:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:550 3:14'>Gal 3:14</a></em>). Whilst the apostles had their receipt of this gift confirmed by miraculous displays of Holy Spirit gifts which have now been withdrawn, the assumption is clear from that list of verses that after “the hearing of faith” and baptism into Christ, the Spirit was “received” (<em><a href='B:550 3:2'>Gal 3:2</a></em> etc:). Baptism was seen as bringing about the receipt of this gift (<em><a href='B:510 19:2'>Act 19:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:550 3:14'>Gal 3:14</a></em> cp. 27-29). When we became “in Christ” at baptism, we were counted as Christ. Just as He called God “Abba”, so we can. The way Jesus addressed God in this way is wonderful, indeed beautiful. It almost seems inappropriate that this personal relationship of the Son to the Father, calling Him “Daddy”, should be observed by us even; and yet now Paul says that it has been applied to&nbsp;<em>us</em>, seeing we are truly “in Him”. We have received such an extraordinarily realistic “spirit of adoption” that really, as Jesus was God’s Son, so are we. Through the work of the Spirit, even the virgin conception and birth of the Lord Jesus is now no barrier between Him and us; for in essence, our spiritual rebirth and adoption as God’s children is such that we too are God’s very own children just as He was. Our excuse for not fully following Him is that ‘Well He was a bit different to us, you know… virgin birth and all that’. If we grasp what Paul is saying, this now has far less validity. For the same Spirit which caused the virgin conception is what has birthed each believer, and through the spirit of adoption we too can feel towards God as “Abba”, just as His Son did. The unity between Father and Son has now been realized between the Father and all His children; the prayer of John 17 to this effect has now been answered. At least, potentially, and if we will accept the answer. And yet, it has to be said that we do not feel to God as Jesus did. The Lord Jesus could not have written the bitter lament about spiritual failure which we find in Romans 7. As we have often concluded, the answer is that we are asked to believe that really we are indeed “in Christ”, and seen, counted and felt towards by God as if we really are His beloved Son.</p><p><em>Whereby we cry</em>- “Whereby” can be rendered “in whom”. Because we are in Christ, we have His spirit, God’s Spirit. We “cry”- in allusion to how in Gethsemane, the Son of God “cried” to God as “Abba”. He there really can be our pattern. The Greek for “cry” really means to scream or croak- the idea is very much of a baby or young child crying out to “daddy”.</p><p><em>Abba, Father</em>- In prayer, we address God as Abba, Father- precisely because “God has sent the Spirit of His Son into our hearts, whereby we cry, Abba, Father” (<em><a href='B:520 8:15'>Rom 8:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:550 4:6'>Gal 4:6</a></em>). I take these passages to refer to the way successful prayer involves the spirit / will of a believer becoming united with the Spirit / will of the Father and Son. <em><a href='B:550 4:6'>Gal 4:6</a></em> says that it is the Spirit of Jesus who prays to God “Abba, Father”; but <em><a href='B:520 8:15'>Rom 8:15</a></em> says that it is us of course who pray to God “Abba, Father”. We are not slaves but God’s very own dear children. The spirit / will / mind of the Lord Jesus is therefore seen as the mind of the believer. And thus Paul could write that it was no longer he who lived, but Christ who lived in him (<em><a href='B:550 2:20'>Gal 2:20</a></em>). The whole of the new creation groans or sighs in our spirit; and Jesus, the Lord the Spirit groans in prayer for us too. God’s Spirit is to dwell in us, right in the core of our hearts (<em><a href='B:520 8:11'>Rom 8:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:550 4:6'>Gal 4:6</a></em>)."We cry Abba, Father" (<em><a href='B:520 8:15'>Rom 8:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:550 4:6'>Gal 4:6</a></em>), as our Lord did then (<em><a href='B:480 14:36'>Mar 14:36</a></em>). We can, we really can, it is possible, to enter into our Lord's intensity then. Paul saw his beloved brother Epaphroditus as "heavy" in spirit (<em><a href='B:570 2:26'>Phi 2:26</a></em>), using a word only used elsewhere about Christ in Gethsemane (<em><a href='B:470 26:37'>Mat 26:37</a></em>; <em><a href='B:480 14:33'>Mar 14:33</a></em>):&nbsp;Luke and other early brethren seemed to have had the Gethsemane record in mind in their sufferings, as we can also do (<em><a href='B:510 21:14'>Act 21:14</a></em> = <em><a href='B:480 14:36'>Mar 14:36</a></em>). I have wondered, and it’s no more than me wondering, whether it could be that <em><a href='B:520 10:9'>Rom 10:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 10:13'>Rom 10:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 22:16'>Act 22:16</a></em> and the other references to calling on the name of the Lord at baptism imply that the candidate for baptism made the statement “Jesus is Lord” after their confession of faith or just before their immersion, and then they shouted the word “Abba Father” as they came out of the water, indicating their adoption as a child of God (<em><a href='B:520 8:15'>Rom 8:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:550 4:6'>Gal 4:6</a></em>). Biblical prayers rarely request things; if we ask according to God’s will, we will receive (<em><a href='B:690 5:14'>1Jn 5:14</a></em>); and yet if God’s word dwells in us, we will ask what we will, and receive it (<em><a href='B:500 15:7'>Joh 15:7</a></em>). Thus if our will is purely God’s will, we will receive answers to every prayer. That our will can be God’s will is another way of saying that our spirit can be His Spirit. This is why several passages speak of how God’s Spirit witnesses with our spirit (<em><a href='B:520 8:15-16'>Rom 8:15-16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 8:26'>Rom 8:26</a></em>; <em><a href='B:690 3:24'>1Jn 3:24</a></em>; <em><a href='B:690 4:13'>1Jn 4:13</a></em>). It's why the early church sensed that not only were they witnessing to things, but the Holy Spirit of God also (<em><a href='B:510 5:32'>Act 5:32</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 15:28'>Act 15:28</a></em>). His Spirit becomes our spirit. Who we are as persons is effectively our prayer and plea to God. This conception of prayer explains why often weeping, crying, waiting, meditating etc. are spoken of as "prayer" , although there was no specific verbalizing of requests (<em><a href='B:230 5:1-2'>Psa 5:1-2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 6:8'>Psa 6:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 18:1-3'>Psa 18:1-3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 18:6'>Psa 18:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 40:1'>Psa 40:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 42:8'>Psa 42:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 64:1'>Psa 64:1</a></em> (Heb:); <em><a href='B:290 65:1-2'>Isa 65:1-2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:290 66:17-20'>Isa 66:17-20</a></em>; <em><a href='B:450 8:22'>Zec 8:22</a></em>). The association between prayer and weeping is especially common: <em><a href='B:90 1:10'>1Sa 1:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 39:12'>Psa 39:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 55:1-2'>Psa 55:1-2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 11:41-42'>Joh 11:41-42</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 5:7'>Heb 5:7</a></em>, especially in the Lord's life and the Messianic Psalms. "The Lord hath heard the voice of my weeping. The Lord hath heard my supplication; the Lord will receive my prayer" (<em><a href='B:230 6:8-9'>Psa 6:8-9</a></em>) crystallizes the point:&nbsp;<em>Desire</em>&nbsp;is also seen as effectively praying for something (<em><a href='B:520 10:1'>Rom 10:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:580 1:9'>Col 1:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:540 9:14'>2Co 9:14</a></em>). Weeping, desiring, waiting, meditating etc. are all acts of the mind, or 'spirit' in Biblical terminology. There is therefore a big association between our spirit or state of mind, and prayer. The spirit (disposition) of Christ which we have received leads us to&nbsp;<em>pray</em>&nbsp;"Abba, Father" (<em><a href='B:520 8:15'>Rom 8:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:550 4:6'>Gal 4:6</a></em>). "Praying in the holy spirit" (<em><a href='B:720 1:20'>Jud 1:20</a></em>) is to be seen in this context. Prayer is part of the&nbsp;<em>atmosphere</em>&nbsp;of spiritual life, not something hived off and separate- it is an expression of our spirit. Thus there are verses which speak of many daily prayers as being just one prayer (<em><a href='B:230 86:3'>Psa 86:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 86:6'>Psa 86:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 88:1-2'>Psa 88:1-2</a></em>); prayer is a way / spirit of life, not something specific which occurs for a matter of minutes each day. The commands to "pray without ceasing" simply can't be literally obeyed (<em><a href='B:590 5:17'>1Th 5:17</a></em>). "Watch and pray&nbsp;<em>always</em>" in the last days likewise connects prayer with&nbsp;<em>watchfulness</em>, which is an attitude of mind rather than something done on specific occasions. This is not to say that prayer&nbsp;<em>in no sense</em>&nbsp;refers to formal, specific prayer. Evidently it does, but it is only a verbal crystallization of our general spirit of life.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 8:16'>Rom 8:16</a></em>&nbsp;<em>The Spirit himself testifies with our spirit that we are children of God</em>- See on <em><a href='B:520 8:15'>Rom 8:15</a></em>&nbsp;<em>spirit of adoption</em>. The Greek can be read as “The Spirit himself bears witness&nbsp;<em>to</em>&nbsp;our spirit, that we are the children of God”. But the idea seems to be of a joint witness- our spirit is in fact<em>&nbsp;the</em>&nbsp;Spirit, and bear witness in a legal sense that we are really God’s children. As we have observed several times, there is only essentially one Spirit- God’s, Christ’s, the believer’s, are all the same spirit. Paul uses the same idea in <em><a href='B:520 9:1'>Rom 9:1</a></em>, where he asserts that his conscience and he may as well have said his spirit, for the idea of essential, inner personality is the same bears joint witness s:w. <em><a href='B:520 8:16'>Rom 8:16</a></em> with the Holy Spirit. God’s personality, His Spirit, is congruent with the person who has a spirit / heart for God. This meeting of minds between God and the believer is what confirms to us that we really are His children. Being His beloved children isn’t dependent upon our moral perfection- we must keep remembering that we are reading the words here in their context as the extension of what Paul was saying throughout <em><a href='B:520 7:15-25'>Rom 7:15-25</a></em>.</p><p>Paul here reverts to the image he used in chapter 3, of us for a moment acting as the judge (<em><a href='B:520 3:4'>Rom 3:4</a></em>), deciding whether God’s promises and claims about us are in fact true, or lies. Our own spirit and God’s Spirit bear legal witness- to whom? To us as the judges. They both testify, that really we are the children of God. Not only is the spirit of Christ, His righteousness, counted as ours; but God’s spirit / mind really is ours in experienced reality. Thus we are joint witnesses in the box together, and v. 17 will develop this theme- joint heirs, joint sufferers, and thus jointly glorified together. All because of our connection with Him, we are counted as Him. Note how Paul seems to be aware of the huge doubt there would be about these things in the hearts of the baptized believers to whom he writes; and such doubt is with us today. Hence the enormous relevance and power of what he writes, and the need he felt to appeal to detailed intellectual argument in order to prove his point time and again:&nbsp;<br/>Imputed righteousness is given us on the basis of our faith. This means that insofar as we can believe all this is true, so it will be. In this sense “The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God” (<em><a href='B:520 8:16'>Rom 8:16</a></em>). We are His dear children (<em><a href='B:560 5:1'>Eph 5:1</a></em>), the pride and joy of Almighty God, counted as wonderful and righteous by Him. Personal Bible reading and reflection are so important; for there the individual finds the essence of God’s will and strives to make it his or her very own. This is how we can come to understand <em><a href='B:520 8:16'>Rom 8:16</a></em>, which says that in prayer, God’s Spirit bears witness with our spirit that is within us. Thus even although “we do not know how to pray for as we ought, the Spirit himself intercedes for us” (<em><a href='B:520 8:26'>Rom 8:26</a></em>). The Spirit of the Father and Son speaks in us when we pray (<em><a href='B:520 8:15'>Rom 8:15</a></em>), if our will / spirit is theirs. To put this in more technical but I think very telling terms: “The subject-object scheme of ‘talking to somebody’ is transcended; He who speaks through us is he who is spoken to”. It’s perhaps the thought behind <em><a href='B:470 10:20'>Mat 10:20</a></em>: “It is not you who speak, but the Spirit of your Father speaking through you”. This is why Paul can thank God that he finds himself praying constantly for Timothy (<em><a href='B:620 1:3'>2Ti 1:3</a></em>)- because he recognizes that not only can we influence God by our prayers, bur He influences us in what we pray for.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 8:17'>Rom 8:17</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And if children, then heirs- heirs of God and joint-heirs with Christ</em>- Very much the ideas of <em><a href='B:550 3:27-29'>Gal 3:27-29</a></em>, where Paul taught that baptism makes us the children of God and join-heirs with Christ of what God promised Abraham. For all that is true of Christ becomes true of us. If He was the seed of Abraham, then so are we; and what was promised to the seed personally thus becomes true for us all. Again, Paul is seeking to explain to the Romans the significance of their baptisms. The law taught that the firstborn was to have a double portion above his brethren. But we are made joint-heirs with Christ, the firstborn (<em><a href='B:520 8:17'>Rom 8:17</a></em>). This is yet another paradox of grace. Likewise in the parable of the prodigal son, both sons receive equal inheritance, rather than the elder son getting more.</p><p><em>If so be that we suffer with Him, that we may also be glorified with him</em>- Again, “if so be” is a misleading translation. This phrase is common in this part of Romans. It an indeed mean “if so be”, but the idea is equally of “seeing that…”, “although…”- and this is how it is commonly translated elsewhere. The good news Paul is teaching is almost unbelievable, too good news- and it was for the translators too, who for the most part have chosen to give a ‘conditional’ feel to the message by inserting all these “if…” statements as if they are conditions. But this impression contradicts the colossal positivism which Paul has, positivism expressed in the face of his own admission of failure in Romans 7; and such translation also fails to give due weight to the idea of positions, status “in Christ” as opposed to in Adam, which is so fundamental to Paul’s argument. Because we are in Christ, we are joint heirs with Him; and seeing that we suffer with Him, we shall be also glorified with Him in that we will share in His resurrection. This is the very teaching of <em><a href='B:520 6:3-5'>Rom 6:3-5</a></em>; baptism into His death and resurrection means that for sure we will be resurrected as He was. Note that we co-suffer with Christ right now- which suggests that He also in some sense suffers in this life, the essence of His cross is lived out in His experience even now, as He suffers with our sufferings, and we with his. The only other time this Greek word for co-suffering occurs is in <em><a href='B:530 12:26'>1Co 12:26</a></em> - we co-suffer with the sufferings of other members of the body of Christ. This is one way in which “we suffer with Him”- to have an empathetic mind. Whilst we must strive for this, Paul’s point is more that we do suffer with Him, because we are in Him; just as in Romans 6 he has demonstrated that we suffered, died, were buried and rose again with Christ, because we are “in Him”. The suffering and groaning of which Paul speaks in <em><a href='B:520 8:17'>Rom 8:17</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 8:22-26'>Rom 8:22-26</a></em> could have specific reference to the ‘groaning’ he has just been making about his inability to keep the Mosaic Law. Our helplessness to be obedient, our frustration with ourselves, is a groaning against sin which is actually a groaning in harmony with that of the Spirit of the Lord Jesus, who makes intercession for us with the same groanings right now (<em><a href='B:520 8:26'>Rom 8:26</a></em>). Indeed, those groanings are those spoken of in <em><a href='B:650 5:7'>Heb 5:7</a></em> as the groanings of strong crying and tears which the Lord made in His final passion. In this sense, the Spirit, the Lord the Spirit, bears witness with our spirit / mind, that we are the children of God (<em><a href='B:520 8:16'>Rom 8:16</a></em>). This clinches all I am trying to say. Our inability to keep the Law of God leads to a groaning against sin and because of sin, which puts us into a unity with the Lord Jesus as our Heavenly intercessor in the court of Heaven. But that wondrous realization of grace which is expressed so finely in Romans 8 would just be impossible were it not for the conviction of sin which there is through our experience of our inability to keep the Law of God. Our failure and groaning because of it becomes in the end the very witness that we are the children of God (<em><a href='B:520 8:16'>Rom 8:16</a></em>). God thereby makes sin His servant, in that the experience of it glorifies Him.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 8:18'>Rom 8:18</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For</em>&nbsp;<em>I reckon-</em>&nbsp;S:w. to count, impute. As God counts us as in Christ, imputing us as having suffered and died with Him, we too in our turn must impute this to ourselves; and if we do, then we will realize that if our present sufferings are in fact seen by God and imputed by Him as being a part in the sufferings of Christ- then we can truly rejoice in the certainty that we will surely share in His resurrection life. If God counts us as He does, we should count ourselves that way too, and have feelings and emotions which are appropriate to such an exalted position.</p><p><em>That the sufferings&nbsp;of this present time</em>- Elsewhere Paul emphasizes that if we are “in Christ”, then His sufferings become ours in the same way as His glory and victory become ours too. The tribulations of <em><a href='B:520 8:35'>Rom 8:35</a></em> could therefore be understood specifically as aspects of Christ’s sufferings, with <em><a href='B:520 8:36'>Rom 8:36</a></em> likening us in our sufferings to the sheep for the slaughter, which spoke of Christ facing the cross. See on <em><a href='B:520 7:5'>Rom 7:5</a></em>. The only other time in Romans that Paul uses the word here translated “sufferings” is in <em><a href='B:520 7:5'>Rom 7:5</a></em>, where he speaks of “the motions s:w. sufferings of sin”. He may be implying that even the sufferings caused by our sins are part of the sufferings which connect us to Christ- for His sufferings were directly because of His bearing of our sins. This is a very profound thought- that even the sufferings of our sins serve only to connect us to the sufferings of Christ, in a mutual bond; for He suffered because of our sins. And for those in Him, our connection with His sufferings is the guarantee of our resurrection to glory with Him.</p><p><em>Are not worthy to be compared with the glory</em>- The contrast between present suffering and future glory is common in Jewish texts. But they all tended to emphasize that the individual who does righteousness will receive personal glory (e.g. Apocalypse of Baruch, 2, 15:8). Paul is saying that the glory to which we look forward is a sharing in the glory of Christ in a material way. This glory exists now in that Christ exists glorified, but that glory must yet be revealed in us literally (<em><a href='B:670 5:1'>1Pe 5:1</a></em>).</p><p><em>Which shall be revealed in us</em>- The “glory” is something internal, rather than referring to some unusually Divine light or cloud of shekinah glory, as imagined by 1st century Judaism and many others today. The Greek for “revealed” carries the idea of revealing, taking the lid off something to expose it. We are in Christ and He is thereby in us- the whole thing has a mutual quality to it. He dwells in us not only in that His righteous character, His spirit, is counted to us- but in actual fact, it is placed within us. This is the “spirit” which Paul will go on to claim is in fact within us. It doesn’t mean we are thereby made righteous in our actual thoughts and actions- for he has bitterly lamented in Romans 7 that this isn’t actually the case. At the day of judgment, when we share in the Lord’s resurrection just as surely as we have in this life shared in His sufferings, that glory, that spirit, that personality within us shall be revealed openly. Perhaps Peter uses flesh and spirit in the same way that Paul does, when he says that believers are “judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit” (<em><a href='B:670 4:6'>1Pe 4:6</a></em>), just as Jesus was likewise judged (<em><a href='B:670 3:18'>1Pe 3:18</a></em>). We are considered by our peers as mere human beings, they may even judge us for the kind of failures in the flesh which Paul admits to in <em><a href='B:520 7:15-25'>Rom 7:15-25</a></em>. But God judges us according to the “spirit”, the fact that the spirit / character of Christ is counted to us, and in some hard-to-define sense is in fact latently placed within us. And this of course is how we should seek to perceive our weak fellow believers.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 8:19'>Rom 8:19</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For the earnest expectation of the creation awaits the revealing of</em>&nbsp;<em>God’s children</em>- This could imply that the believers aren’t really revealed for who they are in this life. This shouldn’t encourage our hypocrisy nor the idea that we can be a believer whose faith is invisible to the world; but it’s some comfort too. Because we look, smell, speak and act identically, for the most part, to the unbelievers around us. The huge difference in status and position has to be perceived by faith alone in this life. This “manifestation” is the same word as used in <em><a href='B:520 8:18'>Rom 8:18</a></em>, “revealed”- see notes on <em><a href='B:520 8:18'>Rom 8:18</a></em>. The whole of creation is somehow looking forward to the revelation of the Christ that is within us. Christ, the spirit of Christ, is concealed deep within our flesh and will be manifested at the last day, even though we as it were feel the baby kicking, as Paul describes in <em><a href='B:520 7:15-25'>Rom 7:15-25</a></em> when he speaks of the two persons struggling within him. On a different scale, we are as it were concealed deep within the creation, as the seed, the germ, which will sprout forth into the full Kingdom of God when Christ returns. All that is material and fleshly, this present system, will no longer conceal the Christ within us personally, and on a global scale it will no longer conceal&nbsp;<em>us</em>, who we really are. This element of hiddenness explains why we simply cannot judge others. Here in this closing section of Romans 1-8 there also seems a connection of thought with the opening section of Romans 1-8, where Paul wrote of how the invisible things of God which were as it were hidden within creation are in some sense declared to those who know God (<em><a href='B:520 1:20'>Rom 1:20</a></em>)&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 8:20'>Rom 8:20</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:520 8:7'>Rom 8:7</a></em>.</p><p><em>For the creation</em>- Given the way Paul writes of “they” as opposed to “ourselves” in <em><a href='B:520 8:23'>Rom 8:23</a></em>, the creation here perhaps refers to all peoples (or maybe even, all created things) apart from the believers.</p><p><em>Was made subjected to vanity</em>- The connection with the opening of the entire section in Romans 1 continues. There Paul used the same word to describe how sinners ‘become vain’ (<em><a href='B:520 1:21'>Rom 1:21</a></em>). They willingly glory in the fallen state of creation, seeking out every opportunity to gratify sinful desires. Although we are indeed “subject to vanity”, we don’t need to in our own turn ‘become vain’. If we can be made free from the daily grind in order to serve God, let us chose it. Let’s not fill our minds and lives with the things of basic human existence, gathering food, reproducing, indulging sexual desire. In one sense, as part of God’s creation, we are subject to vanity- and perhaps that’s why Paul uses the same word in the practical section of Romans to say that we “must needs be subject” to worldly powers (<em><a href='B:520 13:1'>Rom 13:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 13:5'>Rom 13:5</a></em>). By doing so we accept how things are in creation at this time. The idea of submission is quite a theme in Romans. Our natural mind, the status / person “in Adam”, isn’t submissive to God’s law and never can be (<em><a href='B:520 8:7'>Rom 8:7</a></em>); the natural creation, of which our fleshly, human side is a part, is subject, in submission to, vanity. Yet we are to submit ourselves- our real selves- to God’s righteousness (<em><a href='B:520 10:3'>Rom 10:3</a></em>).</p><p><em>Not of its own will</em>- This continues the parallel between the believer in Christ’s fallen and weak state, and the state of the entire creation. Again, this is a development of the theme of <em><a href='B:520 7:15-25'>Rom 7:15-25</a></em> - that we sin because of our weakness in dealing with the state we find ourselves in, but our sin isn’t wilful- it is in fact committed not willingly, “that which I would / will not” (<em><a href='B:520 7:19'>Rom 7:19</a></em>).</p><p><em>But by reason of Him who subjected it in hope</em>- A reference to God. This is a major deconstruction of the popular idea of ‘Satan’, who was and is supposed by many to be the one who has tied the world down under the consequences of sin. But it is&nbsp;<em>God</em>&nbsp;who has done the subjecting, and therefore He has done it “in hope”, which He will be the One to bring to realization.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 8:21'>Rom 8:21</a></em>&nbsp;<em>The creation itself also</em>- Ultimately, the creation will share the deliverance which we personally experience now and shall experience in its final term at the Lord’s return. The&nbsp;<em>whole</em>&nbsp;of creation earnestly looks forward to the manifestation of the sons of God. The whole of creation was made "subject to vanity, not willingly" - it was not their fault that the curse came upon them. "The&nbsp;<em>whole</em>&nbsp;of creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together", longing to share in the manifestation in glory of God’s spiritual creation. The sadness and bitterness of the animal creation is due to their longing for that day of "the glorious liberty of the children of God" in which they will share.</p><p><em>Shall be delivered</em>- the same word has been used by Paul in speaking of how even now, we have been delivered from slavery to sin and death by becoming “in Christ” (<em><a href='B:520 6:18'>Rom 6:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 6:22'>Rom 6:22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 8:2'>Rom 8:2</a></em>). The same word is also used about our having been made free from slavery to the Mosaic Law (<em><a href='B:550 5:1'>Gal 5:1</a></em>), which connection could suggest that the “creation” here has some specific reference to the entire Jewish system.</p><p><em>From the bondage</em>- Gk. ‘slavery’. The idea of being in slavery to sin and the Law has been common in Paul’s argument so far. The believer in Christ is saved from such slavery- and God’s long term plan is that the entire creation will share in this redemption too.</p><p><em>Of corruption</em>- Used by Paul in <em><a href='B:580 2:22'>Col 2:22</a></em> with special reference to the Law of Moses. But he also uses the word in explaining how our present corruptible body shall be changed to incorruption when Christ returns (<em><a href='B:530 15:42'>1Co 15:42</a></em>; <em><a href='B:530 15:50'>1Co 15:50</a></em>). The whole creation will be changed and redeemed as we personally will be. In this sense the work of the Lord Jesus will bring about the creation, or re-creation, of a new earth without the results of Adam’s sin. His achievement on the cross in this sense saved the world and not just the believers.</p><p><em>Into the liberty of the glory of the children of God</em>- The redemption and freedom from corruption which the believers shall experience will be experienced by all of creation. When at the end of Romans 11 Paul appears to rejoice in the totality and universality of Divine redemption in Christ, he may well have this in mind. Not that all human beings who have ever lived will be saved, but rather that the whole of creation, in a physical sense, will be saved / delivered just as the believers will have been. Our freedom is ‘of glory’ in the sense touched upon in <em><a href='B:520 8:18'>Rom 8:18</a></em> - the glory of the character of Christ which is latent within us but which is yet to be revealed openly. Paul always uses the Greek word used here for “liberty” to exalt how believers in Christ have been set free from the Jewish law (<em><a href='B:530 10:29'>1Co 10:29</a></em>; <em><a href='B:540 3:17'>2Co 3:17</a></em>; <em><a href='B:550 2:4'>Gal 2:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:550 5:1'>Gal 5:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:550 5:13'>Gal 5:13</a></em>). He clearly has this at least as a subtext in his argument here, encouraging us to wonder whether by ‘all of creation’ he has in view “all Israel”. In this case, his argument would be brought to its full term in <em><a href='B:520 11:26'>Rom 11:26</a></em>, when he exalts that finally “all Israel shall be saved”. When Paul speaks of “all AV “the whole” creation” in <em><a href='B:520 8:22'>Rom 8:22</a></em>, this is the same word translated “all” in <em><a href='B:520 11:26'>Rom 11:26</a></em>. They will finally share in the blessed redemption made possible by the Messiah whom they crucified, they will also experience the glorious liberty from sin and the Law which was the strength of sin, which was exalted in by those like Paul whom they persecuted and reviled. For it is those who received Jesus as Christ rather than rejected Him as did the Jews, whom the NT styles “the children of God” (<em><a href='B:500 1:12'>Joh 1:12</a></em>). In this sense, Paul in this very context notes that the Jews under the Law are not the true “children of God”- but the believers in Christ are (<em><a href='B:520 9:8'>Rom 9:8</a></em>):&nbsp;</p><p>This “liberty” in which the NT so frequently exults (<em><a href='B:490 4:18'>Luk 4:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:530 10:29'>1Co 10:29</a></em>; <em><a href='B:550 2:4'>Gal 2:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:550 5:13'>Gal 5:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:660 1:25'>Jas 1:25</a></em>; <em><a href='B:660 2:12'>Jas 2:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:670 2:16'>1Pe 2:16</a></em>) will be fully revealed in the freedom of the Kingdom: “the glorious liberty of the children of God” (<em><a href='B:520 8:21'>Rom 8:21</a></em>). As it will be then, so now: we will not be free to do what we like morally, but within the context of God’s covenant, we are free, totally and utterly free, in our service of Him.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 8:22'>Rom 8:22</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For we know that the whole creation</em>&nbsp;– Gk. “all” creation, s:w. <em><a href='B:520 11:26'>Rom 11:26</a></em> “all Israel”. See on <em><a href='B:520 8:21'>Rom 8:21</a></em>.</p><p><em>Has been groaning together&nbsp;in the pains of childbirth until now</em>- Groans together with whom? Perhaps the idea is that creation together, all parts of it, groan together. But I suggest the groaning is together with us and the Lord Jesus. The Greek for “groan” is used about the groaning of the Lord Jesus in intercessory prayer in <em><a href='B:480 7:34'>Mar 7:34</a></em>. The believers in Him likewise groan in awaiting the change of our nature which shall come at Christ’s return (<em><a href='B:540 5:2'>2Co 5:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:540 5:4'>2Co 5:4</a></em>). This is the groaning we have heard throughout <em><a href='B:520 7:15-24'>Rom 7:15-24</a></em>, groaning at the hopelessness of our position as sinners. Paul perceived “for we&nbsp;<em>know</em>”, Gk. ‘perceive’ that he wasn’t alone in his groaning, but there is even within the natural creation some premonition that a redemption is yet to come, and a groaning in discontent at the present situation. Thus he didn’t perceive nature as at peace with itself, as many today naively imagine. Rather is it groaning with us. And if we follow up Paul’s hints that “all creation” has some reference to “all Israel”, their groaning which he perceived would have been in terms of ‘not having found that which they sought after’, as he put it in <em><a href='B:520 11:7'>Rom 11:7</a></em>; they sought righteousness but didn’t find it (<em><a href='B:520 9:31'>Rom 9:31</a></em>). They were looking for the right thing in the wrong places and by the wrong way. And yet their groaning, our groaning, the groaning perceived in the natural creation, are in fact but birth pangs- we groan and travail in pain together. The birth which this leads to is the new day of God’s Kingdom, the final birth of the Spirit which believers in Christ have experienced in prospect through baptism. And again, Paul’s sub textual reference to the bankruptcy of the Law to save is still there, for the only other time he uses this word for “travail” is in his allegorical comment that Judaism is barren and doesn’t travail, and yet the true Zion is in travail, groaning to bring forth many children (<em><a href='B:550 4:19'>Gal 4:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:550 4:27'>Gal 4:27</a></em>). And yet he is perhaps hinting that just as the Jews subconsciously knew that Jesus was Messiah “this is the heir, let us kill him”, so the Jewish system was in fact groaning and travailing towards the bringing forth of faith in Christ. The same idea of travailing in birth pangs is to be found in the descriptions of the situation just before the return of Christ (e.g. <em><a href='B:590 5:3'>1Th 5:3</a></em>). The significance of Paul’s emphasis that this is happening ‘right up until now’ might then be a hint that he expected the return of Christ imminently. However, as previously touched upon in this exposition, it could be that Paul believed we should live as if the return of Christ is imminent; he therefore interpreted prophecy, Scripture and contemporary situations in that manner, just as we should. The groaning of creation and of ourselves also is therefore but the prelude to something far better- the actual birth at the second coming of Christ. My own interpretation of the radical changes in natural phenomena on earth at this time is that it’s all an indication that creation is indeed groaning, now as never before, in a subconscious pleading for the Lord’s return.</p><p>The groaning and travailing could be a reference to natural disasters and the animal violence which there is within this fallen world. Our groanings, our struggling in prayer, is transferred to God by the Lord Jesus groaning also, but with groanings far deeper and more fervently powerful than ours (<em><a href='B:520 8:22-23'>Rom 8:22-23</a></em> cp. 26). See on <em><a href='B:520 8:17'>Rom 8:17</a></em>; <em><a href='B:580 2:1'>Col 2:1</a></em>. Romans 8 teaches that there is in fact just one Spirit; the Spirit of Christ is the Spirit of God, and is "the Spirit" in the believer (<em><a href='B:520 8:9-11'>Rom 8:9-11</a></em>). There is "one Spirit" (<em><a href='B:560 4:4'>Eph 4:4</a></em>). If the will of God is in us, if His will is embedded in our conscience, we will ask what we will, what our spirit desires, and it will be granted. This is because if our Spirit is attune with the Spirit of God and of Christ, our desires, our wish, is transferred automatically to Him. Whatever we ask being in the name of Christ, being&nbsp;<em>in</em>&nbsp;His character and the essence of His spirit, will therefore be done (<em><a href='B:500 15:16'>Joh 15:16</a></em>). It doesn't mean that saying the words "I ask in the name of Christ" gives our request some kind of magical power with God. It must surely mean that if we are in Him, if His words abide in us, then we will surely be heard, for our will is His will. We are guaranteed answers if we ask in His name, if we ask what we will, if the word dwells in us, if we ask according to God’s will... all these are essentially the same thing. If we are truly in Him, if the word really dwells in us, if our will has become merged with God’s will, then we will only request things which are in accordance with His will, and therefore we will receive them. Thus the experience of answered prayer will become part of the atmosphere of spiritual life for the successful believer. The Lord knew that the Father heard Him always (<em><a href='B:500 11:42'>Joh 11:42</a></em>). It is for this reason that the prayers of faithful men rarely make explicit requests; their prayers are an expression of the spirit of their lives and their relationship with God, not a list of requests. It explains why God sees our needs, He sees our situations, as if these are requests for help, and acts accordingly. The request doesn't have to be baldly stated; God sees and knows and responds. This is why Romans 8 appears to confuse the spirit of God, the spirit of Christ in the believer, and Christ himself as "the Lord the Spirit". Yet what Paul is showing is that in fact if we are spiritually minded, if our thinking is in harmony with the Father and Son, prayer is simply a merger of our Spirit with theirs; the idea of prayer as a means of requesting things doesn't figure, because God knows our need and will provide. The whole creation&nbsp;<em>groans</em>; we ourselves&nbsp;<em>groan&nbsp;</em>inwardly; and the Spirit makes intercession with&nbsp;<em>groans</em>&nbsp;that can't be uttered. Clearly enough, our groans are His groans. He expresses them more powerfully and articulately than we can. It has been observed: "As I read Paul's words, an image comes to mind of a mother tuning in to her child's wordless cry. I know mothers who can distinguish a cry for food from a cry for attention, an earache cry from a stomach-ache cry. To me, the sounds are identical, but the mother instinctively perceives the meaning of the child's nonverbal groan. It is the inarticulateness, the very helplessness, of the child that gives her compassion such intensity". In deep sickness or depression it can simply be that we find formal, verbalized prayer impossible. <em><a href='B:230 77:4'>Psa 77:4</a></em> speaks of this: "I am so troubled that I cannot speak" (formally, to God). It's in those moments that comfort can be taken from the fact that it is our spirit which is mediated as it were to God. Tribulation is read as prayer- hence even the Lord's suffering on the cross, "the affliction of the afflicted", was read by the Father as the Lord Jesus 'crying unto' the Father (<em><a href='B:230 22:24'>Psa 22:24</a></em>). This is sure comfort to those so beset by illness and physical pain that they lack the clarity of mind to formally pray- their very affliction is read by the Father as their prayer.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 8:23'>Rom 8:23</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And not only the creation but we ourselves</em>- A fair emphasis by Paul on the fact that our groaning are in some sort of harmony with the groaning of all creation. If we understand ‘all creation’ as “all Israel”, Paul’s emphasis on the commonality of our groaning together would be as if to say ‘Jews and Christians aren’t that far apart really; we are united by our groanings’. And he argued the same at the opening of his argument in Romans 1-3; that Jew and Gentile are united by the desperation of their sinfulness, their common need for redemption.</p><p><em>Who have the firstfruits of the Spirit</em>- I have explained earlier that Paul is teaching that the spirit or personality / mind of Christ is counted to us by imputed righteousness; but more than that, the Spirit of Christ is actually placed within us, although that spirit of Christ which dwells within us is latent, hidden beneath the flesh and failures of which Paul speaks in Romans 7. As we are in Christ, so He is in us, indwelling us by His Spirit. Clearly enough, the resurrected Christ is the firstfruit (<em><a href='B:530 15:20'>1Co 15:20</a></em>; <em><a href='B:530 15:23'>1Co 15:23</a></em>), and we shall only be the firstfruits “afterward... at his coming”. Yet because all that is true of Christ is true of we who are counted in Him, we too are the firstfruits. “The Spirit” could refer to Christ personally, “the Lord the Spirit” (<em><a href='B:540 3:18'>2Co 3:18</a></em> RVmg:).</p><p><em>Groan inwardly</em>- Paul writes this in explanation of his groaning within himself which is outlined in <em><a href='B:520 7:15-24'>Rom 7:15-24</a></em>.</p><p><em>As we wait eagerly for</em>- The Greek rather carries the idea of expecting. For if we are in Christ, His sufferings counted as ours and ours as His, then our ultimate salvation is assured. We are therefore expecting it, rather than waiting to see what shall happen at His return.</p><p><em>Adoption as children and the redemption of our bodies</em>- Continuing the image of adoption which was introduced in <em><a href='B:520 8:15'>Rom 8:15</a></em>. We have already received the spirit of adoption. We are adopted unto God for the sake of our being in Christ, the supreme Son of God (<em><a href='B:560 1:5'>Eph 1:5</a></em>). We are God’s adopted children in that we are in Christ, the ultimate child of God. But as has been lamented in Romans 7, our body, our flesh, is still as it is, unredeemed, and in practice unable to be subject to God’s law. We with Paul and with all creation, groan for redemption from this situation. <em><a href='B:550 4:5'>Gal 4:5</a></em> speaks of the death of Christ as being required “to redeem that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons”. The ideas of redemption, adoption and “sons” are repeated. So although we have attained such adoption as God’s sons in that we are in His Son by status, we long for the physical manifestation of that redemption which we have received- and we groan for it. Note that “the adoption of&nbsp;<em>sons</em>” isn’t sexist language; it is as sons that we are adopted rather than as daughters or androids because we are counted as in God’s Son, Jesus, who happened to be male. We are counted as Him. The status we have received in Him is one of redemption, we are labelled as it were “redeemed”. We in Christ have already received this redemption by grace (<em><a href='B:520 3:24'>Rom 3:24</a></em>). He is “redemption” and we are in Him (<em><a href='B:530 1:30'>1Co 1:30</a></em>). Consistently Paul speaks of ‘redemption’ as being “in Christ” (<em><a href='B:560 1:7'>Eph 1:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:580 1:14'>Col 1:14</a></em>), and we have been baptized into Him and are counted in Him, as Paul has laboured throughout Romans so far. But our bodies still need that redemption, and we await / expect it at the Lord’s return. <em><a href='B:560 1:14'>Eph 1:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:560 4:30'>Eph 4:30</a></em> likewise speak of “the day of redemption” as the second coming of Christ, and yet urge us to believe that we “sealed” by our receipt of the Spirit, as a guarantee, that this day will really come for us. The “spirit” referred to is the same as here in Romans 8 - the indwelling of Jesus personally within all them who are “in Him”, and the counting of His spirit to them by imputed righteousness.</p><p>Just as our minds have received the spirit of adoption, so our bodies will be transformed at the final judgment into a body like that of Jesus (<em><a href='B:570 3:20-21'>Phi 3:20-21</a></em>).</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 8:24'>Rom 8:24</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For in hope were we saved; but hope that is seen is not hope. For who hopes for what he sees?</em>- “In hope were we saved” is better translated as “saved in hope”. God’s grace and the blood of Christ, believed in by faith, are what saves, rather than hope of itself. We have been saved, but in hope- for the fullness of salvation will only be revealed when Christ returns. As commented under <em><a href='B:520 8:23'>Rom 8:23</a></em>, we have been redeemed, but the redemption of the body is our expectation at the second coming. Note that the Greek for “hope” means a confident expectation- the English ‘hope’ tends to carry a somewhat less confident flavour of meaning, the implication being that we ‘hope for the best’ rather than confidently await. But because we are saved in Christ, our hope is certain. Likewise the Greek translated in this section as “wait” better translates as ‘confidently await’. We’re not waiting to see what happens, but rather awaiting with confidence what must surely come for us- the redemption of our body. Anything less than this approach wouldn’t have left Paul pulling out of his groaning within himself of Romans 7 with the confident cry of rejoicing, the scream in the night, of <em><a href='B:520 7:25'>Rom 7:25</a></em> - that he has indeed found the way of escape and deliverance through Christ. Jesus personally is “our hope” (<em><a href='B:610 1:1'>1Ti 1:1</a></em>). And we are in Him. But we don’t physically see Him yet, nor physically have we seen the redemption of our bodies. We therefore wait, or await confidently, the fulfilment of the hope which is now reserved for us (<em><a href='B:580 1:5'>Col 1:5</a></em>).</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 8:25'>Rom 8:25</a></em>&nbsp;<em>But if we hope for what we do not see, then we with patience wait for it</em>- Why does Paul labour his point here- that we don’t have “see” what we know is coming for us, therefore we must patiently wait for it? Maybe to encourage patience in the waiting- perhaps the crux of his argument in these verses is on the word “patience”. But maybe he is back to addressing the old worry which he know lurks in every reader: Why, then, am I still such a sinner right now, today? Given that reality, how then can I so confidently await the future redemption? And Paul’s answer is that yes we have been redeemed, but no we don’t see that redemption physically, no, we don’t yet see it, but we are patiently awaiting it in confidence. Despite all our weakness and failure in the flesh:&nbsp;Our waiting is paralleled with the awaiting of all creation for the manifestation of God’s children the same word is used in <em><a href='B:520 8:19'>Rom 8:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 8:23'>Rom 8:23</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 8:25'>Rom 8:25</a></em>. The New Testament associates this ‘waiting’ with the faithful awaiting of Christ’s return (s:w. <em><a href='B:530 1:7'>1Co 1:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:550 5:5'>Gal 5:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:570 3:20'>Phi 3:20</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 9:28'>Heb 9:28</a></em>). Yet here in Romans we are awaiting the manifestation of ourselves as the sons of God (<em><a href='B:520 8:19'>Rom 8:19</a></em>). Christ is us and we are Him, if we are in Him and He in us. His manifestation or ‘coming’ (s:w. <em><a href='B:530 1:7'>1Co 1:7</a></em>, we wait for the manifestation / coming of Christ) will be the same as the manifestation of the sons of God, all those who are in Him. His manifestation will therefore be ours; His glory shall be manifested in us in that day s:w. <em><a href='B:520 8:18'>Rom 8:18</a></em> just as He personally shall be manifested. And thus we read that in a sense, Christ shall return with all those who are in Him with Him; for the faithful shall be snatched away to meet Him in the air, as clouds (<em><a href='B:590 4:17'>1Th 4:17</a></em>), and then He shall come to earth with clouds, of the faithful believers (<em><a href='B:730 1:7'>Rev 1:7</a></em>). In this sense the second coming of Christ is likened to the new Jerusalem, the spotless bride of Christ, coming down from Heaven to earth (<em><a href='B:730 21:2'>Rev 21:2</a></em>). His manifestation is ours, for all that is true of Him is true of us. Our&nbsp;<em>hupomone</em>&nbsp;‘joyful endurance’, AV “patience” in awaiting the return of Christ is therefore possible because we are awaiting our redemption. We can only joyfully await His coming and&nbsp;<em>hupomone</em>&nbsp;can carry an element of ‘joy’ within the wide flavour of its meaning if we are confident that His coming means our redemption rather than our judgment to condemnation. If our attitude to the return of Christ is that we shall only then find out, only then will our destiny be sorted out- then we are of all men most fearful and uncertain. But clearly enough for those in Christ, His revealing physically to the world shall be our revealing. His coming is going to be ours. “For thee he comes, His might to impart, to the trembling heart and the feeble knee”.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 8:26'>Rom 8:26</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And in like manner</em>- A phrase hard to interpret in this context. The sense may be more of “And even moreover”, “even so”; “And now guess what, even more..." might be the dynamic sense. That apart from us having a wonderful hope which we confidently await, it’s not all jam tomorrow. The spirit, both as the Lord the spirit, i:e. Jesus personally, and also as His spirit which indwells us, is actively at work even now.</p><p><em>The Spirit also</em>- A title for Christ personally. See on <em><a href='B:520 7:14'>Rom 7:14</a></em>.</p><p><em>Helps our infirmity</em>- “Helps” occurs in the LXX of <em><a href='B:20 18:22'>Exo 18:22</a></em> and <em><a href='B:40 11:17'>Num 11:17</a></em>, where Moses is the one helped. Paul is suggesting that each believer can rise up to the pattern of Moses; he was no longer to be seen by Jewish believers as some distant, untouchable, stellar example of devotion. He was a pattern that through the Spirit could be realistically attained; although the point is being cleverly made that he too had weakness that needed Divine help. Paul made it a credo of his own life, and urged other believers to follow his example in this, that he would labour to support s:w. help, <em><a href='B:520 8:26'>Rom 8:26</a></em> the weak (<em><a href='B:510 20:35'>Act 20:35</a></em>). For we are all weak, and helped only by grace. But the Greek word Paul uses for ‘helps’ also carries the meaning of ‘to participate it’. It clearly has this sense in <em><a href='B:610 6:2'>1Ti 6:2</a></em>, “partakers participators in the benefit”. The Spirit participates in our infirmities and thus helps us; just as we should seek to empathize as far as we can in the infirmities of others, both practical and moral. The “infirmities” Paul has in mind would seem to be the infirmity of spirit he laments in <em><a href='B:520 7:15-24'>Rom 7:15-24</a></em>; our moral weakness. The same word is used of how the Lord Jesus in His ministry fulfilled the prophecy of <em><a href='B:290 53:4'>Isa 53:4</a></em> that on the cross He would ‘take our infirmities’ (<em><a href='B:470 8:17'>Mat 8:17</a></em>). These “infirmities” according to <em><a href='B:290 53:4'>Isa 53:4</a></em> were our sins, but sin’s effect is manifested through sickness. The moral dimension to these “infirmities” has already been established by Paul in Romans, for in <em><a href='B:520 5:6'>Rom 5:6</a></em> he uses the word to describe how “when we were yet&nbsp;<em>weak</em>&nbsp;s:w. ‘infirm’, Christ died for the ungodly; and he explains his sense here as being that “when we were yet&nbsp;<em>sinners</em>” (<em><a href='B:520 5:8'>Rom 5:8</a></em>). Jesus as the Lord the Spirit engages with our infirmities, on the plane of the spirit, the deep human mind and psyche. What He did on the cross in engaging with our moral infirmity He did in His life, and He continues to do for us in essence. He does not turn away in disgust at our infirmities, rather through His Spirit within us He engages with them, perhaps deep within our subconscious, beneath our conscious will:&nbsp; The allusion to <em><a href='B:470 8:17'>Mat 8:17</a></em> seems certain- for there we read the same word for “infirmities” and “took” is&nbsp;<em>lambano</em>, a form of which is used by Paul in saying that the Spirit “helps” our infirmities. We are therefore led to understand “the Spirit” as a title of Christ personally. That title is used, however, because of the fact that in this context, His Spirit, His personality, is within us, He personally indwells us within our spirit; as we are in Christ so He is in us. His strength is perfected through our weakness (s:w. “infirmities”; <em><a href='B:540 12:9'>2Co 12:9</a></em>). He knows even now the feeling of our infirmities (<em><a href='B:650 4:15'>Heb 4:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 5:2'>Heb 5:2</a></em>). If the Lord Jesus so engages with our weaknesses, we therefore ought to unhesitatingly “support the weak” s:w:, <em><a href='B:590 5:14'>1Th 5:14</a></em>.</p><p><em>For we do not know how to pray-&nbsp;</em><em><a href='B:470 20:22'>Mat 20:22</a></em> = <em><a href='B:520 8:26'>Rom 8:26</a></em>. This is an example of where appreciating the links with the Gospels opens our understanding of Paul's letters. Paul is implying that we are like the mother of Zebedee's children, in that when we pray, we know not what we ask for in the sense that we don't&nbsp;<em>appreciate</em>&nbsp;what we ask for. I know what to pray for: my redemption, and that of others. Read wrongly, <em><a href='B:520 8:26'>Rom 8:26</a></em> implies we haven't the foggiest what on earth to ask God for. But we&nbsp;<em>do</em>&nbsp;know what to ask for; the point is, we don't&nbsp;<em>appreciate</em>&nbsp;what we are asking for, just as that woman didn’t appreciate what she was praying for when she asked that her two boys would be in the Kingdom.</p><p>A related word for “pray” is used in this same context by Paul in <em><a href='B:520 9:3'>Rom 9:3</a></em>, where he says that he “could wish”, s:w. “pray”, that he himself were condemned by God so that Israel might be saved. His allusion is to Moses’ prayer that he would be excluded from God’s book rather than Israel be excluded from the Kingdom. But Paul learnt the lesson from how God responded to Moses- that He doesn’t accept substitutionary sacrifice. Paul is admitting he too doesn’t know how to pray for Israel as he ought, but he leaves their salvation in the hands of their Saviour, whilst so earnestly desiring it in his own spirit.</p><p><em>As we ought</em>- We don’t seem to have within us to pray as we&nbsp;<em>ought</em>, i:e. as we s:w. ‘must’. It’s not that we just don’t know what to pray about; we don’t pray as we ought to / must, and yet our gracious Mediator makes intercession with unutterable groans. And the older Paul can lament his failures to preach as he “ought", as he&nbsp;<em>must</em>, and therefore he appeals for prayer that he will witness to the Gospel as every believer of it&nbsp;<em>must</em>&nbsp;(<em><a href='B:560 6:20'>Eph 6:20</a></em>; <em><a href='B:580 4:4'>Col 4:4</a></em>).</p><p><em>But the Spirit Himself</em>- A clear reference to Christ, whose spirit indwells us and is in dialogue with&nbsp;<em>our</em>&nbsp;spirit on some unconscious level. Our innermost spiritual desires are thereby transferred to God by our Heavenly mediator. And our innermost desire is to be right with God, to obtain salvation, deliverance from this body of death and life of spiritual failure. Now we can better understand why all we are reading here flows on naturally from his groaning of spirit in Romans 7. The Lord Jesus indwells us, His spirit perceives the spiritual groaning of our spirit, and transfers it as it were to Himself; for if we are in Christ, then He is in us. And His intercession for us is in that sense successful; our salvation was obtained on the cross thanks to His own groaning in spirit there, and this guarantees that He will obtain it for us the idea of ‘intercession’, we have noted, includes that of ‘obtaining’.</p><p><em>Makes intercession for us</em>- A return to the legal metaphors. The Lord Jesus is our interceder, the counsel for the defence, and also an emotional witness, pleading with groanings to the judge in support of our case. The Greek for “intercession” cannot be taken too far, but it is derived from the verb ‘to obtain’. The obtaining of our salvation, the winning of our case, was achieved on the cross, in the groanings of Jesus in Gethsemane and on the stake; but in essence, He groans for us still in intercession, and in doing so, His groaning are in sympathy with our groaning for salvation. The type of groanings of spirit of <em><a href='B:520 7:15-24'>Rom 7:15-24</a></em> become the groanings of our Heavenly intercessor. He is not separate from our frustrations at our failures; He takes them fully on board. The crucial thing is that we have them; that we can read <em><a href='B:520 7:15-24'>Rom 7:15-24</a></em> with empathy and know that ‘That’s me’. Which I believe most readers of these words can indeed say.</p><p><em>With groanings</em>- <em><a href='B:650 5:7'>Heb 5:7</a></em> comments that&nbsp; Christ prayed "with strong crying and tears". These words are certainly to be connected with <em><a href='B:520 8:26'>Rom 8:26</a></em>, which speaks of Christ making intercession for us now&nbsp;with "groanings which cannot be uttered". One might think from <em><a href='B:650 5:7'>Heb 5:7</a></em> that the Lord Jesus made quite a noise whilst hanging on the cross. But <em><a href='B:520 8:26'>Rom 8:26</a></em> says that his groaning is so intense that it cannot be audibly uttered; the physicality of sound would not do justice to the intensity of mental striving. No doubt the Lord Jesus was praying silently, or at best quietly, as he hung there. The point is that the same agonizing depth of prayer which the Lord achieved on the cross for us is what he now goes through as he intercedes for us with the Father. <em><a href='B:650 5:7'>Heb 5:7</a></em> describes Christ on the cross as a priest offering up a guilt offering for our sins of ignorance. He did this, we are told, through "prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears". This must surely be a reference to "Father forgive them". Those were said with a real passion, with strong crying, with tears as He appreciated the extent of our sinfulness and offence of God. There is a connection between these words and those of <em><a href='B:520 8:26-27'>Rom 8:26-27</a></em>, which describes Christ as our High Priest making intercession for us "with groanings". "Groanings" is surely the language of suffering and crucifixion. It is as if our Lord goes through it all again when He prays for our forgiveness, He has the same passion for us now as He did then. Think of how on the cross He had that overwhelming desire for our forgiveness despite His own physical pain. That same level of desire is with Him now. Surely we can respond by confessing our sins, by getting down to realistic self-examination, by rallying our faith to truly appreciate His mediation and the forgiveness that has been achieved, to believe that all our sins, past and future, have been conquered, and to therefore rise up to the challenge of doing all we can to live a life which is appropriate to such great salvation. The suffering and groaning of which Paul speaks in <em><a href='B:520 8:17'>Rom 8:17</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 8:22-26'>Rom 8:22-26</a></em> is in my view a reference to the ‘groaning’ he has just been making about his inability to keep the Mosaic Law see on <em><a href='B:520 7:18'>Rom 7:18</a></em>. Our helplessness to be obedient, our frustration with ourselves, is a groaning against sin which is actually a groaning in harmony with that of the Spirit of the Lord Jesus, who makes intercession for us with the same groanings right now (<em><a href='B:520 8:26'>Rom 8:26</a></em>). Indeed, those groanings are those spoken of in <em><a href='B:650 5:7'>Heb 5:7</a></em> as the groanings of strong crying and tears which the Lord made in His final passion. In this sense, the Spirit, the Lord the Spirit, bears witness with our spirit / mind, that we are the children of God (<em><a href='B:520 8:16'>Rom 8:16</a></em>). This clinches all I am trying to say. Our inability to keep the Law of God leads to a groaning against sin and because of sin, which puts us into a unity with the Lord Jesus as our Heavenly intercessor in the court of Heaven. Because of this, we are declared justified, there are no credible accusers, and the passionate intercessor / advocate turns out to be the judge Himself. Thus through our frustration at our own failure, we are led not only to Christ but to the certainty of an assured salvation. But that wondrous realization of grace which is expressed so finely in Romans 8 would just be impossible were it not for the conviction of sin which there is through our experience of our inability to keep the Law of God. Our failure and groaning because of it becomes in the end the very witness that we are the children of God (<em><a href='B:520 8:16'>Rom 8:16</a></em>). God thereby makes sin His servant, in that the experience of it glorifies Him. How God works through sin is revealed in the way that although God always provided food for Israel in the wilderness, He ‘suffered them to hunger’ for 40 years, in order to try to teach them that man lives not by bread alone, but by God’s word (<em><a href='B:50 8:2-3'>Deu 8:2-3</a></em>). The Jews in the wilderness despised the food God gave them as worthless (<em><a href='B:40 21:3'>Num 21:3</a></em>); they went hungry not literally, but in the sense that they despised the manna of God’s provision. And He allowed them to have that hunger, in order that He might try to teach them about the value of His word. He didn’t simply punish them for their ingratitude. He sought to work through it in order to teach them something. Even the process of rejection results in the victims coming to ‘know the Lord’.</p><p><em>Which cannot be uttered</em>- In the same way as our inner groanings for salvation, for deliverance from how we are, are unspoken, rarely verbalized (although <em><a href='B:520 7:15-24'>Rom 7:15-24</a></em> is a fine exception), so His intercession for us isn’t in human words, it’s a dialogue of the Spirit with God, a meeting of innermost minds. Our sinfulness and desire to be free from it is articulated through the spirit of God’s perfect Son, to the mind or spirit of God Himself. Intercession, therefore, isn’t a question of translating words which we say in prayer into some Heavenly language which is somehow understandable to God, rather like a translator may interpret from one language to another. It is our spirit which is perceived for what it is and articulated before God. This explains why both in Biblical example and in our own experience, our unspoken, unformulated desires of the spirit are read by God as prayers and responded to. I devote a whole chapter in my analysis of “Prayer” to exemplifying this Biblically, but we should also know it from our own experience. Desires which we had, above all we asked or thought, are read by God as prayers and responded to. Paul gives an example of this in saying that Elijah made intercession to God&nbsp;<em>against</em>&nbsp;Israel (<em><a href='B:520 11:2-3'>Rom 11:2-3</a></em>), when clearly it was his thoughts in this context which were being interpreted as prayer. Perhaps the statement that the Lord Jesus intercedes for us without human words, in terms which “cannot be uttered”, is intended as a comfort to those who feel they’re ‘not good at praying’ because they don’t know how to put it all in words. Verbalization skills are hardly a prerequisite for powerful prayer- because some people are more verbal, better with words, than others. Romans 8 speaks of the importance of being spiritually minded, and then goes on to say that our spirit, our deep inner mind, is transferred to God by Christ, called by His title "the Lord the spirit" ,&nbsp;<em>without</em>&nbsp;specifically spoken words. This is surely proof enough that the Lord does not mediate our prayers as an interpreter would, from one language to another, matching lexical items from one language with those from another. "We know not what to pray for", so the Lord Jesus reads our inner spirit, and transfers this on a deep mental level, without words, to the Father. The whole process of mediation takes place within the Lord's mind, with the sort of groanings He had as He begged the Father to raise Lazarus (<em><a href='B:520 8:26'>Rom 8:26</a></em> cp. <em><a href='B:500 11:38'>Joh 11:38</a></em>), and as on the cross He prayed with strong crying and tears for our redemption (<em><a href='B:650 5:5'>Heb 5:5</a></em> cp. <em><a href='B:290 53:12'>Isa 53:12</a></em>). The Lord Jesus is the same yesterday and today. That same passion and intensity of pleading really is there. This is why the state of our mind, our spirit, is so vitally important; because it is this which the Lord Jesus interprets to the Father. The Lord's Spirit struggles in mediation with crying and groaning (<em><a href='B:520 8:26'>Rom 8:26</a></em>), as He did for the raising of Lazarus. There is a further connection with <em><a href='B:650 5:5'>Heb 5:5</a></em>, where we learn that the Lord prayed on the cross with a like intensity. And this Lord is our Lord today. He can be crucified afresh, therefore He has the capacity for struggle and mental effort. The Greek for "groanings" in <em><a href='B:520 8:26'>Rom 8:26</a></em> also occurs in <em><a href='B:480 7:34'>Mar 7:34</a></em>: "Looking up to heaven, he&nbsp;<em>sighed</em>&nbsp;and saith unto him, Ephthatha". The sighing of intense prayer by the Lord was His more spiritually cultured reflection of the number one desire of that man's spirit, as was His groaning and tears for Martha's desire to be granted, and Lazarus to be raised. It has been wisely observed that the language of Christ's mediation can be quite misunderstood. The picture we should have "is not that of an orante,&nbsp;<em>standing</em>&nbsp;ever before the Father with out-stretched arms... pleading our cause in the presence of a reluctant God... but that of a&nbsp;<em>throned</em>&nbsp;Priest-King, asking what He will from a Father who always hears and grants His request”. The description of Christ groaning in spirit to transfer our spirit to God (<em><a href='B:520 8:26'>Rom 8:26</a></em>) is a reflection of the fact that we groan for redemption and the coming of the day of the liberty of God’s children (<em><a href='B:520 8:22-23'>Rom 8:22-23</a></em>), when what is guaranteed by "the firstfruits of the Spirit" which we have, will at last be realized. "All things work together for good" to this end, of forgiveness and salvation. It certainly doesn't mean that every story ends up happily-ever-after in this life. "We know not what we should pray for as we ought" (<em><a href='B:520 8:26'>Rom 8:26</a></em>) seems to be some kind of allusion back to the mother of Zebedee's children asking Christ to get her two sons the best places in the Kingdom (<em><a href='B:470 20:22'>Mat 20:22</a></em>). He basically replied 'You know not what you pray for', in the sense of 'you don't appreciate'. It may be that Paul in Romans 8 is saying that in our desire for the Kingdom, in our groaning for it, we don't appreciate what we ask for as we ought, yet Christ nonetheless makes powerful intercession for us to this end. Because there is only "one Spirit", even the terms "Spirit of God" and "Spirit of Christ" can be paralleled because they are manifestations of that same one Spirit: "Ye are... in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. And if Christ be in you... the Spirit is life... if the Spirit of (God) that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you... the Spirit (Christ, <em><a href='B:610 2:5'>1Ti 2:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:540 3:18'>2Co 3:18</a></em> R:V:) maketh intercession for us" (<em><a href='B:520 8:9-11'>Rom 8:9-11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 8:26'>Rom 8:26</a></em>). See on <em><a href='B:500 7:39'>Joh 7:39</a></em>.</p><p>Ps. 139 reminds us how God knows us so well, psychologically as well as physically. David's response to this is that such knowledge is too wonderful for him and he cannot attain it (Ps. 139:6). The simple point being made is that we cannot know the extent to which God knows us. Nor do we know all God knows about us. He knows us better than we know ourselves. This is a huge comfort in a world where we beg more than anything: "Please understand me". It is common to throw in to our sentences: "Do you get what I mean? You get me?". And this desire is often ultimately not met in our human relationships. The priceless comfort of this Psalm is that this most basic human need is met in God's knowledge of us. Even our eternal future is unknown to us- "It does not yet appear what we shall be" (1 Jn. 3:2) but believing the truth expressed in this Psalm, we can be at peace about that too. We do not in fact know ourselves; God does. This is why the Psalm concludes with a request for God to "search me" and correct me- because it is outside my own ability to do so. In the same spirit, Paul admits that "we know not what to pray for as we ought", and trusts that the Lord Jesus transmits his essential spirit to God and mediates for him accordingly: "The Spirit also helps our infirmity. For we do not know how to pray as we ought, but the Spirit himself makes intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered" (Rom. 8:26). Paul laments that he doesn't understand his own actions: "For why I do what I do, I do not understand. For I do not do what I intend, but instead I do what I hate" (Rom. 7:15). Paul admits that "I know nothing against myself" but he is not thereby justified (1 Cor. 4:4). We see ourselves in a darkened mirror ["through a glass darkly"] but only then, at the Lord's coming, face to face- with ourselves: "For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part, but then shall I know fully, even as also I have been fully known" (1 Cor. 13:12). Only then shall we see ourselves as God sees us. And that is surely the function of the day of judgment- it is for our benefit. All searching to 'find yourself' in this life is vain, because our natures are intrinsically limited so that we cannot, at least not ultimately. The wonder of salvation is that we shall find ourselves, we shall know ourselves as God knows. </p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 8:27'>Rom 8:27</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And he that searches the hearts</em>- A clear reference to God, whom many Bible passages present as the One who searches human hearts. God knows and recognizes what the Lord Jesus is ‘saying’ because He Himself anyway knows the true state of our hearts, searching our motives and the inner thoughts which lay behind the external actions and words which are judged by men. Hence we can be judged harshly by men according to the flesh, but justified by the God who knows our spirit (<em><a href='B:670 4:6'>1Pe 4:6</a></em>). The ‘searching’ of human hearts is also done by the Lord Jesus (s:w. <em><a href='B:730 2:23'>Rev 2:23</a></em>), as well as by God. And their findings are of course congruent. In this sense, the intercession of the Lord Jesus is “according to God” Gk:, or “the will of God” AV, or to fill out the ellipsis another way, ‘according to the searching of God too’.</p><p><em>Knows what is the mind of the Spirit Jesus, because he makes intercession for the saints according to the will of God</em>- God who knows our minds knows the mind of Christ too. Because His mind is our mind, His Spirit is intertwined with, in dialogue with, reflective of, our deepest spirit in our inner, spiritual person. The hearts / minds of the believers are in this sense the mind of Christ; for due to our status in Him, “we have the mind of Christ” (<em><a href='B:530 2:16'>1Co 2:16</a></em>). Thus the mind of Christ as He comes before the Father in intercession for us is at one with God’s mind, as well as at one with our mind. In this we begin to see the profound depths, or something of them, of what it means to be “in Christ”, and how, mechanically, if you wish, reconciliation is achieved between God and man through Christ. The Lord Jesus does not just transfer our words to God as pieces of language. Seeing that we do not know how to properly express ourselves to God, He transfers the thoughts of our spirit to God (<em><a href='B:520 8:26-27'>Rom 8:26-27</a></em>). It is in this context that Paul encourages us to have a spiritual mind in our daily life; because that is relayed to the presence of God by the Lord Jesus, "the Lord the Spirit”. Therefore our whole lives can be a life of prayer, lived out in the presence of the Lord God. However, we are encouraged to pray with our human words as well; indeed, Scripture is full of examples of men doing just this.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 8:28'>Rom 8:28</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And we know that to them that love God, to them that are called according to His purpose- all things work together for good</em>- A reference to the eternal “good” of the Kingdom age, i:e:, ‘so that we might enter the Kingdom’? The future Kingdom is called “good things” in <em><a href='B:290 52:7'>Isa 52:7</a></em> (quoted in <em><a href='B:520 10:15'>Rom 10:15</a></em>) and <em><a href='B:300 8:15'>Jer 8:15</a></em>.<em>&nbsp;All things work together for good</em>&nbsp;doesn’t mean that somehow everything will work out OK for us in this life- for so often they don’t. We are asked to carry the Lord’s cross, to suffer now and be redeemed in glory later at His return. “All things” may refer to “all creation” in <em><a href='B:520 8:22'>Rom 8:22</a></em>, as if to say that everything in the whole of creation works together for our ultimate “good”. But that “good” must be defined within Paul’s usage of the term in Romans; and he doesn’t ever use it in the sense of material good in this life. Consider how he uses the word: “Doing good”, righteous behaviour (<em><a href='B:520 2:7'>Rom 2:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 2:10'>Rom 2:10</a></em>); “a good man”, a righteous man, maybe in reference to the moral purity of the Lord Jesus (<em><a href='B:520 5:7'>Rom 5:7</a></em>); “no good thing dwells within me... the good that I would do, I do not” (<em><a href='B:520 7:18-19'>Rom 7:18-19</a></em>). Remember that Paul is writing Romans 8 in commentary upon and extension to his lament in Romans 7 that he cannot do the good that he would. Now he is taking comfort that in the bigger picture, man is not alone in creation; all things in this world are somehow working together within God’s master plan so that we shall in fact do good, be righteous; both in our lives in Christ today and ultimately for eternity in God’s Kingdom. For those who “love God”, who in their innermost beings delight in God’s law, somehow life works out, albeit in a very complex way, so that we may do that which is good, and have the goodness of Christ’s righteousness eternally counted to us. Despite having lamented that he himself fails to “do good” as he would wish (<em><a href='B:520 7:19'>Rom 7:19</a></em>), Paul urges us all to “do good” in the practical section of Romans. We are to cleave to the good, overcome evil with good, do good, be wise to that which is good and simple concerning evil (<em><a href='B:520 12:2'>Rom 12:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 12:9'>Rom 12:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 12:21'>Rom 12:21</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 13:3'>Rom 13:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 16:19'>Rom 16:19</a></em>). Clearly Paul doesn’t wish us to understand his frustration with his human condition as any excuse for giving up the effort. And the indwelling spirit of Christ seeks to orchestrate all things in the whole of creation to work together so that we may succeed in that doing of good. Snow in Latvia or flash floods in Australia may be brought about by cosmic forces which operate exactly so that we may... help up that old man who has slipped on the ice, take in that family who lost their home. And of course it all works out far more subtly than this, hour by hour. God has begun a “good work s:w. in us” and will bring it to completion in the day of Christ’s return (<em><a href='B:570 1:6'>Phi 1:6</a></em>). And all things in the whole of creation are somehow orchestrated to that end. Thus at baptism we were created in Christ Jesus unto good works (<em><a href='B:560 2:10'>Eph 2:10</a></em>). And He gives us “all sufficiency to abound to every good work” (<em><a href='B:540 9:8'>2Co 9:8</a></em>), we are sanctified and prepared Gk. ‘provided for’ to perform every good work God intends for us (<em><a href='B:620 2:21'>2Ti 2:21</a></em>); fully equipped by God to do every good work in His purpose for us (<em><a href='B:620 3:17'>2Ti 3:17</a></em>). Each time in these verses, the Greek word for “good” is the same as in <em><a href='B:520 8:28'>Rom 8:28</a></em>. All this puts paid once and for all to the idea that we can do no good work because we don’t have the money, the life situation, the resources. We have every sufficiency to do those good works intended for us; but we must “be ready to every good work” (<em><a href='B:630 3:1'>Tit 3:1</a></em>), prepared to grasp the moment, living in the spirit of&nbsp;<em>carpe diem</em>. And thus we shall be ‘established’ in every good work we put our hands to (<em><a href='B:600 2:17'>2Th 2:17</a></em>), none shall ultimately harm us if we follow after performing these good works (<em><a href='B:670 3:13'>1Pe 3:13</a></em>), we shall be made perfect or completed “in every good work in the doing of His will” (<em><a href='B:650 13:21'>Heb 13:21</a></em>). All things work together for good especially when the “good works” are in the context of assisting others towards the Kingdom. Paul’s concise summary of us in this verse as those who “love God” recalls <em><a href='B:690 4:20-21'>1Jn 4:20-21</a></em>; <em><a href='B:690 5:2'>1Jn 5:2</a></em> - we only love God when we love others. The uncommon Greek word translated ‘work together’ is to be found in the great preaching commission in <em><a href='B:480 16:20'>Mar 16:20</a></em>, where it is observed that the Lord Jesus ‘worked together with’ those who sought to preach the Gospel in all the world. This appears to be a comment upon the Lord’s promise that in this work of preaching the Gospel, He would be with His preachers unto the end of the world (<em><a href='B:470 28:20'>Mat 28:20</a></em>). Whilst this can be understood as the end of the age, it seems to me that the Lord is saying that in taking the Gospel to the whole world, He will be with them in it, right to the ends of the world- be it in witnessing to Amazonian Indians or to your unbelieving family in a run down apartment block in Moscow or London or New York. We are workers together with Him in the work of saving others (<em><a href='B:540 6:1'>2Co 6:1</a></em>); yet all things in all creation are also working together to this end. By becoming part of that huge operating system, dynamized as it is by God’s Spirit, we will experience God working with us. Somehow, resources become available; somehow we meet the right people:&nbsp; But all this happens if we are those who “love God”. If our love for Him and the furtherance of His glory in human lives is paramount, then we will naturally find ourselves part of this positive, triumphant system which always is lead in triumph in Christ. Paul uses the same Greek word translated ‘work together’ in the practical section of Romans, where he three time speaks of his brethren as his ‘workers together’, or co-workers (<em><a href='B:520 16:3'>Rom 16:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 16:9'>Rom 16:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 16:21'>Rom 16:21</a></em>). I suggest that Paul has in view here that he was co-working with those brethren as co-workers with God. The co-working he refers to doesn’t simply mean that these brethren worked together with Paul. They were co-workers in the sense of being like Paul, co-workers- with God. All this isn’t only encouragement to those faced with decision making on a large scale- e.g. a mission organization wondering if they have the resources to open a new front of work, or provide significant care to a needy group. More personally, it applies to each of us. We each have good works before ordained that we should walk in them, live a way of life which achieves them (<em><a href='B:560 2:10'>Eph 2:10</a></em>). We need to ask the Lord to reveal what they are, to review our station and place within life’s network and perceive them, remembering that “the unexamined life isn’t worth living”, and seek to go for them. The idea is commonly expressed that for now, I shall work in my career, in my business, and then I shall have the resources to serve God as I vaguely imagine I could in some specific way. Manic capitalism has succeeded in commodifying everything, turning everything into a price tag. But the good works God has in mind for us aren’t usually of that nature. Kindness, acceptance, comfort, forgiveness, interest in others’ needs and sufferings... these are the essence of being as Christ in this world. This is Christianity, Christ-ness, being like Christ. For He achieved all He did “with a minimum of miracle” as Robert Roberts put it, and with hardly any cash behind Him. And so all this working together towards ultimate “good” shall be possible and is possible, for those who in the core of their hearts truly “love God”. This is another allusion, surely, to <em><a href='B:520 7:15-24'>Rom 7:15-24</a></em>, where Paul is saying that in his heart he loves God, but is frustrated by his flesh. I have no doubt that most of you my readers are in this category- of loving God. The Jewish mind would’ve been jogged by the reference to ‘loving God’ to the classic definition of loving God- to love Him with our heart and mind (<em><a href='B:470 22:37'>Mat 22:37</a></em>). And this is exactly what Paul is saying he does in Romans 7, delighting in God’s law in his mind, despite serving sin in his flesh.</p><p>Here Paul starts to introduce the concept of calling, election according to God’s purpose. He doesn’t just start talking of Divine calling and predestination without a context. His whole message in Romans 1-8 is that we are saved by grace; and the fact there is some element of predestination and calling over and above our will and works is solid proof that salvation is by grace- and that we who know we have been called, in that we have heard the call of the Gospel which contains that call, really are those who have been chosen to live eternally. Again and again, the message Paul preaches here is too good news. We struggle to qualify what he is saying, to allow our works and obedience a greater factor in the final algorithm of Divine salvation. But time and again we return to the question- why do I know all this, why am I reading these words, hearing this call, when so many others have lived and died without it? Why is it that I ‘get it’ about God, but my brother or my sister was never interested from babyhood? Why me, why her, why you, and not the guy next door? For all our philosophy, wise cracks and clever words, there is no abidingly satisfactory answer. It is of God’s grace and not of ourselves. Paul specifically connects our calling with God’s grace in <em><a href='B:620 1:9'>2Ti 1:9</a></em>: “Who has saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His purpose and grace”. Note how the ideas of calling, grace and God’s purpose all run together here as they do in <em><a href='B:520 8:28'>Rom 8:28</a></em>. The “purpose of God” is further defined in <em><a href='B:520 9:11'>Rom 9:11</a></em> as not depending upon human works. We were called because we were called, by grace, quite independent of what works we would or would not do. <em><a href='B:560 1:11'>Eph 1:11</a></em> says that we are “predestinated according to the purpose of God”. The whole idea of calling according to a predetermined Divine purpose means we are predestinated. We need not struggle over whether we have been called or not. The call, the invitation to the Kingdom, is in the Gospel. Any who hear it have been called. If I invite you to an event, you are invited, you are called to it. Lest there be any doubt, Paul began Romans by assuring us that we are called just as surely as he was (<em><a href='B:520 1:1'>Rom 1:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 1:6-7'>Rom 1:6-7</a></em>). He opens 1Corinthians the same way- speaking of his calling and then using the same word to describe how his readers are likewise the called (<em><a href='B:530 1:1-2'>1Co 1:1-2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:530 1:24'>1Co 1:24</a></em>). The calling of God is “without repentance” in the sense that we can never be disinvited, become ‘uncalled’ (<em><a href='B:520 11:29'>Rom 11:29</a></em>):&nbsp; And if we are called, then we are predestinated (<em><a href='B:560 1:11'>Eph 1:11</a></em>). Whilst calling doesn’t mean final acceptance with God- for we must make our calling and election sure (<em><a href='B:680 1:10'>2Pe 1:10</a></em>), to not be saved at the last day would require us to have wilfully fought against the predestined desire of God to save us, to have reasoned against destiny. Paul’s great theme in Romans 1-8 is that we are “in Christ” by status through having believed into Him by baptism. This connects with this theme of calling according to the Divine purpose, because God ‘purposed His eternal purpose in Christ Jesus our Lord’ (<em><a href='B:560 3:11'>Eph 3:11</a></em>). If we are in Him, then we are in God’s eternal purpose, we will continue eternally because God’s purpose for us is eternal. We would have to wilfully reject that status if we are to somehow come out of that eternal purpose. Being “in” God’s purpose means that His purpose, His will, His Spirit, is to become ours- hence Paul can use the same word to speak of his “purpose” in life (<em><a href='B:620 3:10'>2Ti 3:10</a></em>).</p><p>“According to His purpose” can be applied to the first clause of the verse, “all things work together for good” within the overall purpose of God to save us. It doesn’t have to modify the idea of our calling. Joseph stands as a pattern for us all. When Paul wrote that all things work together for our good (<em><a href='B:520 8:28'>Rom 8:28</a></em>), he was echoing how in all the grief of Joseph's life, the rejection by his brethren, the cruel twists of fate as they seemed at the time…&nbsp;<em>God meant it for good</em>&nbsp;(<em><a href='B:10 50:20'>Gen 50:20</a></em>). This same wonderful process will come true in our lives- for they too are equally directed by a loving Father. God’s whole purpose, according to Paul, is that we should become like His Son-and to this end all things are directed in God’s plan for us (<em><a href='B:520 8:28-29'>Rom 8:28-29</a></em>). To achieve the "measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ" is the 'perfection' or maturity towards which God works in our lives. As we read of Him day by day, slowly His words and ways will become ours. The men who lived with Jesus in the flesh are our pattern in this; for the wonder of the inspired record means that His realness comes through to us too. Time and again, their spoken and written words are reflective of His words, both consciously and unconsciously.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 8:29'>Rom 8:29</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:520 6:5'>Rom 6:5</a></em>.</p><p><em>For whom He foreknew, He also foreordained</em>- We are called for sure, therefore we were predestinated for sure, and therefore we personally were foreknown. To the Jewish mind, it was the prophets and Messiah who were personally foreknown. And Paul uses this shockingly exalted language about each of us, reasoning back from the basis that we know we have been called. His logical path is irresistible, at least intellectually. But in practice it amounts to an almost too good news. We were predestinated to be saved, to be part of God’s eternal purpose, a plan for us which shall last for ever. It would require a battle of wills against God, a conscious, wilful desire&nbsp;<em>not</em>&nbsp;to be in that purpose any more, to make us no longer a part of that purpose. No wonder we should strive to spread the invitations to that Kingdom far and wide, to call people to the Kingdom. We who have heard and accepted that call are even now part of a plan, a purpose, which shall last eternally- this is the significance of God’s purpose with us being an “eternal purpose” (<em><a href='B:560 3:11'>Eph 3:11</a></em>). This may explain why often we feel that God is indeed working with us, that we are part of some far bigger cosmic plan, but we’re not sure exactly where it’s going to end. All we can do is to play our part in that purpose as enthusiastically as possible, knowing that we are playing a part in some unseen purpose, which shall have eternal consequences. Why was the train cancelled, the airport closed by snow? So that for those who wish to be part of God’s purpose, who “love God”, we had time to make a phone call to brother X or pay a visit to sister Y or stay the night with family Z, so that we might play some part in encouraging them towards God’s Kingdom? We cannot see it clearly, but we sense something of God in these things, even in death itself. The situation gets the more complex, the waters muddied, in that both we and others can at times and in some ways not respond as God intends, or not as far as He intended. And so the eternal purpose is in a sense thwarted, God’s intentions delayed or forced by human failure to be rescheduled, reinterpreted, fulfilled in other ways or at other times. But all the same, we continue to play our part as best we can, as far as we can, loving God with our whole heart, soul and mind, not on a hobbyist, part-time level; and so we shall eternally continue.</p><p><em>To be conformed to the image of His Son</em>- This is parallel to our being fully born into the family of God, of which the Lord Jesus is the firstborn. Whilst the process of being formed after the image of Christ is ongoing in this life, it will come to full term only at our final birth of the Spirit when we enter God’s Kingdom (<em><a href='B:500 3:3-5'>Joh 3:3-5</a></em>). The Greek for “conformed” is used only in one other place, in <em><a href='B:570 3:21'>Phi 3:21</a></em>, where we read that at Christ’s return, our vile body shall be “fashioned like unto” s:w. ‘conformed’ the now glorious body of Christ. The conforming is therefore referring to our final change of nature at Christ’s return, even though the conforming process begins in this life (<em><a href='B:520 12:2'>Rom 12:2</a></em>). The end point, therefore, isn’t so much eternal life, but to be like Christ, the Son of God. Paul has been arguing that we are counted as Christ now, His character, personality and spirit are counted to us. But finally we shall be changed into persons like unto Christ Himself. But the form of Jesus to which we shall be con-formed in that day is the “form” which He had on earth- for <em><a href='B:570 2:6'>Phi 2:6</a></em> speaks of the Lord Jesus as having “the form of God” at the time of His final spiritual climax in the death of the cross. This&nbsp;<em>morphe</em>&nbsp;or “form” refers not to His ‘very nature’, as Trinitarians wilfully misinterpret this passage, but rather to the image of God mentally. Who Jesus was in His time of dying was in fact “God”; not that He ‘was God’ then, but in that His character and spirit finally matured to an exact replica of who God is in essence. And this is who or what we are counted as today- for all in Christ are counted as Him. And this is who we shall be conformed to in the final triumph at the day of His coming. Our calling is to be like Him; not simply to have eternal life in God’s Kingdom. More essentially, the call of the Gospel is a call to be like Him in this life, and to then be finally made like Him. The parables which explain the good news of the Kingdom therefore speak of how life can be lived now, in forgiveness, service, kindness etc. This is the good news of the Kingdom life; the good news isn’t simply an invitation to live eternally in a future Kingdom on earth; rather is it the good news of a form of life that can be lived now and shall eternally be lived to its intended fullness. When Paul writes of our being transformed into “the image of Christ” (<em><a href='B:520 8:29'>Rom 8:29</a></em>; <em><a href='B:530 15:49'>1Co 15:49</a></em>) he seems to have in mind <em><a href='B:330 1:28'>Eze 1:28</a></em> LXX: “The appearance of the image of the glory of the Lord”. “The glory” in Ezekiel is personified-&nbsp; it refers to a person, and I submit that person was a prophetic image of Jesus Christ. But Paul’s big point is that we&nbsp;<em>each&nbsp;</em>with unveiled face have beheld the Lord’s glory (<em><a href='B:540 3:16'>2Co 3:16</a></em> to <em><a href='B:540 4:6'>2Co 4:6</a></em>); just as he did on the Damascus road, and just as Ezekiel did. It follows, therefore, that not only is Paul our example, but our beholding of the Lord’s glory propels us on our personal commission in the Lord’s service, whatever it may be:&nbsp;See on <em><a href='B:510 9:3'>Act 9:3</a></em>. Martial described a crucifixion victim in&nbsp;<em>Liber Spectaculorum</em>: “In all his body was nowhere a body’s shape". We are to be “conformed to the image of God’s son" (<em><a href='B:520 8:29'>Rom 8:29</a></em>)- to share His&nbsp;<em>morphe</em>, which was so marred beyond recognition that men turned away in disgust (<em><a href='B:290 52:14'>Isa 52:14</a></em> cp. <em><a href='B:570 2:7'>Phi 2:7</a></em>). The mind that was in Him then must be in us now (<em><a href='B:570 2:5'>Phi 2:5</a></em>).</p><p><em>That He might be the firstborn among many other children</em>- Because we shall be made like Him morally, we will have the essential family characteristic: moral perfection. We will thereby become God’s children also, as He was and is. We shall become His “brothers” in that we have been counted as Him now, and then shall be made like Him. So the language isn’t thoughtlessly sexist, rather is it reflective of how we shall be made like Him. Through the resurrection, Christ became “the firstborn of all creation” (<em><a href='B:580 1:15'>Col 1:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:580 1:18'>Col 1:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:730 1:5'>Rev 1:5</a></em>); the same Greek phrase for “all creation” is to be found in <em><a href='B:520 8:22'>Rom 8:22</a></em>. The idea may be that ultimately all creation somehow will follow this same path to glory, to ultimate reconciliation with God. And yet <em><a href='B:580 1:23'>Col 1:23</a></em> uses the same phrase in this context to speak of how the Gospel has been preached to “all creation”, in fulfilment of the great commission to take the Gospel to “all creation” (<em><a href='B:480 16:15'>Mar 16:15</a></em> same phrase). “Firstborn among many brothers” here in <em><a href='B:520 8:29'>Rom 8:29</a></em> therefore becomes parallel to being the firstborn of “all creation” in Colossians 1. In the end, “all creation” will be God’s redeemed children. And we will only be there because someone went out into our world and preached the Gospel to the “all creation”. In this lies the eternal significance of calling others to that Kingdom by obeying the great commission.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 8:30'>Rom 8:30</a></em>&nbsp;And<em>&nbsp;whom He foreordained, those He also called, and whom He called, these He also justified, and who He justified, these He also glorified-&nbsp;</em>This is partially a recapitulation of the argument of <em><a href='B:520 8:29'>Rom 8:29</a></em>; a repeating for emphasis of something which is almost too good news to believe. We were called because we were predestinated; and Paul has earlier outlined in his argument that we who are in Christ have been “justified”, declared right, at the judgment seat of God. We haven’t yet been glorified, in that our bodies haven’t yet been changed, the final day of judgment hasn’t yet come. But Paul uses the past tense as if it has already happened. This ‘prophetic perfect’ was a Hebrew style which was quite grammatically acceptable, even if it may seem strange when translated into other languages such as Greek or English. Paul’s point is that if we are in Christ, declared right before God’s judgment right now, then we can be assured of final salvation, the glorification of the body- should Christ return at this moment, or if we should die at this moment. For tomorrow of course we might throw it all away. But we are not to worry about tomorrow in that sense; we can rejoice here and now that we are saved and are as good as ultimately saved and in the Kingdom. We have already been predestinated, already called, already justified- and therefore in prospect, already glorified. Yet again, Paul succeeds in making us gasp for breath, struggling as we do with the too good news of the Gospel. It is the Lord Jesus who has now been “glorified” (s:w. <em><a href='B:500 12:16'>Joh 12:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 3:13'>Act 3:13</a></em>); and seeing that all that is true of Him is now true of us who by status are now “in Him”, it can be also said that we have been in this sense already glorified. Perhaps the practical section of Romans connects to this verse when we read in <em><a href='B:520 15:6'>Rom 15:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 15:9'>Rom 15:9</a></em> that the Gentiles shall glorify God for His mercy; because He has glorified us, we are to glorify Him.</p><p>“Also glorified” is true from God’s standpoint, outside of our kind of time. For that glory has yet to be revealed in us (<em><a href='B:670 5:1'>1Pe 5:1</a></em>).</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 8:31'>Rom 8:31</a></em>&nbsp;<em>What then shall we say to these things?–&nbsp;</em>Paul returns to the rhetorical, legal style which he used earlier in Romans. The phrase could be an allusion to a legal one; as if to say to the accused or to the jury: ‘What then do you say to these things?’. We are invited to be the jury at our own trial. The evidence that we shall be saved is devastating; nothing can be said against it. Or it could be that Paul is in the place of the defence, going on the attack against the prosecutor. What can be argued against all this evidence? And there would have to be silence. The case is set in concrete. The arguments simply cannot be answered. Paul has previously thrown down the challenge after some of his previous depositions of evidence in this very public case of God’s Gracious, Certain Salvation vs. All Human Doubts And Fears. Four times he has challenged: What then shall we say to this (<em><a href='B:520 3:5'>Rom 3:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 4:1'>Rom 4:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 6:1'>Rom 6:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 7:7'>Rom 7:7</a></em>)? And there can only be silence. But Paul’s rhetorical style is almost aggressive; he is the counsel for the defence who is on the offensive rather than the apologetic and defensive. But it seems Paul isn’t satisfied with winning the case. He drives it home now in the final verses of this chapter in a kind of&nbsp;<em>tour de triumph,&nbsp;</em>a victory lap before all of creation. He is exalting, both intellectually and emotionally, in God’s grace and the certainty of our salvation. But he’s not exalting just for the sake of it; he is aware of his own cries of frustration with his own failure which he voiced in Romans 7, and he is aware of how cautious and weak in faith are we his readers, who struggle to believe the goodness of this good news, this Gospel of grace. And so he has to hammer it home. "What shall we then say to these things?"- i:e. 'what form of words, of 'saying', is adequate response to them?' (<em><a href='B:520 8:31'>Rom 8:31</a></em>; Paul uses that phrase seven times in Romans, so beyond words did he find the atonement wrought in Christ). Words aren't symbols sufficient for our experience of God’s grace and love; all commentary is bathos, like trying to explain a symphony in words; we experience a collapse of language. What remains, I suppose, is to live, to exist, in the sober knowledge of this grace, to never lose sight of them in our hearts; and all the rest, the rest of life and living and all the decisions and responses we are supposed to make, will somehow come naturally.</p><p><em>If God is for us, who can be against us?</em>- The songs of the suffering Servant are applied to us in <em><a href='B:520 8:31'>Rom 8:31</a></em>, where Paul exalts that "if God be for us, who is against us?"- alluding to <em><a href='B:290 50:8'>Isa 50:8</a></em> "The Lord God is helping me- who is he that would convict me?". If we are in Christ, we like Him cannot be condemned. In the legal context, if the judge of all is legally “for us”, then there effectively is no accuser, nothing and nobody standing against us. It’s as if Paul has rightly guessed his readers’ response: ‘OK Paul, I have nothing to say against your argument, but all the same you don’t know what a sinner I am, what a line of sins I have waiting there to condemn me’. And Paul’s exultant answer is that if God is “for us”- and he has demonstrated this time and again, that God quite simply wants to save us- then nothing and nobody, not even our own sins, can ultimately stand against us. The idea of God being “for us” is repeated twice elsewhere in Romans. In <em><a href='B:520 5:8'>Rom 5:8</a></em> we read that God commended His love toward us in that Christ, His Son, died “for us”. This is the extent to which God is “for us”. And in <em><a href='B:520 8:34'>Rom 8:34</a></em>, Christ makes intercession “for us” to God the judge; and yet God the judge is also “for us”. All this legal language is only metaphor, and all metaphors break down at some point if pushed too far. If in this case we push it too far, we would end up saying that God is somehow unjust, His sense of legal justice lacks integrity and so is worthless in an ethical, moral sense. However, the broad brush impression is that in the highest, ultimate court analysis of our case, both the judge and the counsel for the defence are passionately “for us” on a personal level. In God’s case, He was “for us” to the extent of giving His Son to die “for us”, for the sake of our sins and failures for which we are in the dock. <em><a href='B:580 2:14'>Col 2:14</a></em> uses the same phrase to describe how the Mosaic Law which was “against us” has been taken out of the way through Christ’s death; and Paul has argued that the strength of sin is in the Law. If that is taken away, then sin will not have power in the lives of those who are “in Christ”, in whom such law and legality is now no more. As an aside, it should be noted that when the Lord told John to “Forbid not; for he that is not against us is for us” (<em><a href='B:490 9:50'>Luk 9:50</a></em> Gk:), He could have been referring to God; as if to say that we don’t need to as it were defend Him against possible impostors, because&nbsp;God Himself is the One who is not against us but for us. In this case, here in <em><a href='B:520 8:31'>Rom 8:31</a></em> we would have yet another of Paul’s allusions to the Gospels; his point would be that if God is for us and not against us, then nothing at all nor anybody, not even ourselves and our sins, can be against us.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 8:32'>Rom 8:32</a></em>&nbsp;<em>He that spared not His own son</em>- Perhaps alluding to how God commended Abraham for not having spared his son (<em><a href='B:10 22:16'>Gen 22:16</a></em>). As noted on <em><a href='B:520 8:31'>Rom 8:31</a></em>, God our judge is “for us” in that He gave His own Son to die “for us”, for our sins. The idea of God not sparing people is usually used in the sense of ‘not sparing them from condemnation’, and it is used like this twice elsewhere in Romans (<em><a href='B:520 11:21'>Rom 11:21</a></em> twice; <em><a href='B:540 13:2'>2Co 13:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:680 2:4-5'>2Pe 2:4-5</a></em>). The Lord Jesus bore our sins in that He identified with them; and the Old Testament idea of sin bearing meant to bear condemnation for sin. As the representative of we who are sinners, He in some sense died the death of a condemned man; His final cry “Why have You forsaken me?” (<em><a href='B:470 27:46'>Mat 27:46</a></em>) was surely rooted in the Old Testament theme that God will forsake sinners but never forsake the righteous. He felt&nbsp;<em>as</em>&nbsp;a sinner, although He was not one. The language of God not sparing His own Son could be read as meaning that God treated Him as condemned, in the sense that the Lord Jesus was to such an extent our representative. If this is the correct line of interpretation, then Paul would again be tackling our objection that we are such awful sinners that perhaps his fantastic news of grace still doesn’t apply to us personally. And he would be answering it by saying that because we are in Christ and Christ in us, Christ died as our representative, deeply identifying with us as characters and persons and thereby with the sinfulness and failure which is such a significant part of us. And therefore as our representative He died and rose again, so that we might be able to believe ‘into Him’ and thereby share in His resurrection and glorification.</p><p>God ‘spared not’ His own son is alluding to the LXX of <em><a href='B:10 22:16'>Gen 22:16</a></em>, where Abraham spares not his son. The Greek phrase is elsewhere used about God not sparing people when He assigns them to condemnation (<em><a href='B:520 11:21'>Rom 11:21</a></em>; <em><a href='B:540 13:2'>2Co 13:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:680 2:4-5'>2Pe 2:4-5</a></em>). The Lord Jesus knows how not only sinners feel but how the rejected will feel- for He ‘bore condemnation’ in this sense. We should be condemned. But He as our representative was condemned, although not personally guilty. He so empathized with us through the experience of the cross that He came to&nbsp;<em>feel</em>&nbsp;like a sinner, although He was not one. And thus He has freed us from condemnation. When Paul asks in <em><a href='B:520 8:33-34'>Rom 8:33-34</a></em> ‘Who can accuse us? Where are those people? Who can condemn us, if God justifies us?’, he is alluding to the woman taken in adultery. For the Lord asked the very same rhetorical questions on that occasion. Paul’s point is that we each one are that woman. We are under accusations which we can’t refute. The Lord never denied her guilt; but He took it away. The Lord comforted her that no&nbsp;<em>man</em>&nbsp;has condemned her nor can condemn her, and He who alone could do so, instead pronounces her free from condemnation.</p><p><em>But delivered Him up for us all</em>- The Greek is three times used in Isaiah 53 LXX about the handing over to Jesus to His death. The moment of the Lord being delivered over by Pilate is so emphasized. There are few details in the record which are recorded verbatim by all the writers (<em><a href='B:470 27:26'>Mat 27:26</a></em>; <em><a href='B:480 15:15'>Mar 15:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:490 23:25'>Luk 23:25</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 19:16'>Joh 19:16</a></em>). The Lord had prophesied this moment of handing over, as if this was something which He dreaded (<em><a href='B:480 9:31'>Mar 9:31</a></em>; <em><a href='B:480 10:33'>Mar 10:33</a></em>); that point when He was outside the legal process, and must now face His destruction. The Angels reminded the disciples: "Remember&nbsp;<em>how</em>&nbsp;he spake unto you when he was yet in Galilee, saying, The Son of man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men" (<em><a href='B:490 24:6-7'>Luk 24:6-7</a></em>). The emphasis is on "<em>How</em>", with what passion and emphasis. <em><a href='B:520 4:25'>Rom 4:25</a></em> makes this moment of handing over equivalent to His actual death: " Who was<em>&nbsp;delivered</em>&nbsp;(s:w:) for our offences, and raised again for our justification". So much stress is put on this moment of being delivered over to crucifixion. The Gospel records stress that Pilate delivered Him up; but in fact God did (<em><a href='B:520 8:32'>Rom 8:32</a></em>); indeed, the Lord delivered Himself up (<em><a href='B:550 2:20'>Gal 2:20</a></em>; <em><a href='B:560 5:2'>Eph 5:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:560 5:25'>Eph 5:25</a></em>). Always the same word is used. These passages also stress that He delivered Himself up, and was delivered up,&nbsp;<em>for us</em>. It was&nbsp;<em>our salvation</em>&nbsp;which motivated Him at the moment of being delivered up. Perhaps it was at that moment that He had the greatest temptation to walk through the midst of them and back to Galilee. As the crowd surged forward and cheered, knowing they'd won the battle of wills with Pilate..."take ye him and crucify him" ringing in His mind... this was it. This was the end. How He must have been tempted to pray again His prayer: "Let this cup pass from me...". Jerusalem was a small town by modern standards, with no more than 10,000 inhabitants. There must have been faces in that crowd which, through swollen eyes, He recognized; some whose children had benefited from His miracles, whose ears had heard His discourses with wonderment. The emphasis on this moment of delivering up is so great that there must have been an especial sacrifice on the Lord's part. But He "gave himself up" to&nbsp;<em>God</em>&nbsp;not men (<em><a href='B:670 2:23'>1Pe 2:23</a></em>); He knew He was giving Himself as an offering to&nbsp;<em>God</em>&nbsp;as the crowd came forward and the soldiers once again led Him. The almost terrifying thing is that&nbsp;<em>we,</em>&nbsp;for the sake of our identity with Christ, are also "delivered up to death" (<em><a href='B:540 4:11'>2Co 4:11</a></em>). We are asked to share, in principle, the height of devotion that He reached in that moment.</p><p><em>How shall He not also with Him freely give us all things</em>- If so much was given to us by the death of Christ, if God gave His Son for us, then how much ‘easier’ is it for Him to give us absolutely anything. For nothing compares to the gift of God’s Son to die; this is the ultimate gift from God to man. To give us eternity and forgiveness for our sins is in far less than the gift of the blood of His Son. And further, if God gave us His Son in order to save us, in order to “give us all things”- is it really feasible that having given us His Son&nbsp;<em>so that</em>&nbsp;He might “give us all things”, He would then&nbsp;<em>not</em>&nbsp;“give us all things”? Again, Paul’s logic is intrusive and powerful. We may shut the book, stop reading or listening, but the force of the argument silently echoes within our narrow and fearful minds. God did “not spare” His Son- by contrast, He “freely gave” Him Gk. ‘to grace with’, His Son was indeed “all things” to God, His only and beloved Son. Seeing God gave us Him, it’s obvious that He is going to give us the things which that gift was given in order to make possible. “Shall He not with Him also” could be a reference to the resurrection- if God gave us so much in the&nbsp;<em>death&nbsp;</em>of His Son, think how much more was achieved and given to us through His resurrection. “With him” could be read another way, however- as referring to how Christ will meet the believers “in the air”, and they shall come “with him” to judgment (<em><a href='B:590 4:14'>1Th 4:14</a></em>), with Him their judge clearly “for them”. However we must remember Paul is driving here at our fears that our sins are too great for the good news, however good it is, to be true for us personally. The Greek translated “freely give” is a form of the word&nbsp;<em>charis</em>, grace, and is often translated “forgive”. It’s the same word used in <em><a href='B:490 7:42'>Luk 7:42</a></em>, where God ‘frankly forgives’ all the sins / debts of His servants. Perhaps Paul has this in mind. If God gave up His Son to die for us, in order to achieve forgiveness for our sins, then rather obviously, surely, He will “frankly forgive” or “freely give” us forgiveness for all things, all and any sin. We shouldn’t think that this is somehow harder for God than to give us His Son to die for our sins. He has already done that. And so giving us the forgiveness which Christ died to attain isn’t therefore so difficult. If we are in Christ, then God has “quickened us together with Him, having forgiven us s:w. “freely give” in <em><a href='B:520 8:32'>Rom 8:32</a></em> all trespasses”. The “all things” of <em><a href='B:520 8:32'>Rom 8:32</a></em> can thus be understood as “all our trespasses”. And so Paul goes on to triumph in <em><a href='B:520 8:37'>Rom 8:37</a></em> that we are conquerors in “all things”, over all our sins, because we are in Him that loved us.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 8:33'>Rom 8:33</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Who shall lay anything to the charge</em>– Again, legal language. Where is our accuser? Can anyone accuse us of anything? No, insofar as we are “in Christ”. The allusion is to the Gospels, to the way the Lord Jesus could calmly challenge: “Which of you can convict me of sin?” (<em><a href='B:500 8:46'>Joh 8:46</a></em>). If He could not be seriously accused of sin, neither can we. The records of the Lord’s trials are perhaps also in view here- for the accusers failed to produce any case which held together (<em><a href='B:480 14:59'>Mar 14:59</a></em>). All this takes on striking relevance to us, as we stand in the dock before the righteous judgment of God- and are declared right, without any credible accusers. This of course is only possible because we are “in Christ”. The only other time the Greek for ‘lay to the charge’ occurs is in the records of Paul’s own trials, where again no credible accusation was found against him (<em><a href='B:510 19:38'>Act 19:38</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 19:40'>Act 19:40</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 23:28-29'>Act 23:28-29</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 26:2'>Act 26:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 26:7'>Act 26:7</a></em>). As so often, Paul is reasoning from his own personal experience. He knew what it felt like to stand in court and see your accusers’ case just crumble before your eyes. He makes the point in his own defence that there is no proof of anything of which he is accused, and that significantly the witnesses against him aren’t even present in the courtroom (<em><a href='B:510 24:13'>Act 24:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 24:19'>Act 24:19</a></em>)- all very much the scene of <em><a href='B:520 8:33'>Rom 8:33</a></em>. And he says this is true for each one who is in Christ. God is the prosecutor- yet He is the one who shall search for Israel's sin, and admit that it cannot be found (<em><a href='B:300 50:20'>Jer 50:20</a></em>). God is both judge, advocate for the defence, and prosecutor- and this is God is&nbsp;<em>for us</em>, the guilty <em><a href='B:520 8:33-34'>Rom 8:33-34</a></em> develops the figure at length. The person bringing the complaint of sin against us is God alone- for there is no personal devil to do so. And the judge who can alone condemn us is the Lord Jesus alone. And yet we find the one ‘brings the charge’ instead being the very one who justifies us, or as the Greek means, renders us guiltless. The one who brings the charge becomes this strange judge who is so eager to declare us guiltless. And the judge who can alone condemn, or render guilty, is the very one who makes intercession to the judge for us- and moreover, the One who died for us, so passionate is His love. The logic is breathtaking, literally so. The figures are taken from an earthly courtroom, but the roles are mixed. Truly “if God be for us another courtroom analogy, who can be against us” (<em><a href='B:520 8:31'>Rom 8:31</a></em>). This advocate / intercessor is matchless. With Him on our side, ‘for us’, we cannot possibly be condemned. Whatever is ‘against us’- our sins- cannot now be against us, in the face of this mighty advocate. Let’s face it, the thing we fear more than death is our sin which is ‘against us’. But the assurance is clear, for those who will believe it. With an attorney for the defence such as we have, who is also our passionate judge so desperate to justify us- even they cannot stand ‘against us’. <em><a href='B:520 8:33'>Rom 8:33</a></em> states that there is now&nbsp;<em>nobody</em>&nbsp;who can accuse us, because none less than God Himself, the judge of all, is our justifier in Christ And so whatever is said about us, don’t let this register with us as if it is God accusing us. Not for us the addiction of internet chat groups, wanting to know what is said about us or feeling defensive under accusation. For all our sins, truly or falsely accused of,&nbsp;<em>God</em>&nbsp;is our justifier, and not ourselves. And thus our consciences can still blossom when under man’s false accusation, genuinely aware of our failures for what they are, not being made to feel more guilty than we should, or to take false guilt. This is all a wonderful and awesome outworking of God’s plan of salvation by grace. If&nbsp;<em>God</em>&nbsp;is our justifier, where is he that condemns us, or lays any guilt to our charge (<em><a href='B:520 8:33-34'>Rom 8:33-34</a></em>)? And yet in family life, in ecclesial relationships... we are so quick to feel and hurt from the possible insinuations of others against us. We seek to justify ourselves, to correct gossip and misrepresentation, to “take up" an issue to clear our name. We all tend to be far too sensitive about what others may be implying about us. All this reflects a sad lack of appreciation of the wonder of the fact that we are justified&nbsp;<em>by God,</em>&nbsp;and in His eyes- which is surely the ultimately important perspective- we are without fault before the throne of grace, covered in the imputed and peerless righteousness of the Lord. Paul, misrepresented and slandered more than most brethren, came to conclude: “But with me it is a very small thing that I should be judged of you, or of man's judgment: yea, I judge not mine own self. For I know nothing by myself; yet am I not hereby justified: but he that judgeth me right now is the Lord" (<em><a href='B:530 4:3-4'>1Co 4:3-4</a></em>). The judge is the justifier, according to this argument. Paul is not justified by himself or by other men, because they are not his judge. The fact that God alone is judge through Christ another first principle means that nobody can ultimately justify us or condemn us. The false claims of others can do nothing to ultimately damage us, and our own efforts at self-justification are in effect a denial of the fact that the Lord is the judge, not us, and therefore He alone can and will justify. When a man is under accusation, his conscience usually dies. He is so bent on self-defence and seeking his own innocence and liberation from accusation. And we see this in so many around us. But for us, we have been delivered from accusation, judged innocent, granted the all powerful and all authoritative heavenly advocate. <em><a href='B:520 8:33'>Rom 8:33</a></em> states that there is now&nbsp;<em>nobody</em>&nbsp;who can accuse us, because none less than God Himself, the judge of all, is our justifier in Christ And so whatever is said about us, don’t let this register with us as if it is God accusing us. Not for us the addiction of internet chat groups, wanting to know what is said about us or feeling defensive under accusation. For all our sins, truly or falsely accused of, God is our justifier, and not ourselves. And thus our consciences can still blossom when under man’s false accusation, genuinely aware of our failures for what they are, not being made to feel more guilty than we should, or to take false guilt. This is all a wonderful and awesome outworking of God’s plan of salvation by grace.</p><p><em>Of God’s chosen ones? It is God that justifies</em>- The reason why there are no accusers against us, not even our own sins, is because we are “God’s elect”. The supreme chosen one of God was of course the Lord Jesus, “mine elect, in whom my soul delights” (<em><a href='B:290 42:1'>Isa 42:1</a></em>). And yet later on in the servant songs of Isaiah, “mine elect” clearly refers to the people of Israel (<em><a href='B:290 45:4'>Isa 45:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:290 65:9'>Isa 65:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:290 65:22'>Isa 65:22</a></em>). The true Israel of God are therefore those counted as somehow “in” the elect one, the singular servant of God, Messiah Jesus. Those baptized into Him are therefore His elect. And how do we know we are “God’s elect”? If we are baptized into Christ, “mine elect”, then for sure we are. And further, we have heard the call of the Gospel, we have been called- so, we are God’s elect, His chosen ones. Of course the objection can be raised that the whole idea of calling or election may appear unfair. Indeed, the Greek word for “elect” can carry the idea of ‘the favoured / favourite one’:&nbsp; There is no ultimate injustice here. The chosen One is the Lord Jesus, beloved for the sake of His righteousness, His spirit of life. Those who respond to the call to be “in Him” are counted likewise. And all this is the way, the method used, in order for God to be the one who counts us as right in the ultimate judgment- for “It is God that justifies”.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 8:34'>Rom 8:34</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Who is he that condemns?</em>- There are many links between Romans and John's Gospel; when Paul asks where is anyone to condemn us (<em><a href='B:520 8:34'>Rom 8:34</a></em>), we are surely intended to make the connection&nbsp; to <em><a href='B:500 8:10'>Joh 8:10</a></em>, where the Lord asks the condemned woman the very same question. It's as if she, there, alone with the Lord, face down, is the dead ringer of every one of us. The legal allusion is definitely to the judge, the one who will pass sentence. The question is “Who is?” rather than “Where is?”. It’s not that God, the judge of all, abdicates His judgment throne and ceases to tell right from wrong. There is an integrity in His judgment. The answer of course is that it is&nbsp;<em>God</em>&nbsp;who is the One who passes sentence. The rest of the verse goes on to speak of the Lord Jesus as our intercessor at His right hand. The point is, that God the righteous judge is going to take notice of the pleadings of His Son, whom He gave to die for our forgiveness and redemption. The idea of condemning must be seen in the context of <em><a href='B:520 8:3'>Rom 8:3</a></em>, where we have just read that it is sin which is condemned by God, and He has already condemned it, in the crucified flesh of the Lord Jesus. “Sin” is condemned; we are not condemned. The point clearly is that it is our status “in Christ” and our disassociation from “sin”, as strongly as Paul disassociated himself from “sin” in <em><a href='B:520 7:15-23'>Rom 7:15-23</a></em>, which is the means by which we are saved, and not only saved but declared right.</p><p><em><br/>It is Christ Jesus that died, yes rather, that was raised from the dead</em>- This is said in the context of the comment that it is God who judges. It’s not that the death and resurrection of a person of itself can change the mind of God or lead Him to not condemn us, in some mystical way. We are saved by the Lord’s death and resurrection in that we can identify with it by baptism into His death and resurrection, and be counted as Christ, the Son of God. It is this which affects how God judges us. There seems to be a link made between the Lord’s death and the judgment in <em><a href='B:520 8:34'>Rom 8:34</a></em>: “Who is he that judgeth / condemneth? It is Christ that died…", as if&nbsp;<em>He</em>&nbsp;and His death are the ultimate judgment. The Old Testament idea of judgment was that in it, the Lord speaks, roars and cries, and there is an earthquake and eclipse of the sun (<em><a href='B:360 3:16'>Joe 3:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:370 1:2'>Amo 1:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:300 25:30'>Jer 25:30</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 46:7'>Psa 46:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:730 10:3'>Rev 10:3</a></em>). Yet all these things are associated with the Lord’s death.</p><p><em>Who is moreover at the right hand of God</em>- Note the double use of the idea of “moreover”. Paul is building up his logic towards the final crescendo- that we are in fact saved from condemnation in Christ. This is classic Paul. The death of God’s Son for us would be enough to persuade God the Judge of all. But further, He rose again; and we who are in Him are counted likewise to have died and risen again, as Paul has laboured in Romans 6. So, for sure we are saved. But yet further, God’s risen Son is now at His right hand, pleading for us I suggest that the sequence here of “Died, rose again, alive at God’s right hand interceding for us” is somehow repeated in <em><a href='B:520 14:9'>Rom 14:9</a></em>: “Christ both died and rose and revived”. In this case the “revived” would be a reference to the fact that He not only resurrected but is alive and active for us in mediation. In this sense, perhaps, “we are saved by His life” (<em><a href='B:520 5:10'>Rom 5:10</a></em>). Being at the right hand was the position of favour, of honour. The point in this context is that if God so deeply respects His Son- and the theme of the Father’s genuine respect of His Son is a beautiful theme in Scripture- then surely He will be very open to the Son’s work for us. The suggestion has been made that the Greek for “right hand” is from the root word “to receive”, and in this verse the idea that Christ stands to receive is balanced with the comment that from that position He makes intercession or request for us His people. He is in the supreme place to receive- and He asks from there for us to be counted as in Him.</p><p><em>Who also makes intercession for us-</em>&nbsp;See on <em><a href='B:520 8:27'>Rom 8:27</a></em>. We should not think that whenever we sin, we have an intercessor in Heaven who can gain forgiveness for us and set us back right with God. The whole argument in Romans is that we are “in Christ” by status and are counted as Him; all that is true of Him becomes true for us. It is not that we are in Christ one moment and then out of Him the next, to be brought back into our “in Christ” status by His intercession. For if this were the case, the implication would be that we were perfect when we were ‘being good’; and if one happened to die at a point of weakness, then we would be eternally damned. God’s way is more profound. We are counted permanently as “in Christ” by status, and in this sense we have already been redeemed, and are simply awaiting the physical articulation of that redemption at the Lord’s return. The imagery of the Lord Jesus as a priest offering Heavenly sacrifices is metaphor, and as such is limited. The position between Him today, His work for us, and the work of the Mosaic priests is not completely analogous. We do not need a Levitical priesthood because the Lord Jesus has replaced that, but this is not to say that He is exactly for us what the Levitical priests were for sinful Israel. For what, then, does the Lord Jesus make intercession? I suggested under <em><a href='B:520 8:27'>Rom 8:27</a></em> that the intercession involves a transference of our mind, our spirit, to that of the Lord Jesus as He sits before God. In this sense the intercession of the Lord Jesus for us personally has an eternal quality to it (<em><a href='B:650 7:25'>Heb 7:25</a></em>) in that our spirit, the essence of who we are, continues in the mind of the Lord Jesus even after we die; just as the memory or spirit of those we love lives on within us after their falling asleep. We are eternally positioned before God, thanks to the intercession of the Lord Jesus. However, it cannot be denied that the Greek for “intercession” does indeed carry the idea of obtaining something. It is used here in the very context of stating that the intercession is made at the “right hand” of God, the place of receiving (see commentary above). Paul uses a related word to that translated “intercession” in saying at another judgment seat that he has “obtained help from God” (<em><a href='B:510 26:22'>Act 26:22</a></em>). Perhaps he said that fully aware that he in fact had a Heavenly intercessor, a true counsel for the defence. The same word for “obtain” which is part of that translated “intercessor” occurs in the context of our obtaining salvation and resurrection to life (<em><a href='B:620 2:10'>2Ti 2:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 11:35'>Heb 11:35</a></em>). It is this which has been interceded for and obtained for us by the Lord Jesus, seated as He is at the right hand, the place of receiving, of the Judge of all. In this sense His intercession has that eternal quality to it which we earlier observed (<em><a href='B:650 7:25'>Heb 7:25</a></em>). And yet even this idea, that the intercession is for our salvation, still seems to be a too simplistic summary of what Paul really has in mind here. The Lord’s intercession for Stephen in his time of dying was surely not simply for Stephen’s salvation. Rather it seems to involve a representation of our spirit, our deepest essence of thought, feeling, personality and life situation, before the Father; intercession for our salvation; and also for other things which are on the Lord’s agenda for us, and which we in this life may always be ignorant of.</p><p>The pregnant phrase&nbsp;<em>huper hemon</em>&nbsp;may mean simply “for us”, but&nbsp;<em>huper</em>&nbsp;could suggest the idea of over and above, beyond us, more than us. In this case, there would be connection with the thought recently expressed by Paul that although we know not how to pray for as we ought, the Lord Jesus as “the Lord the Spirit” makes intercession for us, beyond what we can verbalize. And of course the idea would freely connect with <em><a href='B:560 3:20'>Eph 3:20</a></em>, where Paul exalts that the Lord Jesus can do “exceeding Gk:&nbsp;<em>huper</em>&nbsp;abundantly above Gk:&nbsp;<em>huper</em>&nbsp;again- the sense of ‘beyond’ is very strong here in the Greek all we ask or think, through the power that works in us”:&nbsp; The wonder of it all will literally take us eternity to appreciate. Our innermost desire is for salvation, to serve God, to be as the Lord Jesus, to achieve His glory, both in our own characters and in all of creation. This, yet again, is the significance of <em><a href='B:520 7:15-23'>Rom 7:15-23</a></em>, that despite our failings and weakness, these are indeed our core desires. And it is this spirit of ours which is transferred to the Lord Jesus and understood by the Father and Judge of all. And in response to those desires, even now, there is a power working within us to do and be for us, to work in and for us, things beyond our wildest dreams and spiritual fantasies.</p><p><em><a href='B:520 8:34-35'>Rom 8:34-35</a></em> suggest that the love of Christ, from which we cannot be separated, is manifested to us through His intercessions for us. He doesn't offer our prayers to God all the time; He is our intercessor in the sense that He is always there as our representative, and on this basis we have acceptability with God, as we are in Him. This is proof enough that intercession is not equal to merely translating our prayers into a language God understands. We offer our prayers ourselves to God, as men have ever done. We are, in this sense, our own priesthood. We offer ourselves to God (<em><a href='B:520 12:1'>Rom 12:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:670 2:5'>1Pe 2:5</a></em>). He Himself made only one offering of Himself; He does not offer Himself again. If He were on earth, He would not be a priest. It is the fact we are in Him that makes our offerings acceptable. Many passages concerning mediation refer to the Lord's mediation of the new covenant through the atonement God achieved through Him. None of them associate His mediation with the offering of our prayers to God. Indeed, several passages suggest that the actual fact of the exalted Lord now being in heavenly places, and we being in Him, is in fact the intercession necessary to bring about our redemption- rather than His translating, as it were, of our actual words (<em><a href='B:520 7:25'>Rom 7:25</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 8:34'>Rom 8:34</a></em>; <em><a href='B:690 2:1'>1Jn 2:1</a></em>). The references to intercession likewise never suggest that Christ intercedes in the sense of offering our prayers to God. "Intercession" can be read as another way of describing prayer; this is how the term is invariably used (<em><a href='B:300 7:16'>Jer 7:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:300 27:18'>Jer 27:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 11:2'>Rom 11:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:610 2:1'>1Ti 2:1</a></em>). Thus when Jeremiah is told not to intercede for Israel, this meant he was not to pray for them; it does not imply that he was acting as a priest to offer Israel's prayers to God. Nowhere in the Bible is the idea floated that a man can offer another man's prayers to God and thereby make them acceptable. The Greek for "intercession" essentially means to meet a person; prayer / intercession is a meeting with God. There is evidently nothing morally impossible about a man having direct contact with God in prayer without any priest or 'mediator'; the Old Testament abounds with such examples. The fact we are called upon to make intercession for others is surely conclusive proof that "intercession" means prayer, not relaying the words of another to God (<em><a href='B:610 2:1'>1Ti 2:1</a></em>). This meaning of intercession needs to be borne in mind when we consider its occurrences in Romans 8. There we are taught that we know not what to pray for as we ought; the Lord Jesus makes intercession for us- i:e. He prays for us- not with words, i:e. not transferring our human words into God’s language, not shuttling to and from between us and God as it were, but with His own groanings of the spirit. We don't know how to pray, so Christ prays (intercedes, in the language of Romans 8) for us.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 8:35'>Rom 8:35</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Who shall separate us from the love of Christ?</em>- The “who?” may be a reference to God, because the “who?” of <em><a href='B:520 8:33-34'>Rom 8:33-34</a></em> was God. But the point there as here was that seeing God is the only One who can do such things, then we can rest assured that they will not happen. Because God, for the sake of His Son, will not do these things. We are “in Christ” by status, and what happened at baptism is not breakable by anything human. We cannot be separated from Him by all the calamities listed in this verse, an <em><a href='B:520 8:36'>Rom 8:36</a></em> goes on to remind us that this cannot happen because we are counted as the slaughtered Lamb, the Lord Jesus. The Greek for “separate” is usually used about divorce (<em><a href='B:530 7:10-11'>1Co 7:10-11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:530 7:15'>1Co 7:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 19:6'>Mat 19:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:480 10:9'>Mar 10:9</a></em>). Only if we chose to as it were divorce from Christ can we be separated from Him. Only we can make that choice- no human situation in our lives is to be interpreted as meaning that Christ has withdrawn His love from us. Reading the list of awful tribulations which follows, we are to understand that the love of Christ does not, therefore, guarantee that we will not suffer in this life. Indeed, as <em><a href='B:520 8:36'>Rom 8:36</a></em> will go on to show, we as “in Christ” must be prepared to be slain with Him all the day long, so as to live with Him. “The love of Christ” frequently refers to His death for us. The fact He died for us should be enough to persuade us that having loved us so much, no human tribulation could possibly be interpreted to mean that He in fact doesn’t love us. And yet people stumble from their faith in Christ because of tribulation, as the parable of the sower makes clear. Why this happens is partly because they have failed to be focused daily upon the cross- that He there, then, did that&nbsp;<em>for me</em>&nbsp;today. This, then, is our challenge- to view all of life’s tragedies, pain and unfairness through the lens of the simple fact that the Son of God loved me, and gave Himself for me, and I as a man or woman in Him shall therefore live eternally.</p><p><em><br/>Shall tribulation-&nbsp;</em>See on <em><a href='B:520 5:3'>Rom 5:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 8:18'>Rom 8:18</a></em>. The word used in the parable of the sower and also about the tribulations of the last days before Christ returns (<em><a href='B:470 13:21'>Mat 13:21</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 24:9'>Mat 24:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 24:21'>Mat 24:21</a></em>). Only through such tribulations shall we enter the Kingdom (<em><a href='B:510 14:22'>Act 14:22</a></em>). Significantly, Paul uses the word earlier in Romans, in speaking of the tribulation which shall come upon the rejected at the last day (<em><a href='B:520 2:9'>Rom 2:9</a></em>). It’s either tribulation then, or now. In this sense we can glory in tribulation, knowing it is the guarantee that we are really in Christ (<em><a href='B:520 5:3'>Rom 5:3</a></em>). Hence in the practical part of Romans we are exhorted to patiently endure tribulation (<em><a href='B:520 12:12'>Rom 12:12</a></em>).</p><p><em>Or anguish-&nbsp;</em>Again, the same word used in <em><a href='B:520 2:9'>Rom 2:9</a></em> “anguish” about the distress of the rejected in the last day. We must experience it now, or then. Paul uses this word again in <em><a href='B:540 12:10'>2Co 12:10</a></em>, along with words similar in meaning to the list here in <em><a href='B:520 8:35'>Rom 8:35</a></em>, in saying that we experience distresses “for Christ’s sake”, for the sake of the fact we are in Him and must have a part in His sufferings.</p><p><em>Or persecution-&nbsp;</em>The same word is used in the parable of the sower (<em><a href='B:470 13:21'>Mat 13:21</a></em>), to which Paul seems to be making allusion in <em><a href='B:520 8:35'>Rom 8:35</a></em>. Many of the words in this list are appropriate to Paul’s personal sufferings for the sake of His being “in Christ”. He too was persecuted (<em><a href='B:510 13:50'>Act 13:50</a></em>; <em><a href='B:620 3:11'>2Ti 3:11</a></em>), distressed etc. The list of his sufferings in <em><a href='B:540 12:10'>2Co 12:10</a></em> includes this word and others in the list here. Again and again, Paul writes as if talking to himself, and as such sets himself up as the parade example of what he means.</p><p><em>Or famine-&nbsp;</em>Lack of food. Again, this word is in the list of Paul’s own sufferings in <em><a href='B:540 11:27'>2Co 11:27</a></em>. Perhaps Paul has specific reference to the famine which there was in the first century which affected the believers (<em><a href='B:510 11:28'>Act 11:28</a></em>). And again, famine is to be one of the latter day tribulations (<em><a href='B:470 24:7'>Mat 24:7</a></em>).</p><p><em>Or nakedness-&nbsp;</em>Lack of clothing. Again, this word is in the list of Paul’s own sufferings in <em><a href='B:540 11:27'>2Co 11:27</a></em>.</p><p><em>Or peril-&nbsp;</em>This word is only used elsewhere in the list of Paul’s own sufferings in <em><a href='B:540 11:26'>2Co 11:26</a></em>.</p><p><em>Or sword</em>- Note that Paul envisaged his readership as likely to suffer from the sword. And yet in <em><a href='B:520 13:4'>Rom 13:4</a></em> he speaks of the first century authorities as using the sword to execute God’s will against those who do wrong. This would lead us to interpret <em><a href='B:520 13:4'>Rom 13:4</a></em> as having specific and limited reference in time and space, perhaps only to the Rome ecclesia at a certain point in time and in some aspects of justice. Nothing, whatever, can separate us from the love of Christ towards us in His death (<em><a href='B:520 8:35'>Rom 8:35</a></em>). His cross is therefore the constant rallying point of our faith, in whatever difficulty we live through. The resolve and strength we so need in our spiritual path can come only through a personal contemplation of the cross.</p><p>This list is to be understood in the context of <em><a href='B:520 8:36'>Rom 8:36</a></em>, that we are counted as in Christ, the slaughtered lamb, and therefore all His sufferings we expect to be somehow articulated in our own lives, just as His resurrection life also shall be. In the first century context, this list was the kind of ‘par for the course’ which anyone could expect who had signed up to be counted as “in Christ”. Twenty centuries later, the list may be more subtle, but nonetheless as painful. For the cross of Christ is the cross of Christ. The forms in which we share it may vary over history and geography, but the essence shall remain. Shall divorce, betrayal, cancer, false accusation- separate&nbsp;<em>us</em>&nbsp;from His love? They should not, but rather be seen as a very real sharing in His death and sufferings, from which we shall just as surely arise into new and eternal life. There are many connections between Romans the visions of Revelation. The whole court scene presented here in Romans 8, whereby the accuser of Christ’s brethren is now no longer in court, he and his case ‘thrown out of court’, is naturally reminiscent of the scene in Revelation 12. There, the accusers of Christ’s brethren are likened to the great Satan, the personified power of sin in its political manifestation, and this is also thrown out of ‘heaven’, out of the Heavenly court / throne room. The fact that&nbsp;<em>sin</em>&nbsp;has been conquered by Christ and ‘thrown out’ is therefore the guarantee that whatever oppressive sinful powers are now in authority, they in their turn will likewise be cast out. It’s only a matter of time now- because sin in its essence has been cast out already. This explains the seamless way in which Paul now moves on from speaking of how the power sin has been nullified to talking of how therefore and thereby, all human opposition to God’s people is now ultimately powerless.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 8:36'>Rom 8:36</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Even as it is written: For your sake we are killed all the day long, we were deemed sheep for the slaughter</em>– See on <em><a href='B:520 8:13'>Rom 8:13</a></em>. The key word in this verse is “deemed / accounted”. Because we are counted as Christ, the lamb slain (and the allusion here is definitely to Isaiah 53), then we should not be phased by our experience of His cross in this life. Indeed we should expect it. We cannot look passively at the cross. It must change how we see ourselves. It must radically affect our self-perception and self understanding. For we are in Him. It was us who hung with Him there, and who hang with Him still in the tribulations of life. For we are to account / impute ourselves as the sheep for the slaughter, i:e. the Lord Jesus, for whose sake we are killed all the day long in the sharing of His sufferings (<em><a href='B:520 8:36'>Rom 8:36</a></em>); with Paul, we “die daily”, because we are in Christ. And if we suffer with Him, we will also reign with Him (<em><a href='B:520 8:17'>Rom 8:17</a></em>; <em><a href='B:620 2:12'>2Ti 2:12</a></em>). To see ourselves as in Christ, to have such a positive view of ourselves, that the essential ‘me’ is actually the sinless Son of God, is almost asking too much of men and women living with all the dysfunction and low self-worth that seems part of the human condition.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 8:37'>Rom 8:37</a></em>&nbsp;<em>No</em>- Paul seems again to be interpreting his readers’ response. ‘Surely it can’t be right that if we are in Christ, then we will suffer so much? Aren’t all these terrible tribulations the sign that we are rejected by God rather than accepted by Him?’. And Paul answers that “No”- in fact the way that we lose in this life is a sign that we have won, and more than won- we have become “more than conquerors”. Truly “I feel like I win when I lose” can become our credo in spiritual life.</p><p><em>In all these things</em>- Every time they happen to us, they are the proof that we have therefore already won, in the very thing wherein it seems we have ‘lost’. The sense here is very much what we meet in the sermon on the mount- that we are to rejoice when we are persecuted, attacked and abused, because in that moment our reward is very great in Heaven.</p><p><em>We are more than conquerors</em>- See on <em><a href='B:520 8:34'>Rom 8:34</a></em> “for us”. Again the word&nbsp;<em>huper&nbsp;</em>is used; there is the idea of being over and above conquerors. There is something superlative about the great salvation which there is in Christ. We don’t just scrape in to God’s Kingdom and sit there in humble gratitude for eternity thinking how blessed / lucky we were. Not at all. We are in Christ, and all that is true of Him is now and shall eternally be true of us. We are crowned as conquerors- and “more than&nbsp;<em>huper</em>&nbsp;conquerors”. There’s something ‘hyper’ about the nature and quality of our salvation. It is all so hyper abundantly above all we ask or think. And it begins now, and in this sense we have some sense, at least a gasp from a great distance, of the ‘hyper’ nature of it all. Paul surely has in mind how the Lord had comforted His people that “I have overcome s:w. ‘conquer’ the world” (<em><a href='B:500 16:33'>Joh 16:33</a></em>). We are counted not only as overcomers just as Jesus was; but hyper-conquerors, hyper-overcomers. John alludes to this passage in his Gospel record when he comments in his letters that&nbsp;<em>we&nbsp;</em>have overcome the world because of our belief into Jesus (<em><a href='B:690 2:13-14'>1Jn 2:13-14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:690 4:4'>1Jn 4:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:690 5:4-5'>1Jn 5:4-5</a></em>). Clearly John like Paul perceived the believer into Christ involving baptism into Him as having the same status as Christ; if He has overcome, so have we. There is also a legal connotation to the word translated “conquerors”. The same word has been used in <em><a href='B:520 3:4'>Rom 3:4</a></em> to describe how God ‘overcomes’ when He is put in the dock and judged by human disbeliefs in His declared plan of salvation. Paul is now drawing his treatise to a conclusion. He began with us as sinners in the dock, accused by our own sins. He has argued that we have been declared right because we are in Christ; not simply ‘let off’, but declared right. We have won the case; the whole thing has been turned around. We the condemned are now the justified, we leave the courtroom as conquerors, as having legally overcome when we were judged; all, of course, because we are in Christ. We are right now more than conquerors through Christ (<em><a href='B:520 8:37'>Rom 8:37</a></em>); and yet to he who overcomes s:w. conquers the Kingdom shall be given (<em><a href='B:730 3:21'>Rev 3:21</a></em>). This doesn’t mean we can sit back and do nothing. And so Paul goes on to exhort us not to be overcome s:w. conquered of evil, but to overcome evil with good (<em><a href='B:520 12:21'>Rom 12:21</a></em>). “What shall we then say to these things? If God be for us, who (or what)<em>&nbsp;can</em>&nbsp;be against us?". Paul caught the gloriously positive spirit of all this, and reflected it in his fondness for words with the&nbsp;<em>hyper-</em>&nbsp;prefix (<em><a href='B:520 8:37'>Rom 8:37</a></em>; <em><a href='B:530 10:13'>1Co 10:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:540 7:4'>2Co 7:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:570 2:9'>Phi 2:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:570 4:7'>Phi 4:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:590 3:10'>1Th 3:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:590 4:6'>1Th 4:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:590 5:13'>1Th 5:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:600 1:3'>2Th 1:3</a></em>). God is not passively waiting for us to act, indifferently offering us the possible futures of salvation or condemnation according to our deeds. He earnestly desires our salvation, He wills and wishes us into the upward spiral of relationship with Him; He has given us spiritual potential and strength.</p><p><em>Through Him that loved us</em>- The love of Christ is often specifically related to His death for us on the cross. We can only become “in Him” because He was so fully our representative, including in death itself. All this wonderful schema of salvation and justification of sinners, counting them as if they are Christ, could only come true because of His death. This was and is the central point of all things; it is not simply so that Christ as a person is the central means by which all was made possible, but more specifically it was His love unto death which was and is that central point.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 8:38'>Rom 8:38</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For I am persuaded</em>- Just as we also need lengthy persuasion as to the ultimate truth that we are saved in Christ, so Paul too had gone through this process of persuasion. The same word is often used to describe how Paul “persuaded” people to continue trusting in God’s grace rather than in their own works (<em><a href='B:510 13:43'>Act 13:43</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 18:4'>Act 18:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 19:26'>Act 19:26</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 26:28'>Act 26:28</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 28:23'>Act 28:23</a></em>; <em><a href='B:540 5:11'>2Co 5:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:550 1:10'>Gal 1:10</a></em>)- indeed, persuading people seems to have been a hallmark of Paul’s preaching. Yet Paul persuaded others on the basis of how he himself had come to be persuaded; and this will be the characteristic of any truly effective preacher of the Gospel.</p><p><em>That neither death nor life</em>- In <em><a href='B:520 8:35'>Rom 8:35</a></em> Paul has argued that no suffering nor disaster in our lives can separate us from “the love of Christ”. Now he starts to talk in more cosmic terms, leading up to the same conclusion- that we cannot be separated or divorced from God’s love for us which is “in Christ”. For those “in Christ”, nothing can stand in the way or change that status; only we can decide to file for divorce / separation. If we die- we shall be raised again. More tellingly, however, we may fear that “life” can separate us from God’s love; Paul may refer to ‘the tribulations of life’, but he may also have in view the way we can mess up in our lives. But not even that can separate us from God’s love for those who are “in Christ”. In what sense could&nbsp;<em>life</em>&nbsp;separate us from God’s love? Surely only in the sense of sins committed in human life. Yet even these cannot separate us from the love of God which is so ready and eager to forgive us. This is the extent of grace; that not even sin, which on one hand separate from God, can actually separate us from the love of God in Christ. We are often plagued by a desire to separate out the things for which we are justly suffering, and things in which we are innocent victims. We struggle over whether our cancer or her depression is our fault, or whether we only got into unhealthy behaviours as a result of others' stressing us... etc. This struggle to understand the balance between personal guilt and being a victim of circumstance or other people makes it hard for some people to free themselves from guilt. Seeking to understand is especially acute when we face death, suffering, tragedy, or experience broken relationships. How much was I to blame? In how much was I merely a victim? My determined conclusion is that it is impossible, at least by any intellectual process, to separate out that suffering for which we are personally guilty, and that suffering which we are merely victims of. The cross of Jesus was not only to remove personal guilt through forgiveness; all our human sufferings and sicknesses were laid upon Him there. Our burdens, both of our own guilt and those which are laid upon us by life or other people, are and were carried by Him who is our total saviour.</p><p><em>Nor Angels, nor principalities... powers</em>- I have argued elsewhere that Paul and the New Testament do not support the Jewish ideas of sinful Angels operating in various hierarchies and dimensions. Indeed, I have argued in&nbsp;<em>The Real Devil</em>&nbsp;that Paul consciously deconstructs these ideas. But for now Paul is prepared to allude to them, as if to say ‘Whatever you fear, whatever you believe is out there, however you believe it is in the cosmos- the wildest fears of your worst nightmares about the spirit world are not going to get in the way of God’s love for those in Christ’.</p><p><em>Nor things present nor things to come, nor powers</em>- Whatever present crises you face, and whatever you may yet face. Knowing we are secured in Christ enables us not to fear the future. For even death itself, and all that may lead up to it, emotionally or physically, are unable to affect our “in Christ” status. “Things to come” may refer to the expected latter day tribulation.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 8:39'>Rom 8:39</a></em> Nothing shall separate us from the love of God in Christ, as revealed in the cross (<em><a href='B:520 8:39'>Rom 8:39</a></em>). The idea of the love of Christ nearly always refers to the cross. And yet the same word occurs in <em><a href='B:650 7:26'>Heb 7:26</a></em>, to remind us that the Son of God is “separate from sinners”. Here again is the paradox. We are sinners. And yet we cannot be separated from He who is personally separate from sinners. Again, the conviction of guilt is required so that we can know His saving grace. But it’s possible to understand this contradiction as just that- a contradiction. The Lord Jesus is separate from sinners; but nothing shall separate&nbsp;<em>us</em>&nbsp;from Him, although we are sinners. This can be seen as yet another of the many irreconcilable paradoxes which express the purity of God’s grace. We have elsewhere commented upon the way that God angrily speaks of permanently rejecting His people, and yet says in the same breath almost that He has not and will never reject them, because of His tender love for them.</p><p><em>Nor height nor depth nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord</em>- “Height” and “depth” may refer to creations supposed to exist beneath the earth or above the heavens. But no created thing can obstruct God’s feelings for us in Christ. Because we are human we tend to view life in a materialistic way; what is visible and concrete assumes huge importance for us. But no created thing can get in the way of God’s love for us- perhaps, the implication being, because this God who so loves us is Himself the creator of all things. Therefore no created thing, in any dimension, in this world nor any other world or dimension, can affect His feelings for us:&nbsp;</p><p>In exalting about the wonderful power of God in human life through Christ, Paul exalts that “neither death nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor things present nor things to come: nor height (Gk:&nbsp;<em>hypsoma</em>&nbsp;– the highest point a star reaches) nor depth (Gk:&nbsp;<em>bathos</em>&nbsp;– the abyss from which a star rises), nor any other creature, are able to separate us from the love of God” (<em><a href='B:520 8:38-39'>Rom 8:38-39</a></em>). “The position of the stars was supposed to affect human destinies. ‘Whatever the stars may be supposed to do’, Paul says, ‘they cannot separate us from God’s love’” (5). Likewise by referring to “any other creature”, Paul seems to be saying that there is no reality, nor even any supposed reality in heaven and earth, that can separate us from God’s loving power. It seems to me, given the facts that Paul doesn’t teach the existence of a personal Satan / demons and so often deconstructs the common ideas about them, that Paul is effectively saying here: ‘Even if you think these things exist, well they are of utterly no power and consequence given the extraordinary and ultimate nature of God’s power’. And so the argument is wrapped up. God’s love for us who are “in Christ” is part and parcel of His love for Christ Himself, His dearly beloved Son. We will be saved, because we are in Christ. And totally nothing and nobody, not even our own humanity and failure, can separate us from Him and His love.</p><p>Notes<br/>(1) F:F. Bruce,&nbsp;<em>Paul And Jesus</em>&nbsp;(London: S:P:C:K:, 1977) p. 78.<br/>(2) Thomas Weinandy<em>, In the Likeness of Sinful Flesh</em>&nbsp;(Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1993) p. 79.<br/>(3) Vincent Branick, “The Sinful Flesh of the Son of God”,&nbsp;<em>The Catholic Bible Quarterly</em>&nbsp;47 (1985) p. 250:&nbsp;<br/>(4) Stephen Finlan,&nbsp;<em>The Background and Content of Paul's Cultic Atonement Metaphors</em>&nbsp;(Atlanta, GA: Society of Biblical Literature, 2004).<br/>(5) A:M. Hunter,&nbsp;<em>Romans</em>&nbsp;(London: S:C:M:, 1981) p. 87.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 9:1'>Rom 9:1</a></em> As explained in the introduction to this commentary, Romans is very thematic. The first eight chapters outline a theology of grace, intended to bind together the Jewish and Gentile elements within the membership of the church at Rome. Chapters 9-11 present God’s dealings with Israel as the parade example of His grace and way of working. Chapters 12-16 then draw on the preceding chapters in appealing for practical behaviour motivated by the theology there outlined.</p><p><em>I speak the truth in Christ, I do not lie, my conscience bearing witness with me in the Holy Spirit</em>- Paul is about to make a momentous personal statement in :2 and :3, reflecting a level of love which is hard to believe a man could reach- being prepared to offer his eternity for the sake of Israel. He says that his own conscience is corroborated by the Holy Spirit, that this is indeed how he feels. For in <em><a href='B:530 4:4'>1Co 4:4</a></em> he states that whether or not our conscience is clear in a matter is not of ultimate importance; it is the Lord's judgment of our position which is all important, as human awareness of internal conscience can be faulty. I have noted on <em><a href='B:540 5:11'>2Co 5:11</a></em> and elsewhere that Paul felt that the operation of the Holy Spirit in the heart of believers ought to influence the conscience. And here he states under Divine inspiration that what he is now writing is indeed true and confirmed by the Holy Spirit.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 9:2'>Rom 9:2</a></em>&nbsp;<em>That I have great sorrow and unceasing pain in my heart</em>- This is the spirit of Jeremiah, who likewise suffered at the hands of a Gospel-resistant Israel, but loved them to tears. The rejection of the Gospel by others should not be met by indifference on our part. Any who have a real sense of God’s glory and the tragedy of any man's rejection of the cross will feel likewise. Paul uses the same word for "sorrow" in writing of his pain at Corinth's rejection of the Gospel (<em><a href='B:540 2:1'>2Co 2:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:540 2:3'>2Co 2:3</a></em>), and we note that Paul may well have been writing to the Romans from Corinth. Paul had these feelings "in Christ" (:1) because he was manifesting the Lord's emotions towards Israel.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 9:3'>Rom 9:3</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For I could wish that I myself were accursed from Christ for the sake of my brothers, my kinsmen according to the flesh-&nbsp;</em>One of the (many) agonies of Paul's soul was that he felt that his brethren did not appreciate the depth of love which he had for them. Israel certainly didn’t; and he loved them to the same extent as Moses did, willing, at least in theory, to give his&nbsp;<em>eternal salvation</em>&nbsp;so that they might be saved (<em><a href='B:520 9:3'>Rom 9:3</a></em>). The more (Gk. 'the more-and-more-abundantly') he loved Corinth, the less they realized his love, and the more they turned away from him (<em><a href='B:540 2:4'>2Co 2:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:540 12:15'>2Co 12:15</a></em>); and he so earnestly wished (Gk:) that the believers in Colosse and Laodicea appreciated how much he spiritually cared for them (<em><a href='B:580 2:1'>Col 2:1</a></em>):&nbsp;<br/>"I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh" was the spirit of Moses, in being willing to give his own physical and eternal life for the salvation of Israel (<em><a href='B:20 32:30-32'>Exo 32:30-32</a></em>). Paul is here rising up to imitate Moses at perhaps his finest hour- willing, at least in principle, to give up his eternal life for the sake of Israel's salvation. The extent of Paul's love for natural Israel does not come out that strongly in the Acts and epistles; but this allusion to Moses says it all. The RVmg. renders <em><a href='B:520 9:3'>Rom 9:3</a></em>: “I could pray…”, more clearly alluding to Moses’ prayer that the people might enter and he be rejected. Yet Paul perceived that God would not accept a substitute offering like that; and hence he says he&nbsp;<em>could&nbsp;</em>pray like this. In essence, he had risen to the same level. Likewise he wrote in <em><a href='B:590 2:8'>1Th 2:8</a></em> RV that he was “well pleased i:e. theoretically willing to impart unto, you not the gospel of God only, but our own souls, because ye were dear unto us”. He perceived the difference between mere imparting of the Gospel in preaching, and being willing to give ones’ soul, ones salvation, because of a heart that bleeds for others. No wonder Paul was such a convincing preacher, with such love behind his words.</p><p>Paul was willing in theory to give up his salvation for them, even though he knew that in actual fact this is not the basis on which God works. He emphasizes that he is not using mere words: "I say the truth in Christ, I lie not note the double emphasis, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Spirit" (<em><a href='B:520 9:1-3'>Rom 9:1-3</a></em>). The Holy Spirit confirmed that what he felt in his conscience for them was in fact valid; this really was the level of devotion Paul reached for a nation who systematically worked for his extermination, and even more painfully, for the infiltration and destruction of his lifetime's work. The Jewish infiltrators had indirectly had their effect on Corinth, who mocked and denigrated the Paul who would have laid down his life for them. And yet time and again he calls them his brethren, he sees them as an innocent Eve in Eden, about to be beguiled by the snake of the Jewish infiltrators; he sees them as a chaste virgin. But remember how they denigrated him, in the cruellest ways. Yet his love for them was surpassing. If indeed Paul wrote Romans from Corinth, his experience with the Corinthians prepared him for this momentous statement to the Romans about Israel.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 9:4'>Rom 9:4</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Who are Israelites, whose is the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the service of God and the promises</em>- We note that Israel were God’s "adopted" son; not His only&nbsp;<em>begotten&nbsp;</em>Son. This would have been a sideways swipe at Jewish emphasis upon ethnicity as a basis for being God’s children. All the glory, covenants etc. were given initially to Israel; which is why the tragedy of their rejection of the Christ who was the focal point of all these things was the more tragic. Paul is writing here not so much as to glorify Israel as to explain why he felt the deep sense of tragedy for them which he did as expressed in :3.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 9:5'>Rom 9:5</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Whose are the fathers and of whom is Christ, as concerning the flesh, who is over all. God be praised forever Amen</em>- The praise of Christ as being so exceedingly "over all" was a swipe at the Jewish tendency to consider Messiah as inferior to the fathers such as Abraham and David. The Lord tackled the same mistaken view by reminding the Jews that David referred to Messiah as his "Lord" (<em><a href='B:480 12:37'>Mar 12:37</a></em>); the "Son of David" was in fact David’s Lord and master. "Of whom is Christ" is a clear statement that the Lord Jesus came 'out of' the Jewish fathers as the promised seed of men like Abraham and David. In no way can the idea of a personal pre-existence of Christ be supported Biblically, the evidence is all against it.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 9:6'>Rom 9:6</a></em>&nbsp;<em>But it is not as though the word of God has come to nothing. For they are not all Israel, that are of Israel</em>- This is an allusion in terms of ideas, although not lexical items&nbsp; words, to the grand encouragement of <em><a href='B:290 55:11'>Isa 55:11</a></em> that God’s word shall not return void but will accomplish His purpose, even if in different ways than those initially intended. God’s word of salvation in Christ same to 'something' through the redefinition of Israel as those who accepted His grace in Christ. "For they are not all Israel that are of Israel" was a quotation from right wing Judaism in condemnation of their weaker brethren; but Paul is effectively saying that it is they who are condemned in these terms.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 9:7'>Rom 9:7</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Neither, because they are Abraham's seed are they all children, but: In Isaac shall your seed be called</em>- Physical descent from Abraham did not make anyone the true "children" of Abraham; because Ishmael also was the seed of Abraham, but was not his "child" in the sense that he did not walk according to the faith of Abraham in his future Messianic seed. That promise was fulfilled through Isaac. So within the statement "In Isaac shall your seed be called" there is the implication that the "seed" of Abraham is to be understood in two senses- referring to the literal children of Abraham, and secondly, specifically referring to the Messiah. Abraham's true seed was therefore one man- the Lord Jesus. Only those "in Him" were the seed to which the promises had reference.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 9:8'>Rom 9:8</a></em>&nbsp;<em>That is: it is not the children of the flesh that are children of God, but the children of the promise who are counted as the seed</em>- See on :7. Fleshly descent from Abraham did not make one a member of the seed of promise. That seed was one person- the Lord Jesus. And only identity with Him makes a person part of the promised seed. This connects with all Paul has written in chapters 1-8; that acceptability with God is on the basis of being in Christ and being thereby counted as Christ, who alone is the promised seed. Galatians 3 makes these points again in very clear language.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 9:9'>Rom 9:9</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For this is the word of promise: According to this season will I come and Sarah shall have a son</em>- The 'coming' of God was in the son of Abraham and Sarah; God 'came' in Christ supremely. In no way did the promised seed literally come down from some pre-existent state in Heaven; He too was conceived on this earth, and through Him God 'came' to His people.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 9:10'>Rom 9:10</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And not only so, but Rebecca also having conceived by one, by our father Isaac</em>- "Conceived by one" is hard to make sense of. Perhaps the idea is that Rebecca was Isaac's only wife. But the next verses speak of how out of two children, the choice of which one was to be the seed was made on the basis of predestination. Both Jacob and Esau had the same one father; but one was chosen and the other wasn't. Abraham had children by various women (Hagar, Keturah and Sarah at least); Isaac had children by only one woman. So there was no question about whether Esau and Jacob were in the right line, as it were. But the point was, a choice was made by predestination and calling.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 9:11'>Rom 9:11</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For the children being not yet born, neither having done anything good or bad, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works but of Him that calls-&nbsp;</em>As noted on :10, Paul is defining the 'seed' as being not according to fleshly descent for both Esau and Jacob were from the same father and mother, but according to calling and predestination independent of the works they did. For the Genesis record frames Jacob as being inferior to Esau in his works. This historical interlude about Israel in Romans 9-11 is in exemplification of the theology outlined in chapters 1-8. There we have read that works do not save a person; it is by God’s grace. And the obvious exemplification of grace is in the very existence of concepts like predestination and calling (<em><a href='B:520 8:30'>Rom 8:30</a></em>). Struggle with these concepts as we may, the simple point is that salvation is not by works nor intellectual ability or good fortune to correctly understand the text of Scripture. This is what predestination implies. One is called and the other isn't, even when the works of one Jacob are not much to boast of, and the one who is not called Esau comes over in the record as a far nicer, more forgiving kind of guy than the one who was called.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 9:12'>Rom 9:12</a></em>&nbsp;<em>It was said to her: The elder shall serve the younger-&nbsp;</em>Esau is presented as the stronger of the two; but he was to serve Jacob. The calling was not of works nor of human strength. We note here that Paul apparently brushes by the blessing of Isaac to the intent that one day, Esau would rise above his brother Jacob and cast off the yoke of servanthood which the earlier statement of the Angel had required (<em><a href='B:10 27:40'>Gen 27:40</a></em>). Whilst the record of those words is inspired, we have there an example of where a man spoke as he felt was required, and the content of his words was not inspired because it was at variance with God’s own word. We can reflect further that Jacob and Rebecca did not believe the Angelic words of blessing, thinking they must make them come true through their own works- which resulted in the fair mess up of much of Jacob's life. The Angelic word was a word of grace that should have just been accepted; no works could bring it to fulfilment. And this too is the exemplification of what Paul has written at such length in chapters 1-8.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 9:13'>Rom 9:13</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Even as it is written: Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated</em>- The point has been fairly made that the Hebrew in <em><a href='B:460 1:2-3'>Mal 1:2-3</a></em> can mean that God loved Esau less, rather than "hated". But that possibility of meaning is not reflected in the quotation here; and Paul is unafraid to tweak Old Testament quotations in order to give the better sense. Perhaps he goes with the term "hated" in order to set us up to indignantly protest that something isn't write here. And he then proceeds to deal with that in the following verses, which teach that we ought to focus on the wonder of the fact that the unworthy Jacob has been loved, and we can share in that love by identification with the seed; and in any case, it is not for us to question God, but rather simply accept His grace. This is the answer to those who experience endless&nbsp;<em>angst</em>&nbsp;about the fate of those who have not heard. No answer is given. We are taught by the whole problem to praise God for the grace He does show to some, and learn our humility before Him in accepting those things which seem so deeply unfair. The context of <em><a href='B:460 1:2-3'>Mal 1:2-3</a></em> is God appealing to Judah to not refuse God’s love towards them, seeing it has not been shown to all. And that challenge and appeal comes through to us in all our struggles concerning the morality of God.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 9:14'>Rom 9:14</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:520 13:12'>Rom 13:12</a></em>.</p><p><em>What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid</em>- As noted on :13, the apparent hatred of God towards Esau is set up to test our response. To protest against it is to say that God is unrighteous, and this is a possibility we are not to even entertain. His predestination of one but not another, loving one and hating another, is in fact His righteousness. And again, Paul has written in chapters 1-8 of God’s ultimate rightness in imputing His righteousness to us- when we do not deserve it. This problem is here placed before us from a different angle- God is 'right' and 'righteous' to love Jacob and hate Esau. Even if all within us cries out against such a position as being immoral and unfair- by our human standards. Likewise, His imputation of righteousness to the unrighteous seems immoral and unfair. But the whole glorious situation is set up to test our obedient acceptance of His grace.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 9:15'>Rom 9:15</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For He said to Moses: I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion</em>- This quotation from <em><a href='B:20 33:19'>Exo 33:19</a></em> concerns the manifestation of the Yahweh Name. The fact God makes a sovereign choice to save some and not others is actually the most fundamental part of His very being as revealed to us. This whole concept of calling some and not others to salvation is presented in Romans 8 as the parade example of God’s grace, and that such grace is the basis of salvation and not works. 'What happens to the rest?' is of course the question God foresees shall arise, and He carefully says nothing about it. Exactly because He wants us to focus upon His grace and accept that it is indeed beyond understanding and against all that we have known in any other aspect of human life and thinking.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 9:16'>Rom 9:16</a></em>&nbsp;<em>So then it is not of him that wills, nor of him that runs, but of God that shows mercy</em>- God’s statement that "I will have mercy" means that it is&nbsp;<em>His&nbsp;</em>will which saves men, and not the will of man "him that wills" and all the works done as an outflow of human will. His mercy is therefore operative on a level above human will / volition and works 'running'. It is God and not man who does the 'running' for our salvation.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 9:17'>Rom 9:17</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:570 2:15'>Phi 2:15</a></em>.</p><p><em>For the scripture says of Pharaoh-&nbsp;</em>When we read His word, we hear His voice. <em><a href='B:110 13:21'>1Ki 13:21</a></em> speaks of us hearing "the mouth of God". Jeremiah spoke "from the mouth of the Lord" (<em><a href='B:140 36:12'>2Ch 36:12</a></em>). His word brings Him that near to us, if we will perceive it for what it is. Thus "Scripture" is put for "God" (<em><a href='B:520 9:17'>Rom 9:17</a></em>; <em><a href='B:550 3:8'>Gal 3:8</a></em>) and vice versa (Matthew 19; Matthew 4, 5). When we speak and preach God’s word, we are relaying God’s voice to men, and should make appropriate effort to deport ourselves as the ministers of His word and voice- not to mention diligently ensuring that our expression and exposition of His word is correct and not fanciful. We are to speak / preach "as it were oracles of God" (<em><a href='B:670 4:11'>1Pe 4:11</a></em> Gk:). We are His voice to men in our preaching of His word.</p><p><em>For this very purpose did I raise you up, that I might show in you My power, and that My Name might be published abroad in all the earth</em>- The question of those that are not called and who are hardened is presented from the perspective of God’s purpose to save those whom He has called. The publishing of God’s Name throughout all the earth is the Old Testament language of the Kingdom of God on earth (<em><a href='B:50 28:10'>Deu 28:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:110 8:43'>1Ki 8:43</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 66:4'>Psa 66:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 83:18'>Psa 83:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 102:15'>Psa 102:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:450 14:9'>Zec 14:9</a></em>) and is repeated in <em><a href='B:520 15:9'>Rom 15:9</a></em>. The earlier quotation from Malachi in :13 goes on to explain that the loving of Jacob and hating of Esau will climax in all the Gentiles seeing God’s Name in all the earth (<em><a href='B:460 1:11'>Mal 1:11</a></em>). Somehow- and the process is as yet hidden from us- the saving of some and not saving of others shall result in God’s Name being published throughout all the earth. This in a limited sense happened when Israel were redeemed from Egypt and Pharaoh was destroyed, but the final reality of it will be in the salvation of God’s people at the time of the Kingdom of God on the whole earth.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 9:18'>Rom 9:18</a></em>&nbsp;<em>So then He has mercy on whom He wishes to, and hardens who He wishes-&nbsp;</em>The emphasis is upon the wishing or willing of God. The will of God is for our salvation- that is the repeated theme of the New Testament. There is another side to that will- in that He does not save all. Some He hardens. But the will of God is for&nbsp;<em>our</em>salvation, and the death of His Son to that end was the deepest articulation of that will (<em><a href='B:650 10:7'>Heb 10:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 10:9'>Heb 10:9</a></em>). That is the Biblical emphasis and we are out of step with God’s will for us if we chafe against that with the pretensions of&nbsp;<em>our</em>&nbsp;will. The Bible revealed God’s will as being opposed to human will; and our will is to doubt and walk away from the way His will operates. The question of 'What about the unsaved?' is purposefully built into human experience as an exercise for us in this regard.</p><p>In the same way as Pharaoh hardened his heart, so natural Israel have done (<em><a href='B:520 11:7'>Rom 11:7</a></em>). Those Jews who refused grace in Christ are therefore as Egypt and are not the true people of God, and will receive Egypt's condemnation. Pharaoh hardened his own heart, but God also hardened his heart. And it is this latter aspect which is focused upon here, in exemplification of how the Spirit works on human hearts, as explained in chapter 8.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 9:19'>Rom 9:19</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Then you will say to me: Why does He still find fault? For who withstands His will?</em>- Seeing we are so often exhorted to do God’s will, and we have freewill not to, it is apparent that indeed God’s will can be withstood. The same word is used of Elymas and others resisting the Gospel (<em><a href='B:510 13:8'>Act 13:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:620 3:8'>2Ti 3:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:620 4:15'>2Ti 4:15</a></em>) and Paul will go on to use the word in saying that some do indeed withstand God (<em><a href='B:520 13:2'>Rom 13:2</a></em>). God does not "find fault" with those whom His will forces to rebel against Him. But in :20 Paul doesn't make that perhaps obvious rejoinder; rather he says that it is not for us to question God.</p><p>It seems that Judaism was arguing that the Jews were chosen and therefore must be acceptable to God. But Paul deconstructs this by making several links with Job, whom he appears to read as initially having the same wrong attitudes as did the Jews:&nbsp;</p><table><tr><td></p><p>Romans 9</td><td>Job</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>:19 "Thou (the Jews) wilt say then unto me, Why doth He yet find fault (with Pharaoh and the Jews)? For who hath resisted His will? The Jews were saying that it was God’s pre-ordained purpose that they should be His people, therefore their behaviour was excusable.</td><td>"He is… mighty in strength: who hath hardened himself (NIV "resisted" ) against&nbsp;Him, and hath prospered?". Job's reasoning is similar to &nbsp; that of the Jews- &nbsp; effectively he too is asking why God is finding fault with him (<em><a href='B:220 9:4'>Job 9:4</a></em>).</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>:20 “O man, who art thou that disputest (AVmg:) with God"</td><td>This is what Job desired to do: "I would order my cause before Him, and fill my mouth with arguments... there the righteous might dispute with Him" (<em><a href='B:220 23:4-7'>Job 23:4-7</a></em>).</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>:14 "Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid" . The context is that the Jews were saying that their Calvinistic view of predestination allowed them to sin yet still remain God’s people.</td><td>By Job saying "It profiteth a man nothing &nbsp; that he should delight himself in God" because he is either predestined to &nbsp; salvation or not, Job provoked the &nbsp; comment from Elihu "Far be it from God, that He should do wickedness; and from &nbsp; the Almighty, that He should commit iniquity" (<em><a href='B:220 34:10'>Job 34:10</a></em>). The link between this and <em><a href='B:520 9:14'>Rom 9:14</a></em> shows that Job had the same mentality as the Judaizers, and was thus also shown the blasphemous conclusion to which his reasoning led.</td><td></td></tr></table>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 9:20'>Rom 9:20</a></em>&nbsp;<em>No, O man; who are you to answer back to God? Shall the thing formed say to Him that formed it: Why did you make me thus?</em>- See on :19. There are plenty of legitimate answers to the complaint that God is forcing people into sin and therefore He is being unreasonable. I suggest that Paul purposefully throws up an obviously illegitimate objection, to which we as readers are already formulating good answers before we reach :20. But our eager expectations that Paul will trounce such objections is purposefully disappointed by what we are to consider the even greater mega argument- that it is not for us to answer back to God. The allusion, as mentioned on :19, is to Job and his friends answering back to God when they should have fallen silent well before they did. That is the abiding impression we have at the end of the book of Job- that Job has fallen silent, laying his hand upon his mouth, but he should have done this far earlier. And Paul asks us to do the same.</p><p>All that said, the argument here comes perhaps closer than anything in the Bible to teaching absolute, unconditional predestination. The same piece of clay can apparently be randomly used by God; one part of it can be used to make a vessel which God eternally keeps, and part of the same lump can be used to make a vessel which is cast away for ever. Putting all scripture together, we cannot believe in absolute, unconditional predestination. Yet I for one would answer the question "Why does He still find fault?" by saying something like: 'Because some of the clay is softer and more responsive to the potter's hand than others. If we are soft and responsive to His hand, then we will be the vessel made that He eternally keeps'. But Paul doesn't answer that way. He basically responds: 'How dare you make any such response! You are not to even question God's apparently absolute, unconditional predestination. Who are you to do so? You are to just accept it in awed silence. Don't answer back'. Quite possibly I am being disobedient to that by now saying: There is enough Biblical evidence to conclude that there has to be human freewill response. That must be given due weight and factored in to the final, unknowable equation that equals 'salvation' in its final term. But, within that equation, there is indeed an element of absolute, unconditional predestination. And that element is the "grace" factor. For that is the context in which Paul speaks of salvation.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 9:21'>Rom 9:21</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Or has not the potter a right over the clay, from the same lump to make one part a vessel to honour, and another to dishonour?</em>- The obvious Old Testament allusions are to <em><a href='B:290 29:16'>Isa 29:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:290 64:8'>Isa 64:8</a></em> and Jeremiah 18. In all these passages, Judah considered that God had been unreasonable. They were not correct- the answer could so easily have been that they were in the situation they were in because of their sins. But as here in Romans 9, the answer instead is that they are but clay in the hands of the potter. It is God who has the "right" to use clay as He wishes. The whole humanist objection to this is that&nbsp;<em>we&nbsp;</em>have 'rights'. It is a humbling thing to learn that as God’s children, our only 'right' is to an eternal grave; nor do we have any 'right to life'. All is of grace, of gift. In this age of obsession with 'our rights', it's so hard to accept God’s perspective- that His will and right is supreme, and our personal focus should be more upon our own wrongs rather than our rights. "The same lump" repeats the teaching of :10, that from one couple came Jacob and Esau, and one was a vessel to honour and another to dishonour. And in any case, we are only being made into "vessels"- for the Father's use in His house. Paul surely wrote this with his eye on how he himself was a "chosen vessel" (<em><a href='B:510 9:15'>Act 9:15</a></em> s:w:). Yet he had to exercise freewill to be part of that purpose and Divine intention. The same words are used in <em><a href='B:590 4:4'>1Th 4:4</a></em> where Paul urges his converts to deport themselves appropriately for those who are vessels of honour by acting with "sanctification and honour". He uses the same words in appealing to Timothy to act likewise as a vessel of honour (<em><a href='B:620 2:20-21'>2Ti 2:20-21</a></em>). Divine choice is one thing, but nobody is being forced to be righteous. We are to respond to the grace of His calling. Paul has earlier taught the Romans that they are to seek for honour, and those who 'work good' shall indeed receive it (<em><a href='B:520 2:7'>Rom 2:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 2:10'>Rom 2:10</a></em>). Here in Romans 9 we are asked to understand that in the perspective of God having actually chosen us for that end- and He didn’t choose everyone. The fact we were called to this end and others weren't should be accepted in gratitude, and responded to- rather than complaining about the philosophical issues arising from some others not having been called.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 9:22'>Rom 9:22</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And so what if God is willing to show His anger and to make His power known, enduring with longsuffering vessels of anger prepared for destruction</em>- The fact some will be destroyed at the last day can be seen from a positive viewpoint; it means that God is amazingly tolerant of them right now. Perhaps his tolerance is so long because he even seeks their repentance, as it seems He did with Pharaoh. Again, the existence of this class of unsaved, condemned persons is to highlight His grace towards us. It's rather like asking why there are so many uninhabited planets and life forms on earth which shall not be saved. It is to give backdrop to the wonder of the grace which has invited&nbsp;<em>us&nbsp;</em>to salvation in God’s Kingdom. The showing of God’s anger is balanced by His making of His power known. The same word translated 'make known' is found in :23- God will make known the riches of His glory to us who are saved. The showing of God’s anger and long endurance of those He shall destroy is therefore in order to highlight and emphasize His power and grace made known to us:&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 9:23'>Rom 9:23</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And that He might make known the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy-&nbsp;</em>The existence of the vessels for destruction is in order to provide context for the glory of the vessels who receive mercy. "Make known" translates a word which means 'make to understand'. Then we shall understand- at the last day, when the riches of glory are realized upon the saved. Then we shall perceive how the whole thing worked out for<em>&nbsp;His</em>&nbsp;glory, and in great richness of that glory. In that day, we will learn by the condemnation of the wicked. The very existence of “the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction” is in order to “make known the riches of his glory upon the vessels of mercy”. After the experience of Divine judgment, "ye shall be comforted concerning the evil that I have brought upon Jerusalem"; and yet these are exactly the words used to describe how God will be 'comforted' after the judgments (<em><a href='B:330 5:13'>Eze 5:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:330 14:22'>Eze 14:22</a></em>). We will come to share God’s perspective through our experience of the judgment process. It will teach us to be like Him, to see things from His viewpoint. As a result of it, the struggles we have over "why…?" not all are saved will be resolved:&nbsp;</p><p><em>Which He beforehand prepared for glory-</em>&nbsp;Our place in God’s Kingdom was "prepared" from the beginning of the world (<em><a href='B:470 25:34'>Mat 25:34</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 11:16'>Heb 11:16</a></em> s:w:), although it was the Lord's death which prepared the place for us (<em><a href='B:500 14:2-3'>Joh 14:2-3</a></em> s:w:). But it is up to us to accept it; places in that Kingdom were "prepared" for Israel but they declined the invitation (<em><a href='B:470 22:4'>Mat 22:4</a></em> s:w:). This is the tragedy- eternity is prepared for some who refuse it. The depth of the tragedy of itself urges us to do all we can to spread the Gospel and strengthen those who have responded.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 9:24'>Rom 9:24</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:590 4:7'>1Th 4:7</a></em>.</p><p><em>Even us, whom He also called, not from the Jews only, but also from the Gentiles?-&nbsp;</em>Again we note the connection with the earlier teaching about calling in <em><a href='B:520 8:30'>Rom 8:30</a></em>, where the concept of calling is given as an example of how salvation is by grace. That calling pays no regard to ethnicity; for whoever hears the invitation is in that sense called to the Kingdom. Therefore it is not the case that only Jews were called; for the Gospel was being heard by non-Jews as well.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 9:25'>Rom 9:25</a></em>&nbsp;<em>As He said also in Hosea: I will call them My people, who were not My people; and she that was not beloved shall be called beloved</em>-&nbsp; The 'calling' here in Romans means 'calling to hear the Gospel'. The context of <em><a href='B:350 2:23'>Hos 2:23</a></em> is that Israel, like Hosea's faithless wife Gomer, were not God’s people but would again be called "My people". But that 'calling' is through the calling of the Gospel in Christ. In fact <em><a href='B:350 2:23'>Hos 2:23</a></em> is alluding to the fact that Gomer had become pregnant with a child indeed, children by another man whilst married to Hosea, and Hosea had named the child Lo-Ammi, 'Not my people'. But as Hosea dreamed of adopting the child as fully his and accepting Gomer again, so God did for Israel. But as things were never really resolved between Hosea and Gomer, neither were they between God and Israel on a national sense. But Paul perceives that the desire to call a 'not My people' as 'My people' would be fulfilled through the calling of individuals of all ethnicities to be God’s people. Hosea's plans for Gomer and Lo-Ammi were rooted in pure grace, stemming from deepest love. Likewise God will impute righteousness to those whom He calls, so that the not loved wife becomes the beloved wife, and the illegitimate children are counted as "My people". Here again we see connection to the preceding theological arguments about imputed righteousness in Romans 1-8. Israel shall again be counted as the beloved wife, and the illegitimate children counted as legitimate- for all who respond to the call:&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 9:26'>Rom 9:26</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And it shall be, that in the place where it was said to them: You are not My people, there shall they be called children of the living God</em>- The illegitimate child of Gomer, Lo-Ammi "not my people" would be adopted by Hosea, through his imputing righteousness to his wayward family. It is tempting to interpret "the place" as Jerusalem. But there is no particular reason for thinking that there is some geographical reference in view. The quotation from <em><a href='B:350 1:10'>Hos 1:10</a></em> uses the Hebrew&nbsp;<em>maqom</em>, which often refers to the holy place, the temple. It is in the temple of God, which now refers to the church, that the new children of God are adopted and accepted.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 9:27'>Rom 9:27</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And Isaiah cried out concerning Israel-&nbsp;</em>Paul perceived through the Spirit that Isaiah&nbsp;<em>cried aloud</em>&nbsp;with passion the idea that although there were many people theoretically "of Israel" in that they were the seed of Abraham, only a remnant of them would be saved. And Paul implies that this holds true in our dispensation too (<em><a href='B:290 10:22'>Isa 10:22</a></em> cp. <em><a href='B:520 9:27'>Rom 9:27</a></em>). One can sense how much Paul felt the passion of God’s word. It wasn't just black print on white paper to him. Thus he speaks of how "Esaias is very bold, and saith... Esaias also&nbsp;<em>crieth</em>&nbsp;concerning Israel..." (<em><a href='B:520 9:27'>Rom 9:27</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 10:20'>Rom 10:20</a></em>). Paul had meditated deeply upon Isaiah's words, even to the point of considering the tone of voice in which he first spoke them. See on <em><a href='B:510 13:27'>Act 13:27</a></em>.</p><p><em>Even if the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, it is only the remnant that shall be saved</em>- Again we have the idea of two seeds of Abraham. Those who are indeed "as the sand of the sea", fulfilling the promise about the multiplication of Abraham's seed, are not thereby saved. Salvation is for the remnant; see on :6. Truly not all Israel are of Israel.</p><p>There may also be particular reference to the saving of Israel in the last days. The Isaiah quotation is from <em><a href='B:290 10:20-23'>Isa 10:20-23</a></em>, which says that in the context of the Assyrian invasion, “the remnant of Israel”, those who survive it, will trust in the Lord alone and “in truth”, i:e. in covenant relationship with Him. It seems that all others of natural Israel will perish in the latter day holocaust upon Israel. (as in <em><a href='B:290 4:2-4'>Isa 4:2-4</a></em>). This language of the remnant ‘returning’ unto the Lord is quoted here about the repentance of the Jewish people and their turning to Christ. Israel were intended to repent because of Sennacherib’s invasion (<em><a href='B:290 37:31-32'>Isa 37:31-32</a></em>), and then “the consumption” of God’s plan could have happened. But the prophecy has been reinterpreted with reference to Israel in the last days, repenting finally as the result of the latter day Assyrian invasion. Isaiah 10 speaks of how Israel’s affliction by Assyria leads them to repentance; a “remnant shall return… unto the mighty God” (<em><a href='B:290 10:21'>Isa 10:21</a></em>)- and the “mighty God” has just been defined in <em><a href='B:290 9:6'>Isa 9:6</a></em> as a title for the Lord Jesus. This will be a result of God using the Assyrian invader to “make a consumption… in the midst of all the land” of Israel (<em><a href='B:290 10:23'>Isa 10:23</a></em>). The “yoke” of Assyria “shall be destroyed because of the anointing” (<em><a href='B:290 10:27'>Isa 10:27</a></em>)- i:e. the coming of Christ, the anointed one, in response to the remnant returning unto Him.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 9:28'>Rom 9:28</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For the Lord will execute His word upon the earth, finishing it and cutting it short</em>- This seems to mean that God’s word of salvation shall be fulfilled by the actual salvation of God’s people at the last day. But the intended time period will be shortened- as a display of God’s grace. This becomes apparent by comparing <em><a href='B:520 9:28-29'>Rom 9:28-29</a></em> with Matthew 24 :</p><table><tr><td></p><p>Matthew 24&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</td><td>Romans 9</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>v. 22 "For the elect's sake</td><td>The seed preserved&nbsp;by the Lord&nbsp;of hosts / Angels (:29)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Those days shall be shortened</td><td>v. 28 "He will finish the account (of Israel's sin), and cut it short in righteousness: because a short(ened) work will the Lord make upon all the earth (land)"</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>…or else there should no flesh be saved"&nbsp;&nbsp;</td><td>v. 29 "as Sodom"</td><td></td></tr></table><p>Romans 9 is quoting from <em><a href='B:290 28:22'>Isa 28:22</a></em>, which is about "a consumption, even determined upon the whole land... from the Lord God of hosts (Angels)". Thus the Angels planned to destroy Israel even more terribly than they did in AD70, but the "determined" "days" of "consumption" were "shortened" because the Angels- other ones apart from the destroying Angels?- had preserved a faithful seed or remnant, which is the theme of the section of Romans where the quotation from Isaiah 28 occurs. And there must be marked similarities in the last days too. “The remnant” of Israel will be saved, those who believe in Jesus, “For the Lord will execute his word upon the earth, finishing it and cutting it short… as Isaiah hath said before, Except the Lord of sabaoth had left us a seed i:e. the remnant we had become as Sodom” (<em><a href='B:520 9:28-29'>Rom 9:28-29</a></em> RV). This associates the shortening of the last days with the salvation of the Jewish remnant. Paul is surely expanding the Lord’s own words, that the days will be shortened “for the elect’s sake”. And that “elect”, according to Paul’s inspired exposition, are the Jews who repent and accept Jesus in the last days. Quite simply, the quicker we get the remnant of Israel to repent, the quicker the Lord will be back. The bigger message, in the context, is that the shortening of intended time periods is another example of the operation of grace in bringing about final salvation.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 9:29'>Rom 9:29</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And, as Isaiah has said before: Except the Lord of Sabaoth had left us a seed, we had become as Sodom and had been made like Gomorrah</em>- Paul makes the point that for the sake of the tiny group of Jews who did still hold and practice the truth, Israel would not suffer the judgments of Sodom in totality (<em><a href='B:520 9:29'>Rom 9:29</a></em> cp. <em><a href='B:290 1:9'>Isa 1:9</a></em>). This would indicate that there will also be a latter day Jewish remnant which will stop the faithless Israel of today receiving the judgment of permanent destruction. But in the context of Romans, the point is that the remnant themselves are "left" as such; it is God’s grace which preserves them faithful and acceptable. Not human works. God "left" a remnant of faithful believers in apostate Israel. Whilst their faithfulness was obviously a result of their own spiritual effort, God 'leaving' them from apostasy suggests that He was also active in preserving them from it too. The record does not speak of them saving themselves from it. <em><a href='B:290 1:10'>Isa 1:10</a></em> goes on to state that in fact, Judah&nbsp;<em>are</em>&nbsp;as Sodom and Gomorrah: "Hear the word of Yahweh, you rulers of Sodom Listen to the law of our God, you people of Gomorrah". But by grace, the remnant are "left" by Him so that they are&nbsp;<em>not</em>&nbsp;treated as Sodom and Gomorrah. This is again a great example of how righteousness is imputed to people by grace, and how the grace / gift of the Spirit works to keep the saved abiding faithful. This is why Romans 8 speaks so much of the gift of the Spirit in the hearts of believers; this is why the remnant are "left", maintained in faith, so that although they are as Sodom (<em><a href='B:290 1:10'>Isa 1:10</a></em>), they are not seen as Sodom (<em><a href='B:290 1:9'>Isa 1:9</a></em>).</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 9:30'>Rom 9:30</a></em>&nbsp;<em>What shall we say then? That the Gentiles, who followed not after righteousness, attained to righteousness, even the righteousness which is of faith-&nbsp;</em>The whole situation with Jews and Gentiles is being presented here as an exemplification of how salvation is by grace. Verse 31 speaks of following after "a law of righteousness", so here we need to read that in too- the Gentiles "followed not after a law of righteousness". Gentiles who were ignorant or disinterested in the Law of Moses which was holy, righteous and good (<em><a href='B:520 7:12'>Rom 7:12</a></em> s:w:) end up righteous- because that righteousness is imputed to them by faith in Christ whereby they are counted as Him.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 9:31'>Rom 9:31</a></em>&nbsp;<em>But Israel, following after a law of righteousness, did not arrive at that law</em>- In contrast to the Gentiles who believed in Christ, Israel did not obtain righteousness before God through the law of Moses. They did not arrive at the righteousness of faith, because the Mosaic law offered no righteousness on the basis of it being imputed by faith. Instead, there had to obedience. And we are too weak to attain total obedience to it:&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 9:32'>Rom 9:32</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Therefore because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by works, they stumbled at the stone of stumbling</em>- Attaining righteousness by attempted obedience to a set of laws requires no faith. And if the game is simply obedience to rules, then there is no real need for the Lord Jesus and the wonderful offer of being counted as Him, if we believe into Him. And thus He becomes a stone of stumbling.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 9:33'>Rom 9:33</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Even as it is written: Look, I lay in Zion a stone of stumbling and a rock of offence-&nbsp;</em>&nbsp;This uses the same Greek words as found in <em><a href='B:520 14:13'>Rom 14:13</a></em>, where we are exhorted not to lay s:w. a stumblingstone s:w. nor rock of offence AV "occasion to fall" in our brother's path. What God does isn't necessarily a pattern for us; we are not, e.g., to use war or murder people in the way He has done at some times. Christ is the stumblingstone to all those who seek justification by works- their trust in works means that they don't perceive the need for Him, and so the whole idea of salvation by grace through being in Him becomes a stumblingstone for them. What this means for us is that we aren't to demand salvation by works from our brethren e.g. from demanding dietary obedience from our brethren, which is the context of <em><a href='B:520 14:13'>Rom 14:13</a></em>.</p><p><em>And he that believes in him shall not be put to shame</em>- The emphasis is upon 'believing'. It is faith which makes us unashamed- in that the "faith" is faith that really, God does impute righteousness to us because we are "in Christ".</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 10:1'>Rom 10:1</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:720 1:20'>Jud 1:20</a></em>.</p><p><em>Brothers, my heart's desire and my supplication to God is for Israel, that they may be saved</em>- "Desire" is a word used only elsewhere about the desire or will of God. Paul was therefore sharing God’s desire or passion for Israel. He was praying with his will aligned with that of God, who passionately wishes Israel's salvation, and has millennia of track record in seeking it. As noted on <em><a href='B:520 9:1-3'>Rom 9:1-3</a></em>, that desire of Paul's was to the point of being theoretically willing to sacrifice his own salvation for theirs. This will / desire of God and Paul will finally come to reality, in that all Israel shall indeed be saved (<em><a href='B:520 11:26'>Rom 11:26</a></em>); but through a redefinition of who is Israel. For "all Israel" being saved must be integrated into the idea that most of Israel shall not be saved, but "a remnant shall be saved" (<em><a href='B:520 9:27'>Rom 9:27</a></em>). That remnant become "all Israel" in God’s eyes.</p><p>The language of Israel being saved is used in the Old Testament concerning their Red Sea deliverance from Egypt (<em><a href='B:20 14:30'>Exo 14:30</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 33:29'>Deu 33:29</a></em>). Paul thereby again identifies himself with Moses. But their salvation from Egypt was not their personal salvation; and the term is used again of Judah's salvation from Babylon, which again they did not make full use of. This perhaps is why <em><a href='B:290 45:17'>Isa 45:17</a></em> says that "Israel shall be saved in the Lord with an&nbsp;<em>everlasting&nbsp;</em>salvation". By being in the Lord Jesus by baptism, in the name of salvation, they could find a salvation which was eternal- a clear reference to eternal life. Only through the ministry of "the Lord our righteousness", whereby God’s righteousness is imputed to us through His Son, can Israel finally be saved (<em><a href='B:300 23:6'>Jer 23:6</a></em>). Again, this is all the outworking of the theology of Romans 1-8 in the case of Israel.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 10:2'>Rom 10:2</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For I bear them witness that they have a zeal for God, but not according to knowledge</em>- Bearing witness is legal language, of which Paul has made frequent usage in Romans 1-8. In the court of Divine judgment, it could be said in mitigation, as it were, that Israel had a zeal for God. But it was not according to knowledge, and the only knowledge worth anything is in the knowledge of the Lord Jesus. The idea of&nbsp;<em>kata</em>&nbsp;knowledge is to be found again in <em><a href='B:580 3:10'>Col 3:10</a></em>, where we read that through the activity of the Spirit, we are renewed in knowledge&nbsp;<em>kata</em>&nbsp;the mental image of the Lord Jesus. The tension is therefore between attempted legal obedience, and permitting the work of the Spirit. This is the tension which has been explored in chapter 8; accepting imputed righteousness and our inability to be justified by works means accepting the work of the Spirit to transform us in reality to that which we are now by status in Christ. Paul wrote Romans from Corinth, where he had repeatedly argued the same; the Judaist influence in Corinth was not producing spirituality, because they were not making use of the gift of the Spirit in their hearts to transform them (<em><a href='B:540 1:22'>2Co 1:22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:540 5:5'>2Co 5:5</a></em>).</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 10:3'>Rom 10:3</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For being ignorant of God’s righteousness and seeking to establish their own, they did not subject themselves to the righteousness of God</em>- Their ignorance was not in that they were unaware of the alternative. They were, to translate the Greek literally, 'agnostic' to it, not committed to it, ignorant in the sense that they ignored it. As noted on :2, there is a tension between accepting the work of the Spirit, and on the other hand seeking justification by acts of legal obedience. 'Seeking to establish' continues the courtroom language of :2. They tried to make a case before God in the basis of their own righteousness in terms of obedience to laws. But they failed to make a case; in the terms of Romans 1-8, they stood before God condemned by their sin, with their defence in ruins. The only alternative was to subject themselves beneath God’s grace and accept imputed righteousness. The same word is used of our submission to Christ, who is the righteousness of God (<em><a href='B:560 5:24'>Eph 5:24</a></em>). He has been given the power to subdue all things unto Himself s:w:, but we must ourselves choose to make that submission. It is pride in our own puny obedience to a few laws which stops that totality of submission to Him which is required for us to be counted fully righteous.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 10:4'>Rom 10:4</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For Christ is the end of the law regarding righteousness to everyone that believes</em>- This could be simply saying that for the believer in imputed righteousness, the law is finished as a source of righteousness. We have been given all righteousness in Him, and so the Law is over as a source of righteousness; and this is why Christ ended the Law in His death. But&nbsp;<em>telos</em>, "end", suggests that Christ was the end point of the Law, and the believer in imputed righteousness believes this. If the Law were perfectly obeyed, it would lead to a man who died on the cross with a perfect character- the Lord Jesus. In this sense the Law was not simply a series of types pointing forward to Him; if it were fully obeyed, it would lead to who Jesus was in character and action.</p><p>The idea that the Lord Jesus ended the Law of Moses on the cross needs some reflection. That statement only pushes the question back one stage further- how exactly did He ‘end’ the Law there? How did a man dying on a cross actually end the Law? The Lord Jesus, supremely in His death, was “the end of the law” (<em><a href='B:520 10:4'>Rom 10:4</a></em>). But the Greek&nbsp;<em>telos</em>&nbsp;“end” is elsewhere translated “the goal” (<em><a href='B:610 1:5'>1Ti 1:5</a></em> NIV). The character and person of the Lord Jesus at the end was the goal of the Mosaic law; those 613 commandments, if perfectly obeyed, were intended to give rise to a personality like that of the Lord Jesus. When He reached the climax of His personal development and spirituality, in the moment of His death, the Law was “fulfilled”. He taught that He “came” in order to die; and yet He also “came” in order to “fulfil” the Law (<em><a href='B:470 5:17'>Mat 5:17</a></em>).</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 10:5'>Rom 10:5</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For Moses writes, that the man that does the righteousness which is of the law shall live thereby</em>- The quotation from <em><a href='B:30 18:5'>Lev 18:5</a></em> could mean that actually perfect obedience would lead to life eternal; but more likely it is simply a statement that the man who obeys all the laws would live "in it" NEV "thereby", referring to the righteousness of the law. He would have blessing in this life, and live this life in the righteousness of the law- and that was it, without any hope of ultimate salvation.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 10:6'>Rom 10:6</a></em>&nbsp;<em>But the righteousness which is of faith says thus: Do not say in your heart, Who shall ascend into heaven? (that is, to bring Christ down)</em>- The quotation from <em><a href='B:50 30:11-14'>Deu 30:11-14</a></em> is somewhat doctored by Paul. The words in their original context don't seem to be saying what Paul interprets them as meaning; as elsewhere, Old Testament words and phrases are picked up and read in a totally different, Christ-centred light in the New Testament. Paul appears to be teaching that the descent of Christ from Heaven is fundamentally in terms of the action of His Spirit in the heart, which is the sanctification which arises from believing in imputed righteousness as outlined in chapter 8</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 10:7'>Rom 10:7</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Or, Who shall descend into the abyss? (that is, to bring Christ up from the dead)</em>- The Lord's resurrection enabled the gift of the Spirit in the hearts of the believers, which according to Romans 8 is all part of the wonderful process which follows believing completely in imputed righteousness.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 10:8'>Rom 10:8</a></em>&nbsp;<em>But what did it say? The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart. That is, the word of faith, which we preach</em>- The word of the simple Gospel- that if you believe in Christ you shall be saved- was enabled by the Lord's resurrection and shall come to full term in His descent from Heaven at the last day (:6,7).</p><p>"The word of faith" can simply mean that the basic content of God’s word is an appeal for faith in His Son. But it is thereby also true that the word of the Gospel leads to faith. The Lord foresaw in <em><a href='B:500 17:20'>Joh 17:20</a></em> that there would be those who would believe on Him “through their word” (i:e. the word taught by the disciples). Our word of preaching can bring others to faith. Our preaching leads to faith being created in the hearers. “The word of faith, which we preach” (<em><a href='B:520 10:8'>Rom 10:8</a></em>) is the word (Gospel) that leads to faith; and a man cannot believe without hearing the Gospel, and he will not hear it unless it is preached by a preacher. Paul summarises by saying that faith comes by hearing the Gospel and hearing by the preaching of the word of God (<em><a href='B:520 10:8'>Rom 10:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 10:14'>Rom 10:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 10:17'>Rom 10:17</a></em>). Paul’s point is that whoever believes will be saved (<em><a href='B:520 9:33'>Rom 9:33</a></em>)- and therefore, we must preach to all, so that they might take advantage of this blessed opportunity. In his repetitious manner, Paul builds up the argument in this letter:</p><p>- Even under the law, Israel could believe God’s word as preached by Moses and have righteousness imputed to them (<em><a href='B:520 10:5-8'>Rom 10:5-8</a></em>)<br/>- We preach, in essence, the very same word (<em><a href='B:520 10:9-10'>Rom 10:9-10</a></em>)<br/>- Isaiah said the same: that belief of his preaching would result in justification (<em><a href='B:520 10:11'>Rom 10:11</a></em>)<br/>- We preach the same. Whoever believes in the Lord’s saving Name by baptism will be saved (<em><a href='B:520 10:12-13'>Rom 10:12-13</a></em>)<br/>- Therefore preach the word, for without your doing this, people can never believe it and therefore be saved (<em><a href='B:520 10:14-15'>Rom 10:14-15</a></em>)<br/>- Israel had heard the word of the cross preached in the past, so just hearing the preacher will not automatically result in faith (<em><a href='B:520 10:16-21'>Rom 10:16-21</a></em>). Both preacher and hearer must be aware of this. Therefore there was a need for the preachers to turn to another wider audience, i:e. the Gentiles.</p><p>Note that this passage in Romans 10 reasons that men will only hear the Gospel if there is a preacher, and yet it also states that all men have heard the Gospel, in fulfilment of the prophesy of Psalms 19 that the message would go into all the earth. But later in the same epistle, Paul says that he preached because he wanted to take the Gospel to those “who have not heard” (<em><a href='B:520 15:21'>Rom 15:21</a></em>). There must be a connection within his thought with what he wrote in chapter 10, about all men hearing the Gospel through preaching. Surely he understood that the fulfilment of the prophecy that all men will hear the Gospel is purely dependent upon our freewill effort to preach to all men. This understanding inspired Paul to press ahead with his plans to expand Gospel work into Spain; and it should motivate us likewise.</p><p>Paul comments that truly Israel have already heard the essence of the Gospel we preach, in that “the word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach” (<em><a href='B:520 10:8'>Rom 10:8</a></em>). He quotes here from <em><a href='B:50 30:12'>Deu 30:12</a></em>: “For this command to be obedient- or, as Paul interprets it, the word of the Gospel... is it not far from thee cp. how God is “not far” from anybody, <em><a href='B:510 17:27'>Act 17:27</a></em>. It is not in heaven above, that thou shouldest say, Who will ascend for us into heaven, and bring it to us, that we may&nbsp;<em>hear and do it</em>?” (<em><a href='B:50 30:12'>Deu 30:12</a></em> LXX). As Moses spoke these words on the last day of his life, he was at the foot of Nebo, which he ascended for his final meeting with God. He is surely alluding to the way in which he had ‘ascended to heaven’ before in ascending to God on Sinai, fulfilling Israel’s wish that he should bring God’s word to them rather than God Himself speak with them. He had returned bringing God’s word to them, to which they had agreed they would “hear and do”. Earlier, in <em><a href='B:50 5:27'>Deu 5:27</a></em>, Moses had reminded the people how they had said: “Go thou near, and hear all that the LORD our God shall say: and speak thou unto us all that the LORD our God shall speak unto thee; and we will&nbsp;<em>hear it, and do</em>&nbsp;it”. Now he is telling them that actually the word he had brought to them needn’t have been brought to them as in essence it was within their hearts. It is for exactly this reason that Paul could reason elsewhere in Romans that the Gentiles do by nature the things contained in the Law, although they don’t know the letter of the Law. And the same principle is found in <em><a href='B:590 4:9'>1Th 4:9</a></em>: “As touching brotherly love, ye need not that I write unto you: for ye yourselves i:e. from within yourselves? are taught of God to love one another”. This is rather like how the Gentiles were not ‘written unto’ and yet they knew from their conscience the essential spirit of the Mosaic Law.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 10:9'>Rom 10:9</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Because if you shall confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and shall believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you shall be saved</em>- Being saved is as simple as that. It is belief and not legal obedience which is required.</p><p>Confessing Christ before men applies to baptism, not just bucking up the courage to give someone a tract at work (<em><a href='B:470 10:32'>Mat 10:32</a></em> = <em><a href='B:520 10:9-10'>Rom 10:9-10</a></em>). Romans 10; Romans 9, 10 stresses that belief&nbsp;<em>and&nbsp;</em>confession are necessary for salvation. This may be one of the many links between Romans and John’s gospel, in that <em><a href='B:500 12:42'>Joh 12:42</a></em> speaks of those who believed but wouldn’t confess. Confession, a public showing forth of our belief, is vital if we are to be saved. It’s perhaps worth noting that baptisms tend often to be attended largely by believers, and be performed indoors, e.g. in a bath at someone’s home, or a church hall. It’s quite possible to learn the Gospel, be baptized- and nobody out in this world ever know. It’s down to us to ensure this isn’t true in our case.</p><p>I have wondered, and it’s no more than me wondering, whether it could be that <em><a href='B:520 10:9'>Rom 10:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 10:13'>Rom 10:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 22:16'>Act 22:16</a></em> and the other references to calling on the name of the Lord at baptism imply that the candidate for baptism made the statement “Jesus is Lord” after their confession of faith or just before their immersion, and then they shouted the word “Abba Father” as they came out of the water, indicating their adoption as a child of God (<em><a href='B:520 8:15'>Rom 8:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:550 4:6'>Gal 4:6</a></em>). &nbsp;</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 10:10'>Rom 10:10</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For with the heart man believes to righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made to salvation</em>- With the heart (mind / brain) man believes unto salvation and not by legal obedience. It is faith which leads to imputed righteousness; but if we really have believed this wondrous truth, then we will confess it with our mouths. We cannot be passive to it. It's not that witnessing to others is a work to be done for salvation; it is rather the inevitable outcome of having believed within the heart that really, I am counted right before God and in Christ I shall live for ever. The early believers clung to the Lord in whom they had believed "with purpose of&nbsp;<em>heart</em>" (<em><a href='B:510 11:23'>Act 11:23</a></em>). They that had not heard of the cross of Christ were made to see, understand and therefore believe by Paul's preaching (<em><a href='B:520 15:21'>Rom 15:21</a></em>). Our appeals likewise must be to the understanding. See on <em><a href='B:510 11:14'>Act 11:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 11:19'>Heb 11:19</a></em>.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 10:11'>Rom 10:11</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For the scripture says: Whoever believes in him shall not be put to shame</em>- The "whoever" in <em><a href='B:290 28:16'>Isa 28:16</a></em> is taken to mean that ethnicity is not important. It is faith and not obedience to any legal code which leads us to not be shamed at the last day, nor today. For <em><a href='B:520 5:5'>Rom 5:5</a></em> uses the same word to say that the sure hope we have of salvation, due to righteousness being imputed to us, means that we are not ashamed even now- "Because God’s love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit which has been given to us". Those seeking to be unashamed on the basis of their legal obedience have not therefore known the activity of the Spirit within their hearts.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 10:12'>Rom 10:12</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:520 3:30'>Rom 3:30</a></em>.</p><p><em>For there is no distinction between Jew and Gentile, for the same one who is Lord of all is rich to all that call upon him</em>- The "whoever" of <em><a href='B:290 28:16'>Isa 28:16</a></em> means just that, no distinction is made between ethnic groups. The riches given by the Lord Jesus to those who believe are those of the gift of the Spirit (<em><a href='B:530 1:5'>1Co 1:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:540 9:11'>2Co 9:11</a></em>). The early preachers concluded that there was no longer a distinction between Jew and Gentile exactly because they saw the gift of the same Spirit to both Jewish and Gentile believers, and the Spirit gift purified the hearts of them all (<em><a href='B:510 15:9'>Act 15:9</a></em>). This was surely why the miraculous manifestation of the Spirit was given to the Gentiles whom Peter was to baptize with Cornelius- to make this same point.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 10:13'>Rom 10:13</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For whoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved</em>- Salvation was for "whoever", regardless of ethnicity. And salvation was by calling upon oneself the Lord's Name, having His Name / characteristics counted to them- and not by legalistic obedience. This is another way of saying that righteousness is imputed by faith in the Lord Jesus, and demonstrating this by baptism into His Name. The pouring out of the Spirit gifts described in Joel 2 was primarily fulfilled in Acts 2, whilst looking forward to "the great and the terrible day of the Lord". Thus <em><a href='B:360 2:32'>Joe 2:32</a></em> "Whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be delivered" was fulfilled primarily in the first century too; it is quoted here in <em><a href='B:520 10:13'>Rom 10:13</a></em> in this connection.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 10:14'>Rom 10:14</a></em>&nbsp;<em>How then shall they call on him in whom they do not have belief? And how shall they believe in him about whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher?-&nbsp;</em>Paul now demonstrates that believing these things demands in practice that we preach them. People cannot believe these things if they have not heard them. If we grasp the wonder of imputed righteousness in Christ, we should therefore take Him to people, and to Israel in particular. This is where true theology cannot but have a transforming influence in practice. For one cannot be passive to these great truths.</p><p>Here Paul clearly states that (as a general rule) it is impossible to believe in Christ without a preacher. The Ethiopian eunuch was the classic case of this. Bible in hand, his exasperation boiled over: “How can I (understand),&nbsp;<em>except</em>&nbsp;some man shall guide me?" (<em><a href='B:510 8:31'>Act 8:31</a></em>). It is perfectly possible that <em><a href='B:520 10:4'>Rom 10:4</a></em> alludes to this, implying that this man's case was typical and notice the connections between <em><a href='B:510 8:37'>Act 8:37</a></em> and <em><a href='B:520 10:9'>Rom 10:9</a></em>. Likewise the Lord Jesus spoke of "them also which shall believe on me through&nbsp;<em>their</em>&nbsp; (the preachers') word" (<em><a href='B:500 17:20'>Joh 17:20</a></em>)- not through their unguided Bible reading. If all we had been given was a Bible, most of us would simply not be where we are today, spiritually. If I had started reading from Genesis, I don't think I'd have got much beyond Leviticus before giving up on the Bible. Yet there are some who have made it through, from Genesis to Revelation. And their testimony is even more emphatic: "Without doubt I needed someone to guide me, I was just crying out for all the pieces to be put into place", in the words of one such recent convert.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 10:15'>Rom 10:15</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And how shall they preach, unless they are sent? Even as it is written: How beautiful are the feet of them that bring glad tidings of good things</em>- An apostle is a sent one. But the implication is that we are all apostles- grasping the wonder of the salvation possible is of itself the call to preach it. And human need is of itself the call. The prophecy of the Lord Jesus preaching: “How beautiful are the feet of&nbsp;<em>him</em>&nbsp;that preaches the Gospel” (<em><a href='B:410 1:15'>Nah 1:15</a></em>)&nbsp; is quoted here with a subtle change of pronoun: “How beautiful are the feet of&nbsp;<em>them</em>&nbsp;that preach”. We are the Lord Jesus to this world, because we are brethren in Him. Any who are in Him, having His righteousness imputed to the, counted as Him, must act as Him- and He is the light of the world. So must we be. This alone is a powerful imperative as to who we are, how we speak, the men and women we show ourselves to be. Paul is quoting this Old Testament prophecy about Jesus to prove that we are all “sent” to preach the Gospel. The validity of our commission to preach is quite simply that Jesus Himself preached; in this way we are all personally “sent” to preach, simply because He was sent to preach. As the Father sent Him, so He sends us.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 10:16'>Rom 10:16</a></em>&nbsp;<em>But they did not all obey the glad tidings. For Isaiah said: Lord, who has believed our report?-&nbsp;</em>This is one of a number of instances of where Old Testament Messianic Scriptures are applied to Paul in the context of his preaching Christ. What is true of the Lord Jesus must be true of us, if we are "in Him" and counted by God as Him. In Judaism, the prophets were seen as a saintly group to whom no ordinary person could pretend. But both the Messiah and Isaiah are here being cited as patterns for all who are "in Christ". The identity between Christian preachers and Isaiah also demonstrates that the essence of the Gospel "glad tidings" was preached in the Old Testament. Isaiah's lament here is of Judah refusing the good news of Messiah in his day, and that is just what happened in the first century. Isaiah's lament is that despite the amazing achievement of Messiah and God’s offer of grace in Him, Jewry generally had not believed it.</p><p>The theme of Romans is the Gospel, and in this context Paul makes the point that because both Jew and Gentile are saved by the Gospel,&nbsp;<em>therefore</em>&nbsp;we should preach to both Jew and Gentile (<em><a href='B:520 10:9-18'>Rom 10:9-18</a></em>). In this context, Paul quotes from <em><a href='B:290 52:7'>Isa 52:7</a></em> and <em><a href='B:410 1:15'>Nah 1:15</a></em>, both concerning preaching to Israel: "How shall they hear without a preacher? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of&nbsp;<em>them</em>&nbsp;(cp. 'he' in the originals- our preaching is a manifestation of the Lord) that preach the Gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings". The Nahum passage is in the context of preaching to Israel the good news of their ultimate freedom from the Assyrian invasion which was then imminent. We are in a strikingly parallel situation in these last days. <em><a href='B:520 10:16'>Rom 10:16</a></em> then goes on to quote <em><a href='B:290 53:1'>Isa 53:1</a></em>, which again refers to the preaching of the Gospel to Israel, and applies it to our preaching.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 10:17'>Rom 10:17</a></em>&nbsp;<em>So belief comes of hearing, and hearing by the word of God</em>- "Hearing" is the same Greek word translated "report" in :16. It refers more to our preaching than to their hearing. We can play a part in the faith of others; our preaching is their hearing, and without it, they cannot believe. God has delegated His purpose and the progress of His work to us. The responsibility is huge. Faith comes by hearing God’s word. But we can hear (or in our generation, read) God’s word without faith (<em><a href='B:620 3:15'>2Ti 3:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 4:2'>Heb 4:2</a></em>). Bible reading, like every other spiritual exercise, can become a mere formality. "The word of God" here as often in the New Testament refers to the message of God in Christ, the Gospel, rather than every verse in the Bible from Genesis to Revelation, including the Chronicles genealogies. Our reporting / preaching NEV "hearing" is&nbsp;<em>dia&nbsp;</em>the word of God. This is not quite the same as saying that we preach the word of God; that would be phrased differently in Greek. Our preaching is on account of the word; it is motivated by the wonder of the word we have ourselves heard.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 10:18'>Rom 10:18</a></em>&nbsp;<em>But I say: Did they not hear? Yes, truly, their sound went out into all the earth and their words to the ends of the world</em>- Paul is doubtless alluding to the great commission here. But he says that it is fulfilled by the preachers spoken of in <em><a href='B:230 19:1-4'>Psa 19:1-4</a></em>, which he quotes. This speaks of the "heavens" declaring God’s gospel world-wide. In the same way as the sun 'goes forth' all over the world, so will the "heavens" go forth to declare the Gospel. The 'heavens' do not just refer to the twelve in the first century; the New Testament says that all in Christ are the "heavenlies"; we are all part of the "sun of righteousness". The arising of Christ as the sun at His second coming (<em><a href='B:460 4:2'>Mal 4:2</a></em>) will be heralded by the church witnessing the Gospel of His coming beforehand. The enthusiast will note a number of other preaching allusions in Psalms 19 : "The firmament&nbsp;<em>sheweth</em>&nbsp;his handiwork" (v:1) uses a word (in the Septuagint) which occurs in <em><a href='B:490 9:60'>Luk 9:60</a></em> concerning the publishing of the Gospel. "Their&nbsp;<em>line</em>&nbsp;is gone out through all the earth" (v:4) is picked up by Paul in describing his preaching (<em><a href='B:540 10:13-16'>2Co 10:13-16</a></em> AVmg:). The idea of 'going out' throughout the earth was clearly at the root of Christ's great commission (<em><a href='B:480 16:15'>Mar 16:15</a></em>). Yet, as we have said, the “heavens" to which this refers in Psalms 19 are interpreted by the New Testament as referring to&nbsp;<em>all</em>&nbsp;believers in Christ. We have to ask whether David really had this interpretation in mind when he wrote Psalms 19. Probably not, but New Testament quotation of the Old is clearly at liberty in taking words out of context and applying them to Christian themes. We are not permitted to wrest Scripture from its context as we are not inspired; but the Spirit within both Paul and David was the same and can rework the words as needed. And yet on a human level, David was one of Paul's heroes; to the point&nbsp;that David’s words are quoted by him with the preface: "<em>I</em>&nbsp;say...". But it was the same Spirit working through both men. See on :20.</p><p>Israel 'heard' the word, and yet they did not ''hearken" to it (<em><a href='B:520 10:16'>Rom 10:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 10:18'>Rom 10:18</a></em>)- we can hear but not hear. Yet if we&nbsp;<em>really&nbsp;</em>believed that Scripture is inspired, we wouldn't be like this. It is awesome to reflect how those Hebrew letters, those Greek ciphers written on parchment 1950 years ago, were actually the very words of God Almighty. But this is the real import of our understanding of inspiration. Israel literally 'heard' the words of Ezekiel, knowing that a prophet had been among them- but they weren't obedient. We too can pay such lip service to the doctrine of inspiration- and yet not be truly obedient to the word we know to be inspired.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 10:19'>Rom 10:19</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:50 7:4'>Deu 7:4</a></em>.</p><p><em>But I say: Did Israel not know? First Moses said: I will provoke you to jealousy with those who are no nation, with a nation void of understanding will I anger you-</em>&nbsp;Paul sees the Jewish anger at Gentile conversion to Christ as a reflection of their jealousy. If Gentiles became followers of some idol cult, the Jews would have been indifferent. But their jealousy was provoked by Israel accepting Jesus of Nazareth as God’s Son and Saviour. This jealousy was and is surely a reflection of a bad conscience, just as subconsciously Joseph's brothers knew that Joseph was not dead but alive, and standing before them. It was Israel's 'knowledge' of the Gospel they had heard which is related by Paul to their anger and jealousy. And we see the same today in many who exhibit anger and jealousy over the faith of others. This is a function of their 'knowledge' which they are in denial of.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 10:20'>Rom 10:20</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And Isaiah is very bold, and said: I was found by those that did not seek Me; I showed myself to those who were not asking for Me</em>- Paul, having the same Divine Spirit as Isaiah, sensed that Isaiah spoke those inspired words in a "very bold" manner, daring manner (s:w. <em><a href='B:520 5:7'>Rom 5:7</a></em>). See on :18. The fact Gentiles found God in Christ when they were not seeking Him is an exemplification of the ideas of predestination and calling which have been introduced in chapter 8 as the supreme example of God’s grace. The element of calling, of finding God when we were not looking for Him, is an example of that higher hand in our lives which is of grace alone. "Seek and you shall find" is here as it were subverted. It's not that God is hiding behind a set of cards or has set up the Bible as a riddle between Him and men, which few figure out. He shows Himself to those who aren't even seeking. This is grace indeed.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 10:21'>Rom 10:21</a></em>&nbsp;<em>But to Israel He said: All the day long did I spread out My hands to a disobedient and obstinate people</em>- The implication of "all the day long" is that Israel's day of opportunity was over. The spreading out of hands towards someone is a picture of a father teaching a child to walk, urging them to take their first faltering steps towards his opening arms. And this was just the figure used of God to Israel in <em><a href='B:350 11:3'>Hos 11:3</a></em>.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 11:1'>Rom 11:1</a></em>&nbsp;<em>I say then, has God cast off His people? God forbid For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin</em>- As we will see on :2, God has cast off Israel but has not cast off His people in that a minority of them, like Paul, have accepted the Lord Jesus. Thereby His people, His Israel, have been redefined. The casting away of natural Israel led to the reconciling of the Gentile world (:15). So clearly they were cast away. "You are not My people" (<em><a href='B:350 1:9-10'>Hos 1:9-10</a></em>) is clear enough; they can only again become God’s people if they are reconciled in the last days (<em><a href='B:350 1:10'>Hos 1:10</a></em>). God broke His covenant relationship with His former people just as a stick is broken in two (<em><a href='B:450 11:10-11'>Zec 11:10-11</a></em>). God and Israel are, in another analogy, in a state of divorce, and He has remarried. Paul sees his own conversion as the evidence that God still has a people, and he urges other Jews to emulate his example (:14). The same word for 'cast off' is used of how Israel cast off Moses (<em><a href='B:510 7:27'>Act 7:27</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 7:39'>Act 7:39</a></em>) just as they did Messiah; and Paul uses the word in saying how the Jews had 'cast off' God’s word in Christ (<em><a href='B:510 13:46'>Act 13:46</a></em>). So the situation arose because Israel themselves had cast off God.</p><p>It's possible to read this another way, whereby Israel are not 'cast off' because the faithfulness of a minority of them is counted to the rest. Therefore in some sense, God has cast off His people (<em><a href='B:120 21:14'>2Ki 21:14</a></em> RV; <em><a href='B:450 10:6'>Zec 10:6</a></em>); and yet, because a minority of them will always accept Christ, it is not true that God has cast off His people in a total sense, in that 'Israel' has been redefined; now Jews as well as Gentiles must be baptized into Christ if they wish to be the seed of Abraham. It was only because of this faithful remnant even in Old Testament times that Israel had not become like Sodom (<em><a href='B:520 9:29'>Rom 9:29</a></em>)- even though Old Testament passages such as Ezekiel 16 clearly liken Jerusalem to Sodom. Yet they are not as Sodom ultimately, for the sake of the remnant who will believe. Perfectly in this context, Paul draws out the lesson from Elijah’s mistake (<em><a href='B:520 11:2'>Rom 11:2</a></em>); Elijah had thought that God had totally cast Israel off, but he didn’t appreciate that there was a remnant of faithful within Israel. And the existence of that remnant may likewise have been concealed from the Christian church, Paul is perhaps implying. Only&nbsp;<em>part&nbsp;</em>of Israel are blind to Messiah; a majority, but not all of them (<em><a href='B:520 11:5'>Rom 11:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 11:7'>Rom 11:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 11:25'>Rom 11:25</a></em>). I don’t think that Paul is merely speaking of the situation in the first century, where clearly some Jews did believe. I say this because <em><a href='B:300 31:37'>Jer 31:37</a></em> states that Israel will never be “cast off”; yet, according to Romans 11, Israel are only not cast off because some of them do believe in Christ. The fact Israel are not now totally “cast off” therefore indicates that there always will be a remnant of faithful Jews- faithful to God’s Son and trusting in grace rather than law (<em><a href='B:520 11:6'>Rom 11:6</a></em>). Therefore we should be hopeful that at least a remnant will respond to our preaching to them. The Jews who do not believe were “cast off” at the very time the world was reconciled to God, i:e. when they crucified Jesus (<em><a href='B:520 11:15'>Rom 11:15</a></em> cp. <em><a href='B:520 5:10-11'>Rom 5:10-11</a></em>). It was through their “trespass” in crucifying Him that salvation came (<em><a href='B:520 11:11'>Rom 11:11</a></em> RVmg:). And the resurrection and second coming which actualizes that salvation will only come once they repent (<em><a href='B:520 11:15'>Rom 11:15</a></em>). So, Israel as a whole are not “cast off” because of the remnant of Jews who will always believe in the grace of Christ; but those individuals who crucified the Lord and uphold that position have cast themselves off from God. The practical upshot of all this is that we should preach to Israel, with faith that some will repent</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 11:2'>Rom 11:2</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:40 26:9'>Num 26:9</a></em>.</p><p><em>God did not cast off His people, whom He foreknew-&nbsp;</em>As noted on :1, God did cast off His people; the axe was laid at the root of the tree and it was cut down, or in another image, it was dried up from the roots even from the time of the Lord's ministry. But God’s purpose with Israel continued in that Israel and 'God’s people' were redefined. So I suggest we need to read the statement here as meaning 'His people-whom-He-foreknew'. The foreknown ones were not cast off; the rest were. And earlier in Romans, Paul has laboured the point that it is the believers in Christ who are the foreknown (<em><a href='B:520 8:29'>Rom 8:29</a></em> s:w:). For the Lord Jesus Christ was the ultimately 'foreknown' One (<em><a href='B:670 1:20'>1Pe 1:20</a></em> s:w:), and those in Him are likewise foreknown. Paul goes on to equate the foreknown ones with the remnant at Elijah's time. The "His people" doesn't therefore refer to Israel generically, but the faithful remnant. That remnant of course have not been cast off; but as demonstrated in chapters 9 and 10, mere physical descent from Abraham doesn't make anyone 'God’s people'; for Ishmael and many others were descended from Abraham too.</p><p><em>Or do you not know what the scripture says of Elijah? How he pleads with God against Israel</em>- “I, even I&nbsp;<em>only</em>&nbsp;am left" was Elijah's cry to God as he realized the depth of Israel's apostasy (<em><a href='B:110 19:10'>1Ki 19:10</a></em>). But this was interpreted by God as a prayer for God to condemn Israel (<em><a href='B:520 11:2-3'>Rom 11:2-3</a></em>). God read what was in Elijah's heart, and counted this as his prayer. Elijah prayed to God against Israel when he told Him that he alone was left faithful- i:e. he was asking God to destroy the nation now. Our essential feelings are read by the Father as prayers.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 11:3'>Rom 11:3</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Lord, they have killed Your prophets, they have destroyed Your altars; and I am left alone, and they seek my life-&nbsp;There</em>&nbsp;is such a thing as feeling lonely when we needn’t. Elijah is an example of this; he felt that he was “left alone” faithful in Israel- even though there were another 7,000 who had not bowed the knee to Baal (<em><a href='B:520 11:3'>Rom 11:3</a></em>). The Hebrew in 1 Kings is hard to translate. It could mean that God reserved 7,000 of Elijah’s brothers and sisters who potentially would not bow the knee to Baal. Yet Elijah didn’t want to see the potential of his brethren. He set himself in a league above them, like the Psalmist, saying in his haste that all men are liars (<em><a href='B:230 116:11'>Psa 116:11</a></em>).</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 11:4'>Rom 11:4</a></em>&nbsp;<em>But what was the answer of God to him? I have left for myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed their knee to Baal</em>- "Left for myself" is the key phrase. These had been preserved by grace. God had worked in their lives to keep them faithful. And yet they were not openly associated with Elijah; their faith was weak, we can conclude; they included the likes of Obadiah who although counted faithful, still presumably went along with the appearance of Baal worship. These 7000 were therefore counted righteous, preserved by grace- and that is the exact context of Romans.</p><p>It may be that Paul's equation of the Jewish believers of the first century with the seven thousand who refused to worship Baal has a literal application (<em><a href='B:520 11:4'>Rom 11:4</a></em>) in that there were about 7,000 Jewish believers. By the time of <em><a href='B:510 4:4'>Act 4:4</a></em> "the number of the men (that believed) had come to be (Greek- not as AV) about five thousand". The only verse that seems to contradict this impression is <em><a href='B:510 21:20'>Act 21:20</a></em>: "Thou seest, brother, how many thousands of Jews there are which believe". However, the Greek word translated "many" is nowhere else translated like this. The sense really is 'You know what thousands believe'- i:e. 'you know the number of Jewish believers, it's in the thousands'. See on <em><a href='B:510 2:46'>Act 2:46</a></em>.<br/>Reflect on how God’s mercy is far greater than the mercy of man- even if we are talking about very loving and spiritual people. Elijah told God that only he was faithful, and the rest of the ecclesia of Israel had turned away. God said that in&nbsp;<em>His</em>&nbsp;eyes, there were another 7,000 faithful. Paul uses this as an example of how all of us are like that 7,000- those saved by God’s grace (<em><a href='B:520 11:4-5'>Rom 11:4-5</a></em>). So Elijah was a spiritual man; but by His grace, God thought much higher of Elijah's brethren than Elijah did.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 11:5'>Rom 11:5</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:520 11:1'>Rom 11:1</a></em>.</p><p><em>Even so then, at this present time also, there is a remnant, according to the calling of grace</em>- As noted on :4, the remnant in Elijah's time were counted as righteous. But this was by grace. Chapter 8 has powerfully made the point that the whole concept of calling requires grace; the fact some are called and others aren't is one of the most obvious examples of grace. The "remnant" were now God’s people.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 11:6'>Rom 11:6</a></em> – see on <em><a href='B:500 4:36'>Joh 4:36</a></em>.</p><p><em>But if it is by grace, it is no more of works. Otherwise grace is no more grace</em>- The concept of grace has no meaning if works are required. The AV and other MSS add to the effect that "work is no more work". We must add in an ellipsis: "Justification by work". We cannot be justified by work, the concept loses meaning, if calling is by grace.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 11:7'>Rom 11:7</a></em>&nbsp;<em>What then? Israel failed to obtain what it was seeking. The chosen obtained it, but the rest were hardened</em>- <em><a href='B:520 10:20'>Rom 10:20</a></em> has said that the Gentiles were not seeking salvation but were given it; Israel was seeking but didn’t obtain, because their searching was not in faith. The chosen / elected by grace obtained it when not looking for it; this is grace itself. "The rest", i:e. Israel, were hardened just as Pharaoh was hardened. They were treated as the Gentile world because that is where they were in their hearts. And yet even Pharaoh had a chance of salvation; and his hardening was a confirmation of his hardening of his own heart:&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 11:8'>Rom 11:8</a></em>&nbsp;<em>According as it is written: God gave them a spirit of stupour, eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear, to this very day</em>- This explains in more detail what it means to have a hardened heart (:7). There is a psychological operation performed on the spirit or the mind- by the Spirit. This is in contrast to how God’s Spirit works to call by grace; for&nbsp;<em>charis</em>, "grace", essentially means a gift, and often refers to the gift of God’s Spirit. The faithful were 'left' by grace. This is why chapter 8 goes on from talking about election and grace to speak of the Spirit gift in the heart.</p><p>The repentance of Israel will be associated with an opening of their eyes to God’s word. "The Lord hath poured out upon (Israel) the spirit of deep sleep, and hath closed your eyes (quoted in <em><a href='B:520 11:8'>Rom 11:8</a></em> concerning Israel's blindness to Christ)... the vision of all (God’s word) is become unto you as the words of a book that is sealed... (but) in that day (of the Kingdom) shall the deaf hear the words of the book" (<em><a href='B:290 29:10-11'>Isa 29:10-11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:290 29:17-18'>Isa 29:17-18</a></em>). This will be when the book is&nbsp;<em>un</em>sealed at "the time of the end" (<em><a href='B:340 12:4'>Dan 12:4</a></em>). It will be in our last days that Israel's blindness starts to be cured, thanks to a Word-based revival, led by the Elijah ministry.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 11:9'>Rom 11:9</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:510 1:20'>Act 1:20</a></em>.</p><p><em>And David said: Let their table be made a snare and a trap and a stumblingblock and a recompense unto them</em>- Whilst "their table" can refer to a materialistic enjoyment of the things of this life, we will later suggest that the Jew in view who have stumbled are those who had initially accepted Christ in the first century, and were now stumbling from the way. This is the theme of Hebrews, the letters of Peter and other New Testament material. Their table therefore would more likely refer to their attitude to a closed table, at which they forbad Gentile believers or any others whom they feared would lead them to guilt by association. It was and is this exclusive, superior attitude which causes legalists to stumble in a spiritual sense. it is their "recompense", their reward in this life only. But their exclusivity becomes a snare and trap to them spiritually. This is the concern of Paul so often; that refusing to accept other believers will cause spiritual stumbling to the supposedly elite:&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 11:10'>Rom 11:10</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Let their eyes be darkened that they may not see, and bend their back forever</em>- This darkening of Jewish hearts / eyes has been spoken of in <em><a href='B:520 1:21'>Rom 1:21</a></em> (s:w:), and I have argued on chapter 1 that 'Jews' and 'Gentiles' refer specifically to the Jewish and Gentile Christian converts within the church at Rome- rather than to Jews and Gentiles in some generic, global sense. As noted on :10, what is in view here is the stumbling of Jewish Christian believers out of the way, leading to their being cut off from the Christ-olive tree. '"Bend the back" uses the same word as just used in <em><a href='B:520 11:4'>Rom 11:4</a></em> for those who bowed the knee to Baal. They would be confirmed in their idolatry. And perhaps the reference is to how the Christian Jews who fell away from faith would eternally bow down at the last judgment (<em><a href='B:730 3:9'>Rev 3:9</a></em>).</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 11:11'>Rom 11:11</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:520 11:1'>Rom 11:1</a></em>.</p><p><em>I say then, did they stumble that they might fall? God forbid But by their fall, salvation came to the Gentiles, to provoke them to jealousy</em>- God did not just make them fall for the sake of it. Paul's vision was of the Jews being provoked by seeing the Gentiles rejoicing in the grace of Abrahamic salvation; and responding by also accepting it. Whether however this was God’s intention or simply Paul's fantasy is not clear; he will write in :14 that he aims at provoking his Jewish brethren to emulate him in turning to salvation by grace in Christ. Whether he really achieved that aim is questionable; and in any case he was sent to the Gentiles and not to the Jews. I have noted throughout commentary on Acts that Paul became obsessed with preaching to the Jews and this at times led him to exaggerate positions in relation to his hopes for them. The language of stumbling and falling encourages us to assume that "the Jews" in view are not Israelites generally, but Jews who had initially accepted Christ but had now stumbled from Him and fallen; for stumbling is relevant to believers rather than those who have never professed a faith in Christ. The fall of Israel enabled the salvation of the Gentiles because there appear to be a specific number of saved persons; and if the Jews didn’t want their places, then as in the parable of the feast, the places had to be filled by others. This will now be stated explicitly in :12.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 11:12'>Rom 11:12</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Now if their fall is the riches of the world-&nbsp;</em>The whole failure of Israel became "riches for the world", the "riches" which by predestination are poured out upon the vessels of mercy (<em><a href='B:520 9:23'>Rom 9:23</a></em>). Nothing is ultimately wasted or lost. Nothing can be done against the Truth (<em><a href='B:540 13:8'>2Co 13:8</a></em>). Meditate on your own life and identify the countless failures through which, especially as you look back over time, the "invisible" hand of God is discernible:&nbsp;The 'enriching' was not just in that Gentiles could have hope of eternity in the future, at the Lord's return. The same word is used in <em><a href='B:560 3:16'>Eph 3:16</a></em> of the current enrichment of believers by "his Spirit in the inner man". This enrichment by the gift of the Spirit is so much a part of believing; indeed Israel refused so much spiritually.</p><p><em>And their loss the riches of the Gentiles, how much more their fulness?</em>- "Loss" is literally 'their diminishing' (as AV); the idea is to their diminished numbers compared to the intention that the seed be as the sand of the seashore for multitude. But their resignation as it were opened up their places for the Gentiles, which is the idea of :25 speaking of how the full number of the Gentiles must come in. The places at the marriage supper must be filled up; the diminished number of Jews taking the places meant that the Gentiles had to be compelled to come in, even though according to the parable such an invitation was not at all what they were seeking for (see on :7). If Jewish rejection of the Gospel was associated with such rich blessing being shared- how much more shall their final acceptance of the Gospel, thus making up the "fulness" or full number of redeemed, be associated with blessing to the world in the form of God’s Kingdom on earth.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 11:13'>Rom 11:13</a></em>&nbsp;<em>But I speak to you who are Gentiles- inasmuch as I am an apostle of the Gentiles, I glorify my ministry</em>- The believers in Rome were split between Jews and Gentiles. My reconstruction is that some of the Jewish Christians were returning to Judaism and the synagogue system, as indeed was happening throughout the empire and not least in the Jerusalem church. By speaking of the immense spiritual wealth coming to the Gentile believers, Paul says he was seeking to provoke the Jews to accepting grace. But Paul's letter to the Romans was not going to provoke the Jews generally; but it could provoke the Jewish Christians in Rome who would hear or read it. I will later suggest that it is these lapsed Jewish Christians who are the branches which had been broken off the olive tree. Paul was sent to the Gentiles and Peter to the Jews, but I have suggested throughout commentary on Acts that Paul never completely accepted this as he might have done. He decided to interpret the ministry to the Gentiles as a way of provoking Jewish conversion. Acts records how consistently he arrived in a town and sought to provoke the Jews immediately- and suffered hugely because of it. For it was Jewish opposition which led to his various tribulations, which he could have been spared if he had been content to let Peter witness to the Jews:&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 11:14'>Rom 11:14</a></em>&nbsp;<em>If by any means I may provoke to jealousy them that are my flesh, and may save some of them</em>- As noted above, Paul did indeed provoke the Jews to jealousy but there is no record of this policy actually being successful in eliciting Jewish conversion.</p><p>In Paul’s case, being all things to all men meant that at times He sacrificed highest principle in order to get through to men; He didn’t just baldly state doctrinal truth and leave his hearers with the problem of whether to accept it. He really sought to persuade men. He magnified his ministry of preaching to the Gentiles, he emphasized the possibility of Gentile salvation, “If by any means I may provoke to emulation ‘incite to rivalry’ them which are my flesh the Jews, and might save some of them” (<em><a href='B:520 11:13-14'>Rom 11:13-14</a></em>). This hardly seems a very appropriate method, under the spotlight of highest principle. But it was a method Paul used. Likewise he badgers the Corinthians into giving money for the poor saints in Jerusalem on the basis that he has boasted to others of how much they would give (<em><a href='B:540 9:2'>2Co 9:2</a></em>), and these boasts had provoked others to be generous; so now, they had better live up to their promise and give the cash. If somebody promised to give money to charity and then didn’t do so, we wouldn’t pressurize them to give. And we wouldn’t really encourage one ecclesia to give money on the basis of telling them that another ecclesia had promised to be very generous, so they ought to be too. Yet these apparently human methods were used by Paul. He spoke “in human terms” to the Romans, “because of the infirmity of your flesh” (<em><a href='B:520 6:19'>Rom 6:19</a></em> NIV); he so wanted to make his point understood. And when he told husbands to love their wives, he uses another rather human reason: that because your wife is “one flesh” with you, by loving her you are loving yourself. ‘And’, he reasons, ‘you wouldn’t hate yourself, would you, so – love your wife’. The cynic could reasonably say that this is pure selfishness (<em><a href='B:560 5:29'>Eph 5:29</a></em>); and Paul seems to recognize that the higher level of understanding is that a husband should love his wife purely because he is manifesting the love of Christ to an often indifferent and unappreciative ecclesia (<em><a href='B:560 5:32-33'>Eph 5:32-33</a></em>). And yet Paul plainly uses the lower level argument too.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 11:15'>Rom 11:15</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:520 11:1'>Rom 11:1</a></em>.</p><p><em>For if the casting away of them is the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead?</em>- Israel were indeed cast away- see on :1 and :2. The opportunity for the reconciling of the Gentile world arose, as Paul sees it, from Israel's rejection of the Gospel. But he foresaw that finally, they would accept the Gospel in the last days, and this would be associated with the resurrection of the dead. Paul as all true Christians acted as if the last day was imminent, and therefore sought earnestly for Israel's repentance- just as we should. He saw this as the great precursor to the resurrection of the last day. He argues the same in :26- the Messianic deliverer comes to Zion to bring Jacob back to God. The parable of fruit on the fig tree taught the same- that generation would see all thing fulfilled. We likewise ought to seek Jewish repentance in order to hasten the day of the Lord's return.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 11:16'>Rom 11:16</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And if the firstfruit is holy, so is the lump; and if the root is holy, so are the branches</em>- The "firstfruit" is the Lord Jesus (<em><a href='B:530 15:20'>1Co 15:20</a></em>; <em><a href='B:530 15:23'>1Co 15:23</a></em>), and the lump always elsewhere refers to the mass of believers (<em><a href='B:520 9:21'>Rom 9:21</a></em>; <em><a href='B:530 5:6-7'>1Co 5:6-7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:550 5:9'>Gal 5:9</a></em>). The holiness of the Lord Jesus is imputed to all in Him. This leads us to likewise connect "the root" with the Lord Jesus and the "branches" with all in Him. Rom. 15:12 (along with Rev. 5:5; 22:16) will define "the root" as the Lord Jesus. The parable of the vine in John 15 is so similar- the Lord Jesus is the vine, we are the branches, and those who do not bear fruit are cut off from Him. The similarity with this allusion to the olive tree is exact. Perhaps the olive is chosen because Paul's theme is the ministry of the Spirit, and the oil of the olive tree is more appropriate for that symbolism. The branches are made holy by their association with the root- this connects with the entire theme of imputed righteousness which Romans has so far developed. Yet we are to read that branches from this olive tree were cut off for unfruitfulness. Those branches had at one time been connected to Christ. I therefore suggest that Paul writing from prison in Caesarea to Rome, at a point well in to Christian history, is talking about Jews who had been baptized into Christ but had now left Him [we note that Romans was written from prison, Rom. 16:7, although before Paul visited Rome. So the 2 years imprisonment in Caesarea would seem to be when Paul wrote this letter]. The Jewish Christians left the Lord Jesus in order to return to Judaism, but the point is that in fact by doing so, they had come out from the true olive tree, the true Israel of God.</p><p>Paul makes an association between Job and Israel in <em><a href='B:520 11:16-17'>Rom 11:16-17</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 11:30'>Rom 11:30</a></em>:</p><table><tr><td></p><p>Romans 11&nbsp;</td><td>Job</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>:35 "Who hath first given to Him,&nbsp;and it shall be recompensed unto&nbsp;Him again?". This is countering&nbsp;the Jewish reasoning that they were self-righteous and were&nbsp;giving their righteousness as a&nbsp;gift to God, for which they&nbsp;were blessed.</td><td>Elihu similarly rebukes the self-righteous Job: "If thou be righteous, what givest thou him? Or what receiveth&nbsp;He of thine hand?" (<em><a href='B:220 35:7'>Job 35:7</a></em>). Without this key from Job it would be&nbsp;hard to understand what 'gift'&nbsp; <em><a href='B:520 11:35'>Rom 11:35</a></em> was&nbsp;speaking about.</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>:16,17 use the figure of roots and branches to describe the&nbsp;Broken branches refer to the&nbsp;apostate Jews:&nbsp;</td><td>Bildad speaks of the&nbsp;wicked (i:e. <em><a href='B:220 18:4'>Job 18:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:220 18:7'>Job 18:7</a></em> clearly Jews:&nbsp; refer to him)&nbsp; "his roots shall be dried&nbsp;up beneath, and&nbsp;above shall his branch be cut off" (<em><a href='B:220 18:16'>Job 18:16</a></em>)</td><td></td></tr></table>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 11:17'>Rom 11:17</a></em>&nbsp;<em>But if some of the branches were broken off, and you, being a wild olive, were grafted in among them and did become partaker with them of the root of the fatness of the olive tree-&nbsp;</em>The breaking off of the branches is because they bear no fruit, according to the parable of the vine in John 15. The wild olive likewise is characterized by bearing no fruit. The Gentiles were therefore grafted in by grace- they had the same deficit of fruit as did the Jews. They were grafted in not because they were more fruitful. Fruit refers to the fruit of the Spirit; this is of the essence. The grafted branches must partake of the fatness, the oily-ness Gk:, of the root. They must partake of the spirit of Christ and thereby bear fruit- otherwise they too would be cut off. The figure of the olive rather than the fig is perhaps used in order to highlight this aspect of the oil / Spirit. The same word for "partaker" is used of our partaking of grace the "gift" of the Spirit of Christ and the Lord Jesus (<em><a href='B:570 1:7'>Phi 1:7</a></em>). The word&nbsp;<em>sug-koinos</em>&nbsp;suggests co-fellowship; and fellowship is with a person, the root, the Lord Jesus, "the root" of David (Rev. 5:5; 22:16; Is. 11:10), the root out a dry land (Is. 53:2). Even within Romans, the Lord is called "the root of [from] Jesse" (Rom. 15:12).  The broken off branches had therefore once been in the fellowship of the Lord Jesus and partakers of His Spirit / fatness. The figure requires that the broken off branches were one time Jewish Christian believers, and not Israel in a generic sense. The vine parable of John 15 likewise requires the branches to refer to those in Christ who were later broken off from the Christ-vine. They were broken off because they did not abide in Christ; and John later comments that we know we abide in Him because of the Spirit we have been given.
The observation has often been made that there is apparently a horticultural error here- because a cultivated shoot is grafted into a wild olive tree stem. And not the other way around, as here, where a wild shoot is grafted into the stem of a cultivated tree. But the error was so obvious as to have been obvious and intentional. This is grace, and the 'error' is the same kind of thing seen in the Lord's parables, where, e.g., the mustard seed becomes a huge tree. God works "Contrary to nature" (:24). The cultivated olive tree doesn't turn wild, and the wild olive shoot is transformed [at least, that was the idea] by the power of the Spirit. But that shoot had to be cut off from the wild olive tree, which I suggest may refer to Judaism. And the allusion is to the olive trees in Zechariah's vision (Zech. 4:11-13), which provide the oil of the Spirit. I suggest this is why Paul speaks of the olive tree rather than the vine, as we might rather imagine he would givenn the Lord's vine parable in Jn. 15. The cultivated branches [Israel] were broken off because they refused the Spirit of God. It has also been observed that "broken off" is inappropriate language also, seeing that fruitless branches are removed with great care and sensitivity. The simple idea perhaps is that both in grace and judgment, God's way of working with His people is so different to all human wisdom and device. The "goodness and severity of God" is the context here (Rom. 11:22 "Towards those that fell, severity; but toward you, God's goodness"). That severity would explain the otherwise out of place language of 'breaking off' the branches. And His goodness in grafting the bad shoots into the Spirit filled stem. But unless the new shoots accepted the Spirit, they too would be broken off. Mere association and physical connection to the tree was not going to save, because the Spirit is critical. This is the exemplification in Israel of the earlier principle that "if any man have not the spirit of Christ, he is none of His". The "fatness" of the cultivated tree clearly refers to the Spirit. It comes from the root, which is where nutritents are brought into the tree; and the root is the Lord Jesus. The mention of "the root" singular rather than plural "roots" appears likewise to be a technical mistake; for olive trees have a root system rather than one specific root. But the singular is used because clearly the reference is to the Lord Jesus. So specifically, the fatness of the root refers to the "spirit of Christ". It is receiving this which is so critical; and the fatness of this tree is so strong  that it can 'go against nature' in empowering the wild shoots and transforming them. That is the point- the wild shoots are transformed into cultivated branches. And yet cultivated branches can still be broken off unless they abide in the tree and receiving the Spirit / "fatness".  </p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 11:18'>Rom 11:18</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Do not boast over the broken branches, for you are but branches too. For if you boast, remember that it is not you that support the root, but the root supports you</em>- "Supports" is literally 'to carry' and is later used in Romans of the Lord Jesus bearing our sins on the cross (<em><a href='B:520 15:1-2'>Rom 15:1-2</a></em>). Awareness that He carries our sins will remove all boasting against those who have fallen away or respond less to Him:&nbsp;  The idea is that 'you don't support the root—the root supports you' [as GNB]. Awareness of how much we owe to the root, the Lord Jesus, means that we will not be focused upon proving superiority over other branches. If we have His spirit, then we will not be caught up with boasting against or conflicting with other branches. Hence Paul warns the Corinthians that the presence of strife and boasting between brethren is evidence that they do not have the Spirit.    </p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 11:19'>Rom 11:19</a></em>&nbsp;<em>You will say then: Branches were broken off so that I might be grafted in-&nbsp;</em>Often the Bible addresses the reader in the second person, as if he is actually present in the mind of the writer (e.g. <em><a href='B:520 11:19'>Rom 11:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 14:15'>Rom 14:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:530 7:16'>1Co 7:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:530 15:35'>1Co 15:35</a></em>). Such personalizing of Scripture is essentially how to study the Bible:&nbsp;Paul agrees that in a sense, yes, the Jewish branches were broken off so that the Gentiles could be grafted in. But :24 says that the ingrafted branches had been cut off from their own wild olive tree. They were therefore 'dead' branches. This is an apparent horticultural blunder. A dead, rejected branch can't get life by being tied on to a living tree. But in the miracle of redemption by the grace of the Spirit, this is how it will be. The oil / fatness / Spirit of the olive tree is such that even a dead branch can be revived by it. Verse 24 recognizes the intentional blunder by saying that Gentiles have been grafted "contrary to nature":&nbsp;A dead, rejected branch can't get life by being tied on to a living tree. But in the miracle of redemption by the grace of the Spirit, this is how it will be. The oil / fatness / Spirit of the olive tree is such that even a dead branch can be revived by it. It is being almost spouted out towards the dead, and can enliven them. Verse 24 recognizes the intentional blunder by saying that Gentiles have been grafted "contrary to nature". Just as the dead, broken branches which are usually burned can [according to this unusual farmer] be grafted in again. Dead and worthy of destruction by burning, they can be made alive again.
It may be that by the time Paul was writing Romans, he has realized that the thousands of Jews who had been baptized at Pentecost had now for the most part left the 'tree' of Christ. They had returned to Jerusalem-dominated Judaism as lamented in the NT epistles, and had withered because they ceased to receive the Spirit from the Lord Jesus, the root. And so they had been broken off. But they are pictured here as not yet burnt and destroyed, but with the possibility of being grafted back in to the tree. Whilst there was life, there was hope. And yet the Gentiles were increasingly being grafted into the tree as Paul was writing to the Romans. Paul appears to argue in :11,14 that although the Jewish Christian branches had largely been broken off, he was seeking to provoke them to jealousy through his preaching to the Gentiles- so that they might return to the tree.  </p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 11:20'>Rom 11:20</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Well. Because of their unbelief they were broken off, and you stand by your faith. Be not highminded, but fear-&nbsp;</em>The "unbelief" in view is not in that these Christian Jews had never believed. The "unbelief" appears to be that of <em><a href='B:650 3:12'>Heb 3:12</a></em>, where the same word is used of how the Hebrew Christians were prone to a heart of unbelief by departing from their faith in Christ and returning to the Law. &nbsp;</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 11:21'>Rom 11:21</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For if God spared not the natural branches, neither will He spare you</em>- The key issue is whether there was the bearing of fruit. The connection with earlier reasoning in Romans is perhaps in the same word being used of how God did not spare His own Son (<em><a href='B:520 8:32'>Rom 8:32</a></em>). This means that He will not spare in judgment those who refuse to accept Him. The language of 'not sparing' is that of judgment; Paul reasons as if judgment had already come, in essence, for those who rejected His Son.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 11:22'>Rom 11:22</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:470 3:7'>Mat 3:7</a></em>.</p><p><em>Behold then the goodness and severity of God: Towards those that fell, severity; but toward you, God’s goodness, if you continue in His goodness. Otherwise you also shall be cut off</em>- "Goodness" is the word used in <em><a href='B:520 2:4'>Rom 2:4</a></em> for how the Jewish Christians had despised God’s goodness and refused to repent. The severe language of judgment used in chapters 1 and 2 appears to refer specifically to judgment upon those Jews in the Roman church who had turned away from Christ. The letter has opened with the description of their judgment, the cutting off of the Jewish branches, and warns the Gentile converts that they must not behave likewise but rather continue in His goodness. The Greek for "severity" means literally sharpness or an abrupt cut. It connects with the idea of the branches being cut off. But it is "those that fell" who are cut off; and so the 'cutting off' is again only a confirmation of their own falling off from the tree.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 11:23'>Rom 11:23</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And they also, if they do not continue in their unbelief, shall be grafted in. For God is able to graft them in again</em>- If they could be grafted in "again" then they had at one time enjoyed the status of the wild olive branches who were grafted in by baptism into Christ. It follows that the cut off branches had likewise at one stage been in Christ. Jew and Gentile are being used here as they are for the most part in the early chapters of Romans- referring not to Jew and Gentile as generic, global terms; but rather specifically to Jewish and Gentile Christians in Rome. God’s ability "is able",&nbsp;<em>dunamos,&nbsp;</em>His power to graft them in again reveals that nobody is forced to condemnation by God' will. Those who are called can always reconnect with the tree. We notice though that it is not simply a case of a cut off branch drifting back into the olive tree. That might be true on the level of social club interaction; but the re-joining of the olive tree is a specific operation by God, connecting a person back in to the flow of the spirit of Christ, the oil of the olive.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 11:24'>Rom 11:24</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:540 4:4'>2Co 4:4</a></em>.</p><p><em>For if you were cut out of that which is by nature a wild olive tree, and were grafted contrary to nature into a good olive tree, how much more appropriately shall these, who are the natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree?</em>- The "contrary to nature" is a reference to how dead branches are not grafted onto living trees and thereby somehow brought to life. The whole analogy here is to demonstrate the power of the spirit of Christ, the oil of the olive, and of God’s grace, in bringing spiritual life to the dead. We note that the Gentiles were cut off from the wild olive and were warned that they could also be cut off from the good olive, if they followed Israel's example. This is true of so many- they cut off from the world, and then if they fall away from Christ, they are cut off from the community in Him. And they are of all men most miserable. "Contrary to nature" explains the whole apparent contradiction of the grafting. Here implicit is the message that through the Spirit, we can overcome human nature. Again, the connection is to a point earlier in Romans, in this case to Rom. 2:14. There we find that the Gentile Christians who have responded to the Spirit are obedient "by nature" to the spirit of the Law, which is the spirit of Christ. That is contrary to their natural inclination. So in this sense of the usage of the word 'nature', they have been given a new 'nature'. And that is through the work of the Spirit, which transforms man far beyond what he can do himself. Although we continue to commit sins, our nature is towards the things of the Spirit. In what we like to watch or listen to, we are 'naturally' inclined to the spiritual rather than the carnal.   </p><p>The "times of the Gentiles" (<em><a href='B:490 21:24'>Luk 21:24</a></em>) appears to refer to the time of Gentile opportunity to learn the Gospel, according to how Paul alludes to it in <em><a href='B:520 11:25'>Rom 11:25</a></em>.</p><p>The Gospel is fulfilled by preaching it. And the Gospel is essentially the promises to Abraham, about all nations being blessed. This promise is fulfilled in our preaching of it- which is why the Acts references to the disciples being " multiplied" consciously refers to the fulfilment of the promises to Abraham about the multiplication of the seed. “The fullness of the Gentiles” (<em><a href='B:520 11:25'>Rom 11:25</a></em>) also refers to this idea of the final number of converted Gentiles being a fullness or fulfilment- of the promises to Abraham. But that fulfilment, as with that of many prophecies, is dependent upon and according to our preaching of the Gospel. See on <em><a href='B:490 14:23'>Luk 14:23</a></em>.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 11:25'>Rom 11:25</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Brothers, I would not have you ignorant of this mystery, lest you be wise in your own conceits, that a hardening in part has befallen Israel, until the full number of the Gentiles is made up</em>- The partial hardening doesn't mean that their hearts were a bit soft and partly hard; for :8-10 is clear that they were indeed hardened and blinded. The "in part" refers to Israel as a whole; part of God's "Israel", the full number of the saved, had been hardened. The numbers of ethnic Jews in the final number of "Israel" had been diminished (see on :12) and so the Gentiles were being brought in to make up the numbers. This was no reason for Gentile boasting; the repeated warnings against this could suggest that there was friction in the Roman church over this matter. The Gentiles were as the street people dragged in to make up the numbers at the wedding feast, being invited to something they had not been searching for.
"A hardening... has befallen" suggests that the hardening was given by God. The hardening of Pharaoh's heart has already been cited by Paul as an example of how God's Spirit operates in confirming men in their softness or hardness. And of course the point is that unbelieving Israel were actually being treated as Pharaoh of Egypt. This idea is continued in :32, where "God has made all people prisoners of disobedience" (GNB). They are "made" disobedient in that they are confirmed in their disobedience. 
Until the full number of the Gentiles is made up- Although Paul was the apostle to the Gentiles, I understand Rom. 11:25,26 to mean that he preached to the Gentiles motivated by the knowledge that when the full number of the Gentiles had “come in”, then “all Israel” would be saved by the Jews then turning to Christ. Paul understands "Israel" as the full number of those who shall be finally saved. Once the allotted number of Gentiles had come in, Paul seems to see the final number of "Israel" being made up by the latter day conversion of some ethnic Israelites. This alone indicates how we should preach to Israel in the last days. Paul thought he was in the last days and so he did so. </p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 11:26'>Rom 11:26</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And so all Israel shall be saved. Even as it is written: There shall come out of Zion the deliverer, and he shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob</em>- "All Israel" refers to the full number of "Israel"; I suggested on :25 that Paul understands "Israel" as the specific number of the redeemed. This number, "Israel" in full number (:25), will be made up by the conversion of ethnic Israelites at the Lord's coming.</p><p>The Lord will come to those who have turned from ungodliness in Jacob, the latter day remnant who repent (<em><a href='B:290 59:20'>Isa 59:20</a></em>); although Paul's citation of this is deliberately altered to teach the truth that the&nbsp;<em>majority</em>&nbsp;of Israel will not turn before He comes. To them He will come and turn ungodliness away from them (<em><a href='B:520 11:26'>Rom 11:26</a></em>). Or as discussed above, we can understand "all Israel" to refer to the completed, redefined Israel, which is now comprised of Jewish and Gentile believers, now "all" together saved. However, it may be that just as "the full number of the Gentiles" in the preceding verse doesn't mean 'every Gentile who has ever lived', so here "all Israel" refers to all ethnic Israel who are to be saved. But their 'full number' will be made up after the last Gentiles have been saved, i.e. around the time of the Lord's return. In Rom. 9:6, Paul has shown that he sees 'Israel' in two ways. There, he is effectively saying 'Not all who are from(ethnic) Israel are [the new] Israel [of God]'. He means there that "all Israel" are the Israelites who believe in the Lord Jesus. </p><p>In the final conflict between Israel and her enemies, God’s confirmation of men will be clearly seen. The Gentile nations will be gathered to make the final invasion by the Lord's evil spirits confirming their evil spirit, whilst the repentant remnant of Israel will be confirmed in their regrets by having "the spirit of grace and supplications" poured on them (<em><a href='B:450 12:10'>Zec 12:10</a></em>), i:e. a desire and ability to powerfully supplicate the Father for forgiveness. If men wish to turn from their sins, God will turn them. Thus "the Redeemer shall come to Zion, and unto them that turn from transgression in Jacob" (<em><a href='B:290 59:20'>Isa 59:20</a></em>) is changed by the Spirit into: "There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob" (<em><a href='B:520 11:26'>Rom 11:26</a></em>). Those who turn from sin are turned from sin by the Lord. The blessing promised to Abraham was not only forgiveness of sins, but that the Lord Jesus would&nbsp;<em>turn away</em>&nbsp;Abraham's seed from their iniquities (<em><a href='B:510 3:26'>Act 3:26</a></em>). Yet we only become Abraham's seed by repentance and baptism. Our repentance and desire not to sin is therefore confirmed after our baptism.</p><p>Be aware that many NT passages mix a number of OT passages in one 'quotation'; e.g. "The deliverer will come from Zion" (<em><a href='B:520 11:26'>Rom 11:26</a></em>) is a conflated quotation of <em><a href='B:230 14:7'>Psa 14:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 53:6'>Psa 53:6</a></em> and <em><a href='B:290 59:20'>Isa 59:20</a></em>. See on <em><a href='B:650 13:5'>Heb 13:5</a></em>.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 11:27'>Rom 11:27</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And this is My covenant to them, when I shall take away their sins</em>- Jeremiah 31 and Ezekiel 34-36 are clear that the covenant which the latter day Jews shall enter into is the new covenant, which Christians now are part of. That new covenant, according to Romans, was that contained in the promises to Abraham. Both ethnic Jews and Gentiles alike need to be baptized into Christ for that covenant to be made with them. The point of this statement seems to be that the sins of the ethnic Jews will be taken away by their baptism into Christ and acceptance of the new covenant in Him. And this will happen in the last days.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 11:28'>Rom 11:28</a></em>&nbsp;<em>As touching the gospel, they are enemies for your sake, but as touching their calling, they are beloved for the fathers' sake</em>- The unbelieving Jews are alienated from God, and in God’s master plan, their failure was made use of in that it enabled the empty places in "Israel", at the marriage supper, to be filled up by Gentiles. Their alienation from God was therefore positively seen as for the sake of Gentile salvation. Yet those of them who are called to the Gospel in the last days will be called specifically because of their ethnic identity- for their fathers' sake. That may appear to contradict the earlier statements that ethnicity and descent from Abraham are worthless; but Paul is building up to the climax of grace in the events of the last days, where grace will be seen to transcend every law and principle, no matter how noble of itself.</p>


