# comment

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><h4><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.</h4>


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><h4><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.</h4><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><h4><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>.</h4>


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><h4>“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.</h4>


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><h4><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.</h4><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><h4><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.</h4><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:
<h4><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.</h4><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:
<h4><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.</h4>


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><h4>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>


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><h4>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.</h4>


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:
<h4><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>.</h4>


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:
<h4><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>).</h4>


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. <em><a href='B:520 15:12'>Rom 15:12</a></em> (along with <em><a href='B:730 5:5'>Rev 5:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:730 22:16'>Rev 22:16</a></em>) 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.</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><h4>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 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.</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;</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;</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.</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.</p><p>Although Paul was the apostle to the Gentiles, I understand <em><a href='B:520 11:25-26'>Rom 11:25-26</a></em> 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>).</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>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 11:29'>Rom 11:29</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable</em>- The gifts&nbsp;<em>charisma</em>- the many givings of grace and calling are separate. As developed in chapter 8, the sovereign calling of God is a parade example of grace, and it is effected by the Spirit being given to influence men and women towards salvation. Such a gift was given to the Corinthians who had been baptized, although they made no use of it and were thus "not spiritual". It seems that Paul hoped and assumed he was living in the last days, and that therefore the Jewish Christians who had fallen away should reflect that their calling and Spirit gift received was not revocable. And it was God's earnest wish that they should re-join the olive tree.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 11:30'>Rom 11:30</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For as you in time past were disobedient to God, but now have obtained mercy by their disobedience-&nbsp;</em>As noted on :28, their disobedience meant that Gentiles could be saved. Even human failure is used by God in His wider purpose:The Gentiles "have now obtained mercy (i:e. the merciful opportunity to hear the Gospel) through their (Israel's) unbelief. Even so have these (Israel) also now not believed, that through your mercy they may obtain mercy" (<em><a href='B:520 11:30-31'>Rom 11:30-31</a></em>). "Mercy" here cannot be read on a surface level; it cannot be that by showing mercy, another race may obtain mercy. "Mercy" is surely being used as a figure for the preaching of the Gospel. Through our mercy to them in this way they can obtain mercy.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 11:31'>Rom 11:31</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Even so have these also now been disobedient, that by the mercy shown to you, they may also now obtain mercy-&nbsp;</em>The mercy shown to us by God in allowing the Gospel to come to us (:32), the mercy and grace of calling and predestination, is to be reflected by our taking of the Gospel to others, especially to Israel. This is the practical outcome of all talk about calling and grace. We are to be so humbled by our receipt of it that we go out and share the calling with others, especially Israel. Could this not mean that Israel's reconciliation to God is partly dependent on our "mercy" in preaching the Gospel to them? And now consider Peter's words to Israel: "Repent::. and be converted, that (firstly) your sins may be blotted out::. and (secondly) he shall send Jesus Christ" at the second coming (<em><a href='B:510 3:19-20'>Act 3:19-20</a></em>). Does this not suggest that Christ's eager desire for the second coming is limited by our preaching to Israel?</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 11:32'>Rom 11:32</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:520 5:20'>Rom 5:20</a></em>.</p><p><em>For God has shut up all to disobedience, that He might have mercy upon all</em>- The "all" appears to be that of :26 "All Israel" (see note there). All those within the number of the redeemed, known as "Israel", have at some point been disobedient; and that disobedience was within God's purpose, in the same way as God "concluded s:w. all under sin" (<em><a href='B:550 3:22'>Gal 3:22</a></em>). Human sin and blindness is therefore used by God in the development of His final wonderful purpose of saving all His Israel.</p><p>Thus God works out His plan of salvation actually through man’s disobedience rather than his obedience. As Paul puts it, we are concluded in unbelief, that God may have mercy (<em><a href='B:520 11:32'>Rom 11:32</a></em>). It was and is the spirit of Joseph, when he comforted his brothers: “Now do not be distressed or angry with yourselves because you sold me here; for God sent me before you to preserve life” (<em><a href='B:10 45:5'>Gen 45:5</a></em>). And again, speaking about the sin of Israel in rejecting Christ: “Their trespass means riches for the Gentile world” (<em><a href='B:520 11:12'>Rom 11:12</a></em>). Or yet again, think of how Abraham’s lie about Sarah and unfaithfulness to his marriage covenant with her became a source of God’s blessing and the curing of&nbsp; Abimelech’s wife from infertility (<em><a href='B:10 20:17'>Gen 20:17</a></em> - I read her infertility as a state that existed prior to the incident with Abraham). The righteousness of God becomes available to us exactly because we have sinned and come short of the glory of God (<em><a href='B:520 3:23-24'>Rom 3:23-24</a></em>). If we lie, then through our lie the truth and glory of God is revealed (<em><a href='B:520 3:7'>Rom 3:7</a></em>). The light comes into the world- the light of hope of salvation, forgiveness, of God in Christ- but this light reveals to us our verdict of ‘guilty’ (<em><a href='B:500 3:18'>Joh 3:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 3:36'>Joh 3:36</a></em>).</p><p>The references to "all" being saved seem to be limited by the context- and "all" rarely means 'every single one', e:g. "all" Jerusalem went out to hear John the Baptist and were "all" baptized by him. I don't suppose the city was left deserted. The only passage which appears to have some bearing is <em><a href='B:520 11:32'>Rom 11:32</a></em>: "For God hath shut up all unto disobedience, that he might have mercy upon all". But the context speaks of how both Jews and Gentiles will be saved- not every Jew and Gentile that's lived, but those who accept the Gospel. And how does God have mercy? The preceding verse clarifies: "even so have these also now been disobedient, that by your mercy they also may now obtain mercy" (<em><a href='B:520 11:31'>Rom 11:31</a></em>):&nbsp; Surely the mercy we show to the Jews is preaching the Gospel of God's mercy to them. Their obtaining mercy depends upon our mercy. Because God chooses to work through us as His witnesses. The Jews must obtain salvation in the same pattern as the Gentiles do: "For as ye in time past were disobedient to God, but now have obtained mercy by their disobedience::." (<em><a href='B:520 11:30'>Rom 11:30</a></em>). As Gentiles crossed over from disobedience to obedience to the Gospel, so must the Jews. And in the last days, this will happen: ":::and so all Israel shall be saved: even as it is written, There shall come out of Zion the Deliverer; He shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob" (<em><a href='B:520 11:26'>Rom 11:26</a></em>). This turning away of ungodliness from Israel is required before "all"- i:e. the redeemed from both Jews and Gentiles- can be saved. But the turning away of ungodliness surely implies a repentance of some Jewish people; God won't just save them regardless, they must turn away from ungodliness.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 11:33'>Rom 11:33</a></em>&nbsp;<em>O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and the knowledge of God How unsearchable are His judgments and His ways past tracing out</em>- This manner of working through human failure (see on :32) in order to save us is indeed beyond human commentary and definition. The knowledge of God here surely refers to His foreknowledge. His ways and judgments refer specifically here to His calling and the time and manner of that calling, by grace. Any attempt to analyse His paths will fail, so we can even less start judging their morality or correctness.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 11:34'>Rom 11:34</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:220 21:22'>Job 21:22</a></em>.</p><p><em>For who has known the mind of the Lord? Or who has been His counsellor?</em>- The parallel in :35 says that God is outgiving in His gifts /&nbsp;<em>charis</em>&nbsp;/ grace, and not in any way returning to anyone what they gave Him. And this is true of His entire purpose; such pure grace originated within His mind and was not input there by anyone else in any form. The purity of His grace and salvation is pure and awesome. The allusions to Job noted on :16 all indicate that Job was brought to the same conclusion which Paul had come to- that we each lay our hand upon our mouth and recognize that it is not by works but grace alone.</p>


text:
<h4><em><a href='B:520 11:35'>Rom 11:35</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Or who has given a gift to Him, that he might be repaid?-&nbsp;</em>See on :16 and :34 for the significance of the quote from <em><a href='B:220 41:3'>Job 41:3</a></em>. The gift of grace is unprovoked; God gives it, without in any sense repaying or compensating for work done. For grace would then not be grace. The origination of all things in God is in fact yet another evidence for salvation by grace and not works. For no matter what works we do, the originator of all was God, by grace alone, before we had even existed or done any works. We are to reflect this by doing things for others which they too can never repay (<em><a href='B:490 14:14'>Luk 14:14</a></em> s:w:).</h4>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 11:36'>Rom 11:36</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For of Him and through Him and to Him, are all things. To Him be the glory for ever. Amen</em>- As noted on :34 and :35, the way that all things originate in God and are of Him means that all is of grace; for there were no works done which God could have responded to. Of&nbsp;<em>ek</em>, through&nbsp;<em>dia</em>&nbsp;and to&nbsp;<em>eis</em>&nbsp;all things&nbsp;<em>pas</em>&nbsp;is exactly the language used in <em><a href='B:530 8:6'>1Co 8:6</a></em> about God's work in the Lord Jesus. God's whole plan centres in, through and to Him.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 12:1'>Rom 12:1</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Therefore I urge you brothers, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God, which is your logical service</em>- See on <em><a href='B:590 5:3'>1Th 5:3</a></em>. As explained in the introduction, the practical section of Romans from <em><a href='B:520 12:1'>Rom 12:1</a></em> to the end is full of allusion to the earlier theological sections, demonstrating how true understanding is to be lived out in practice. The "mercies" in view are those just discussed in the context of God's grace in calling us, not according to our works. God will have compassion / mercy s:w. "mercies" on whom He will (<em><a href='B:520 9:15'>Rom 9:15</a></em>)- and He has chosen to have compassion upon us. Our response should be complete surrender to Him. The "mercies" could also be a technical term for the promises- "the sure mercies of David" of <em><a href='B:290 55:3'>Isa 55:3</a></em>.</p><p>The description of the believer as a “living sacrifice” alludes to the scapegoat, the only living sacrifice, which was a type of the risen Lord (<em><a href='B:30 16:10'>Lev 16:10</a></em> LXX = <em><a href='B:510 1:3'>Act 1:3</a></em>). As the Lord ran free in His resurrection, bearing away the sins of men, so we who are in Him and preach that salvation can do the same. As Christ bore away our iniquities (<em><a href='B:290 53:11'>Isa 53:11</a></em>), so “we then that are strong ought to bear the iniquities of the weak” (<em><a href='B:520 15:1'>Rom 15:1</a></em>).</p><p>Having spoken of the surpassing love of God in Christ, Paul urges that it is “your logical service” to totally dedicate ourselves to Him in response. Our reasoned response is to sacrifice all for His sake. It is not reason nor logic that we are any longer in this world to enjoy ourselves. We are here to give and not to receive.</p><p>Christ is the supreme priest; but because we are “in Him", we too have some part in the priesthood. Note how the priests are described in language relevant to the Lord: "The law of truth was in his mouth, and iniquity was not found in his lips: he walked with me in peace and equity, and did turn many away from iniquity" (<em><a href='B:460 2:6'>Mal 2:6</a></em>). Thus we must "present (our) bodies a living sacrifice" to God (<em><a href='B:520 12:1'>Rom 12:1</a></em>); making the believer "the offering and the priest", as Christ was (and is). We are our own priests. This must have been a radical idea to those early Jewish Christians. Yet this is what Paul and Peter were driving at when they said things like: "You&nbsp;<em>also</em>are an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices::. present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable (Gk:&nbsp;<em>logikos</em>) service (<em>service</em>&nbsp;is priestly language)" (<em><a href='B:670 2:5'>1Pe 2:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 12:1'>Rom 12:1</a></em>). They were saying: '<em>You're your own priest now'.</em>&nbsp;And the early believers found it hard to cope with. Have you considered that the most common form of apostasy (i:e. leaving the true Faith) in the early church was going back to the Jewish Law, with its system of priests? Natural Israel likewise totally failed to live up to God's desire that they should be a&nbsp;<em>Kingdom</em>&nbsp;of priests. They left it all to their priests. They&nbsp;<em>didn't&nbsp;</em>teach every man his neighbour and his brother, saying, Know the Lord (<em><a href='B:650 8:11'>Heb 8:11</a></em>; even though when He re-accepts them, God will count them as if they did). Although it was God's original intention that each family leader sanctified themselves and slew the Passover lamb personally, they came to delegate this to their priests (so <em><a href='B:140 30:17'>2Ch 30:17</a></em> implies). See on <em><a href='B:470 5:29'>Mat 5:29</a></em>.</p><p>We must be living sacrifices, devoted to the Lord (<em><a href='B:520 12:1'>Rom 12:1</a></em>); but if we flunk out of this: "His own iniquities shall take the wicked himself, and he shall be holden with the cords of his sins" (<em><a href='B:240 5:22'>Pro 5:22</a></em>). We're a sacrifice either way, tied up without the freedom of movement as we would wish. There's therefore and thereby an element of sorrow, either way in life: "Godly sorrow worketh repentance to salvation not to be repented of (i:e. that gift you will really, eternally enjoy): but the sorrow of the world worketh death" (<em><a href='B:540 7:10'>2Co 7:10</a></em>).</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 12:2'>Rom 12:2</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And do not conform to the mould of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may experience what is the good and acceptable and the perfect will of God</em>- "Be transformed" is asking us to allow the work of transformation and renewing which He wishes to perform within us. This is different to reading this as a command to somehow use brute psychological force to enforce a new psychology upon ourselves; we aren't strong enough to do so, neither is that a realistic possibility. The same word for "transformed" is used of how the Spirit transforms our minds into the mental image of the Lord Jesus (<em><a href='B:540 3:18'>2Co 3:18</a></em>). This is an internal transformation and not a reference to any miraculous gifts. Likewise the only other time the Greek word translated "renewing" is used is in <em><a href='B:630 3:5'>Tit 3:5</a></em>, speaking of the regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit. Allowing the work of the Spirit will mean we experience the will of God; and this connects with the theology of chapter 8, where the will of God in choosing us and calling us is shown to outwork in practice through the function of the Holy Spirit in our lives and hearts. The perfecting of that will, its coming to full completion, will be in the salvation of the last day.</p><p>Psychotherapists have powerfully pointed out the difference between the real, essential person- and the personas, or personages, whom we live out in the eyes of others. We humans tend to pretend to be the person others expect of us, we act out the person we feel our society or upbringing demands of us, rather than ‘being ourselves’; and so transformation of our real character is something which is left largely unaddressed in many lives. Truly did Shakespeare write from a worldly perspective that all the world’s a stage, and we are merely the players / actors. And as Napoleon said, “One becomes the man of one’s uniform”; the persona, the act we live, comes to influence the real self, the real person, like the clown who can’t stop clowning around offstage. In Biblical terms, we allow the world to push us into its mould, psychologically and sociologically, rather than allowing ourselves to be transformed by the renewing of our minds by the things of God’s word and His Son (<em><a href='B:520 12:2'>Rom 12:2</a></em>). We so easily allow the world to squeeze us into its mould, rather than being personally transformed by our relationship with the Lord (<em><a href='B:520 12:2'>Rom 12:2</a></em> J:B. Phillips).</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 12:3'>Rom 12:3</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For I say, through the grace that was given me, to every man that is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think, but to think soberly, accordingly as God has dealt to each man a measure of faith</em>- This continues the reference to God's will in :2. Faith is given, in the same way as we are called, predestined and moved towards salvation by the work and gift of the Spirit. This should humble us; in the same way as in the preceding chapter, Paul has urged Gentile believers to be humbled by the process of predestination, and not think highly of themselves because it is all of grace. And it was even of grace that Paul was reminding them of this. The awesome depth of this grace leads us to "think soberly", a word play in Greek:&nbsp;<em>phroneo sophroneo</em>. It elicits from us deep thinking- that God should give us faith, as Jacob was loved and Esau hated, quite apart from our works.</p><p>The next verses go on to speak of the manifestation of the gifts in a practical form, which in the first century included miraculous works. There was exhortation to “seek the best gifts”; and yet they were distributed “according as God hath dealt to every man according to the measure of faith” (<em><a href='B:520 12:3'>Rom 12:3</a></em> and context). He gave to each of them in the early church gifts which reflected the measure of faith shown by the individual believer. How much they could achieve for their Lord was limited by their faith.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 12:4'>Rom 12:4</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For even as we have many members in one body, and all the members do not have the same office</em>- Paul was writing this from Corinth, where he had had to make the same points (1 Corinthians 12). It seems the Romans, just as the Corinthians and many today, had failed to distinguish between unity and uniformity. Each baptized member of Christ has some function- and this is important to remember especially when great emphasis is placed upon pastoral teams and the like. This doesn't mean that every member of Christ has no function; each must indeed be empowered to function. "Office" is&nbsp;<em>praxis</em>, and we shall be judged according to our&nbsp;<em>praxis</em>&nbsp;(<em><a href='B:470 16:27'>Mat 16:27</a></em>), according to how we have used the Lord's potentials which we have been dealt. We need to seek and enquire what are His hopes for us, and to devote our lives to serving as intended.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 12:5'>Rom 12:5</a></em>&nbsp;<em>So we, who are many, are one body in Christ, and although different, still members one of another</em>- We are to live according to our status; if we are baptized into the body of Christ and counted as Him, according to the theology of imputed righteousness explained earlier in Romans, then we are to act as part of the body. The Greek here could bear a retranslation, hinging around&nbsp;<em>kata heis</em>, AV "every one", to the effect that we are "one body in Christ, and on account of&nbsp;<em>kata</em>&nbsp;the one Christ, members one of another". He is the unique bond between persons in Him. In another figure, He is the yoke who binds others together so that the burden is lighter. Human relationships are almost impossible to maintain on any intimate level- without the binding influence of the Lord Jesus. This is why He could reason in John 17 that Christian unity would be the supreme witness to Him.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 12:6'>Rom 12:6</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And having gifts differing according to the grace that was given to us, whether prophecy, let us prophecy according to the proportion of our faith</em>- "Grace",&nbsp;<em>charis</em>, is so often associated with the gift of the Spirit. That gift is the Lord Jesus in our hearts transforming us into His image, and such a promise is for all time. But in the first century, this gift had miraculous manifestations which are not now available. The&nbsp;<em>charis</em>, "grace", was given then and still is now; but the&nbsp;<em>charisma</em>, the gifts according to that grace, vary in form over time just as they did in form between persons in the first century. Those given prophecy were to use that gift according as they had been given it. This may seem obvious, but clearly there was a tendency to want to serve the Lord in ways other than His ideal intention. Paul's obsession with ministry to the Jews, when this was Peter's intended work, is a case in point.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 12:7'>Rom 12:7</a></em><em>&nbsp;Or ministry, let us give ourselves to our ministry. Or he that teaches, to his teaching-&nbsp;</em>See on <em><a href='B:510 20:24'>Act 20:24</a></em>&nbsp;<em>The ministry that I received</em>. The gifts Paul mentions in :6-8 are all gifts relevant to leaders rather than the mass of church membership. Perhaps Paul was writing with his eye on himself; or maybe he was particularly addressing the leadership of the church.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 12:8'>Rom 12:8</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:540 1:12'>2Co 1:12</a></em>.</p><p><em>Or he that exhorts, to his exhorting; he that gives, let him do it with generosity. He that rules, with diligence. He that shows mercy, with cheerfulness</em>- The words used here are repeated in Paul's appeals for the Corinthians to give to the Jerusalem Poor Fund with cheerful giving (<em><a href='B:540 9:7'>2Co 9:7</a></em>) and to support that ministry generously. Paul will mention this later in Romans. It was a major preoccupation with him and he may well be hinting here at Roman support of it.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 12:9'>Rom 12:9</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Let love be without hypocrisy. Abhor that which is evil. Cling to that which is good</em>- The appeal here for unfeigned love (also in <em><a href='B:540 6:6'>2Co 6:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:670 2:22'>1Pe 2:22</a></em>) highlights the fact that there can so easily be the appearance of love without true love. And this warning must be given its true weight by us all as we seek to make true love the defining feature of our living and being. The Greek for "cling to" is used nine other times in the NT and always with the sense of clinging to persons. The Lord's teaching in <em><a href='B:470 7:17-20'>Mat 7:17-20</a></em> is that we can in fact quite easily tell the good from the evil persons by looking at their fruits. Perhaps Paul has that in view here. We are to cling or cleave to those in Christ who have good fruits and keep away from those with evil fruits. If we don't do this, then our love is going to become hypocritical and feigned.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 12:10'>Rom 12:10</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Love one another with brotherly affection. Outdo one another in showing honour to others</em>- "Love" is claimed by everyone; :9 has challenged us to love unfeigned, unpretended and genuine. That love or&nbsp;<em>agape</em>&nbsp;is the love of Christ, loving as He loved us- for in that is the 'newness' of the command to love one another "as I have loved you" (<em><a href='B:500 13:34'>Joh 13:34</a></em>). That&nbsp;<em>agape</em>&nbsp;love will issue in a brotherly love for each other and respect / honour to others on account of their place in the body of Christ. If we seek to love our Christian brethren on the basis of their behaviour, we will find it impossible to love many or that deeply. We have to respect them for their status in Christ; and writing Romans from Corinth, Paul had gone very far in doing that. For he loved the Corinthians, so weak in understanding and behaviour, with the love of Christ- in that he respected their status as in Him. Paul uses the same Greek word for "honour" in reflecting that the Corinthians, and all believers, had been bought with a "price"- the blood of the Lord Jesus (<em><a href='B:530 7:23'>1Co 7:23</a></em>). All who have been bought with that are to be honoured- for they are of great price.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 12:11'>Rom 12:11</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Be diligent, not lazy, fervent in spirit in your serving the Lord</em>- This is another of Paul's allusions to the Lord's parables, this time warning the Romans not to be like the lazy servant in the parable (<em><a href='B:470 25:26'>Mat 25:26</a></em> = <em><a href='B:520 12:11'>Rom 12:11</a></em>). "Fervent in spirit" in the Lord's service is a phrase elsewhere used only about Apollos (<em><a href='B:510 18:25'>Act 18:25</a></em>) who was also at Corinth (<em><a href='B:510 19:1'>Act 19:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:530 1:12'>1Co 1:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:530 3:4'>1Co 3:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:530 4:6'>1Co 4:6</a></em>) from where Paul was writing Romans. This kind of internal congruence deepens our faith in the veracity of the records; Paul was writing with the example of Apollos before him, and he urged the Romans to be like him. Paul is not simply appealing for zeal as opposed to laziness. He asks them to allow the Spirit to work in them, to be open to being used- and this would make them anything but lazy. There was a common association between slavery and laziness; for the slaves were often in such a dead end situation that there was no motivation for zeal and initiative. But slavery to the Lord Jesus, energized by His Spirit, was not at all like that, but the very opposite.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 12:12'>Rom 12:12</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Rejoicing in hope, patient in tribulation, continuing earnestly in prayer</em>- "Hope" in the New Testament refers to a confident expectation, not a vague hope-for-the-best. It is only by having such a certain expectation of a place in the Kingdom of God, an eternity assured at this moment, that a person can rejoice. One cannot have joy at a prospect which is vague or uncertain. And it is this sure hope, arising as it does from our status in Christ, which alone can make us endure tribulation and keep on in prayer, rather than praying on the cusp of emotion or desperate need. All this is the practical outworking of our status in Christ, and the guarantee of eternity by God's grace, giving us the hope which will make us endure all things (<em><a href='B:520 5:2-3'>Rom 5:2-3</a></em>). "Tribulation" is literally&nbsp;<em>the&nbsp;</em>tribulation; Paul expected the Lord's return in his generation, and so envisaged that the tribulation of the Olivet prophecy would be experienced by his readers.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 12:13'>Rom 12:13</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Responding to the necessities of the saints by sharing, accustomed to showing hospitality</em>- The same word for "responding" AV "distributing" is to be used in <em><a href='B:520 15:27'>Rom 15:27</a></em> in the context of donating towards the Jerusalem Poor Fund, and surely Paul had this in mind here. We note the repeated commandments to show hospitality, literally a love of foreigners (<em><a href='B:610 3:2'>1Ti 3:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:630 1:8'>Tit 1:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 13:2'>Heb 13:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:670 4:9'>1Pe 4:9</a></em>). The mentality of the first century was very parochial; people loved their own, identifying themselves according to their ethnicity or birth place- and disliked others. The love of foreigners was achievable only by perceiving that we are all foreigners to God, who have been accepted by grace into a new identity.</p><p>The amount of travel by the early brethren was extraordinary, and could only have been impressive to the world around them. The same could be said of us today, regularly travelling for days across Russia and North America to attend gatherings, flying and hitch hiking around Africa to meet each other… driving hours to meeting. The NT letters feature passages which served as letters of recommendation (<em><a href='B:520 16:1'>Rom 16:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:530 16:10-12'>1Co 16:10-12</a></em> cp. <em><a href='B:570 2:25-30'>Phi 2:25-30</a></em>; <em><a href='B:580 4:7-9'>Col 4:7-9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:560 6:21'>Eph 6:21</a></em>; <em><a href='B:640 1:22'>Phm 1:22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 15:24'>Rom 15:24</a></em>). Thus hospitality became a required Christian virtue (<em><a href='B:520 12:13'>Rom 12:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 13:2'>Heb 13:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:670 4:9'>1Pe 4:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:610 3:2'>1Ti 3:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:630 1:8'>Tit 1:8</a></em>). Even ordinary Christians could count on this hospitality. Yet “security and hospitality when travelling had traditionally been the privilege of the powerful, who had relied upon a network of patronage and friendship, created by wealth. The letters of recommendation disclose the fact that these domestic advantages were now extended to the whole household of faith, who are accepted on trust, though complete strangers”. This was the practical outcome of the doctrines believed; a member of the&nbsp;<em>ekklesia&nbsp;</em>of God would be welcomed as a brother or sister in Laodicea, Ephesus, Corinth or Rome. And so it should be amongst us today. &nbsp;</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 12:14'>Rom 12:14</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Bless them that persecute you; bless and curse not</em>- We must bless / forgive those who persecute us (blessing and forgiveness are closely linked in Scripture). This is clearly to be done without waiting for the persecutor to stop or repent. Forgiveness without repentance has to be offered. Paul would have recalled how he had persecuted the Christians, and the likes of Stephen had blessed him rather than wished curses upon him; and those blessings had lead to his forgiveness and redemption, to God's glory. The Roman church was perhaps under specific persecution of some kind, or Paul maybe foresaw the persecution which would come under Nero.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 12:15'>Rom 12:15</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Rejoice with them that rejoice, weep with them that weep</em>- Such a fellow feeling for others is only possible if we are connected to them within the same body; and so this ability to connect with the emotions of others is an outcome of our being united in the body of Christ. For <em><a href='B:530 12:26'>1Co 12:26</a></em> clarifies that it is on account of our joint membership in His body that the members have such connection with each other.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 12:16'>Rom 12:16</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:470 25:15'>Mat 25:15</a></em>.</p><h4><em>Be of the same mind one toward another-&nbsp;</em>This is not an appeal for uniformity of thinking or interpretation. The one mind which we should each have is that of the Lord Jesus, as stated explicitly in Philippians 2. Another way of expressing His mind would be His Spirit; we are to view each other with the eyes, spirit or mind of the Lord Jesus. And the earlier chapters in Romans have explained how He looks upon us as perfect, with righteousness imputed to us. Paul's attitude to the Corinthians, from where he was writing Romans, is surely the parade example of practicing this in church life:&nbsp;</h4><p><em>Do not be arrogant, but condescend to those who are lowly. Be not wise in your own conceits</em>- We would rather expect: 'Do not be proud, but be lowly'. Instead we are asked to condescend to, or accept, the humble. Our humility is shown in our attitude to the humble. Our attitudes to others is therefore read as a significant reflection of our pride or humility. Not being wise "in your own conceits" carries the idea as GNB of "Do not think of yourselves as wise". It is recognizing our unwisdom which helps our humility; and the idea that we are ourselves wise is arrogance. That is exactly the teaching of 1 Corinthians 1. The acceptance of God's wisdom, as extolled at the end of Romans 11, means recognizing that we of ourselves are not wise; and this is humbling:&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 12:17'>Rom 12:17</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Render to no one evil for evil. Take thought to do things honourably in the sight of all men-&nbsp;</em>The spirit of grace received from God is that we received good for our evil; to render evil for evil, when we received good for evil, is therefore a denial of the grace we received. <em><a href='B:590 5:15'>1Th 5:15</a></em> also teaches us not to render evil for evil, but on the basis that we should be consumed with always following after what is good. And it is with this thought that this section concludes in :21- we should overcome evil with good, and not with more evil. For this, in the bigger picture, is God's way of triumphing over evil through His grace in Christ. "Honourably" is literally 'good'; the idea is not that Paul inserts here a random injunction to give no bad appearances to people. Instead of rewarding evil with evil, we instead should plan to do&nbsp;<em>good&nbsp;</em>'do things honourably', NEV before men. For this is the summary conclusion of :21, that evil is to be overcome by good.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 12:18'>Rom 12:18</a></em>&nbsp;<em>If possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all</em>- The "all" in view may refer to those within the church, and that may be the purview of :17 also. The majority of the pressures in Paul's life came from within the ecclesia. His life was based amongst the ecclesias; thus to him "all men" were the believers, not the world as a whole (<em><a href='B:480 9:50'>Mar 9:50</a></em> = <em><a href='B:520 12:18'>Rom 12:18</a></em>).</p><p>Conflict in the ecclesia shouldn’t actually surprise us. We should expect it. For it was the ecclesia of Christ’s day who were the ones who rejected Him. “As far as it depends on you" surely suggests that Paul saw conflict with others as arising due to others’ attitudes over which we have no control. Paul's inspired wording tacitly accepts that we often cannot live in peace with others because it's not possible given their failures; but we can change&nbsp;<em>our</em>&nbsp;attitudes, and that is the point. Paul's own example was of not being at peace with the majority of the brotherhood- all in Asia turned against him. Division and interpersonal tensions are inevitable- but we must ensure they are never our fault, for they betray a serious failure in the principles of living in the body of Christ, and living under grace.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 12:19'>Rom 12:19</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God; for it is written: Vengeance is Mine, I will repay, says the Lord</em>- The desire for vengeance may well refer to conflicts within the church. For "the wrath of God" would be the punishment of those who had done wrong, and this wrath will be poured out at the last day upon those who are responsible to the Lord. The comfort that the Lord's wrath would be upon those who have wronged us is therefore only appropriate to those who are responsible to judgment- largely those within the church.</p><p>We must remember that “Vengeance is&nbsp;<em>mine</em>&nbsp;not ours, not the state’s, and requital" (<em><a href='B:50 32:35'>Deu 32:35</a></em>). That taking of vengeance, that requital, was worked out by God on the cross. There the Lord Jesus was clothed with the ‘garments of vengeance’ (<em><a href='B:290 59:17'>Isa 59:17</a></em>); the day of the crucifixion was “the day of vengeance" (<em><a href='B:290 63:4'>Isa 63:4</a></em>). This is one reason why God doesn’t operate a tit-for-tat requital of our sins upon our heads- because He dealt with sin and His vengeance for it in the cross, not by any other way. Hence David calls Yahweh the “God of revenge", the one&nbsp;<em>alone</em>&nbsp;to whom vengeance belongs (<em><a href='B:230 94:1'>Psa 94:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 94:3'>Psa 94:3</a></em>). Our response to all this is to believe that truly vengeance is God and therefore we will&nbsp;<em>not&nbsp;</em>avenge ourselves (<em><a href='B:520 12:19'>Rom 12:19</a></em>). I take this to apply to all the micro-level ‘takings of vengeance’ which we so easily do in our words, body language, attitudes etc:, in response to the hurt received from others. The cross alone enables us to break the cycle.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 12:20'>Rom 12:20</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:230 140:9-10'>Psa 140:9-10</a></em>.</p><p><em>But if your enemy is hungry, feed him. If he is thirsty, give him something to drink. For in so doing you shall heap coals of fire upon his head</em>- The fire of condemnation at the judgment has already been kindled by men's attitudes now (<em><a href='B:490 12:49'>Luk 12:49</a></em>), and hence by doing good to such men when they abuse us we (now) "heap coals of fire upon his head". "Your enemy" here must therefore refer to someone who is responsible to the last judgment, i:e. in the ecclesia (cp. <em><a href='B:600 3:15'>2Th 3:15</a></em>, which implies 'an enemy' was first century vocabulary for a shunned and rejected false teacher). See on <em><a href='B:720 1:23'>Jud 1:23</a></em>. By showing grace to your enemy within the church who refuses to repent, you are actually making his final punishment worse.</p><p>But I don't understand this as meaning that our motivation for such kindness should be the gleeful thought that we will thereby earn for them greater and more painful condemnation at the last day. Such motives would surely be foreign to all we have seen and known in the Father and Son. Rather am I attracted to the suggestion that there is a reference here to the practice, originating in Egypt, of putting a pan of hot coals over the head of a person who has openly repented. In which case, we would be being taught to show grace to our enemies, in order that we might bring them to repentance. This would chime in with the teaching elsewhere in Romans that God's goodness leads us to repentance (<em><a href='B:520 2:4'>Rom 2:4</a></em>). And this is how we should be, especially with our brethren. The idea of excluding our brethren seems to me the very opposite of the spirit of grace which we have received.</p><p>Paul quotes the words of <em><a href='B:240 25:21-22'>Pro 25:21-22</a></em> here. But he omits to apply the last part of <em><a href='B:240 25:22'>Pro 25:22</a></em> to us: "And the Lord shall reward you". Paul's point is that we should not resist evil, leave God to glorify His Name- and enable this to happen, without seeking for a personal reward for our righteousness. Thus <em><a href='B:240 25:21-22'>Pro 25:21-22</a></em>: “If thine enemy be hungry, give him bread to eat::. for thou shalt heap coals of fire upon his head, and the Lord shall reward thee” is quoted here, but with the pointed omission of the last clause: "The Lord shall reward thee". It's as if Paul is saying: 'The condemnation of the wicked, when&nbsp;<em>God,&nbsp;</em>not you, pours out His vengeance, will glorify Him. So do your part to bring this about, don't worry about the reward you're promised so much as the bringing about of His glory'.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 12:21'>Rom 12:21</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Be not overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good</em>- It will not do to glumly conclude that evil shall only be overcome at the Lord's return. We are to right now overcome evil, not by fighting it in the world nor by seeking to brutally repress it within our own minds; but to proactively focus on the good and thereby overcome it. God likewise overcomes evil through the overcoming of His Son on the cross (s:w. <em><a href='B:520 3:4'>Rom 3:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 16:33'>Joh 16:33</a></em>). And that is to be our pattern too.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 13:1'>Rom 13:1</a></em> The question has been asked as to how the words of Romans 13 can stand true, with their implication that Government ministers are God’s representatives, punishing sinners and upholding righteousness, and therefore should be obeyed. Many believers are pressured by such ministers to join armies and in other ways too, to break the law of Christ. How, for example, could those words have been true in Hitler’s Germany or Taliban-controlled Afghanistan?</p><p>First it must be remembered that there are other passages which do command our submission to human authorities: “Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord’s sake: whether it be to the king, as supreme; Or unto governors, as unto them that are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers, and for the praise of them that do well. For so is the will of God, that with well doing ye may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men: As free, and not using your liberty for a cloke of maliciousness, but as the servants of God:&nbsp; Honour all men. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honour the king” (<em><a href='B:670 1:13-17'>1Pe 1:13-17</a></em>). Whilst these words stand true, Peter himself also disobeyed human authority, with the comment that we must obey God rather than men. When there is a conflict in allegiance created, we must obey God and disobey anyone or any institution that commands us to disobey Him. And Paul likewise- the man who was jailed repeatedly for breaking the law: “Put them in mind to be subject to principalities and powers, to obey magistrates, to be ready to every good work, To speak evil of no man, to be no brawlers, but gentle, shewing all meekness unto all men” (<em><a href='B:630 3:1-2'>Tit 3:1-2</a></em>).<br/>But the Romans 13 passage goes much further, saying that these “ministers” are ordained by God on His behalf, and therefore must be obeyed. Logically, therefore, one would have to obey whatever they said. Otherwise we would always be having to decide whether or not a Government minister was really ordained in God’s behalf, or not. And Romans 13 seems to imply that all ministers are “ministers of God”. And so for this passage I wish to suggest that it specifically refers to submission to the elders and apostles of the first century ecclesia, empowered as they were with the miraculous Spirit gifts and direct revelations of wisdom and judgment:&nbsp;<br/>There is great stress in Romans 13 that these “powers” punish evil / sinfulness. This is just not true of human Governments. Yet it is appropriate if the “powers” spoken of here are within the ecclesia. So we will consider the passage phrase by phrase- and we find that almost every Greek noun or verb in it is used elsewhere in a specifically ecclesial context.<br/><em>“Let every one of you be in subjection to the governing authorities</em>”<em>&nbsp;(:1).</em><br/>The Greek for “Higher” means ‘to excel, to be superior, better than, to surpass”. The same word occurs in <em><a href='B:570 2:3'>Phi 2:3</a></em>: “Let nothing be done through strife or vainglory; but in lowliness of mind let each esteem other&nbsp;<em>better than themselves</em>”. We may respect human ministers but we can scarcely esteem them better than ourselves in a spiritual sense. Yet authority held by ecclesial elders is earnt and not demanded- based on our respect of them as brethren more mature in Christ than we are.<br/>“<em>For there is no power but by God:&nbsp;the powers that be have been ordained</em>…”</p><p>“Powers” is s:w. same word <em><a href='B:540 10:8'>2Co 10:8</a></em> “our apostolic a<em>uthority</em>”; “<em>the power&nbsp;</em>which the Lord hath given me” (Paul; <em><a href='B:540 13:10'>2Co 13:10</a></em>). “Not because we the apostles have not&nbsp;<em>power</em>” (<em><a href='B:600 3:9'>2Th 3:9</a></em>). Those powers are “ordained”- s:w. <em><a href='B:510 15:2'>Act 15:2</a></em>, where Paul and Barnabas were “determined”, s:w. “ordained”, to go to Jerusalem as representative elders; the family of Stephanas “addicted themselves”, literally ‘ordained themselves’, to the work of ministry in the ecclesia. Note how here as in Romans 13, the ideas or being&nbsp;<em>ordained</em>&nbsp;to be a&nbsp;<em>minister&nbsp;</em>also occur together:&nbsp;<br/><em>Ordained by God</em><br/>In the sense of <em><a href='B:530 12:28'>1Co 12:28</a></em>: “<em>And God&nbsp;</em>hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues”:&nbsp;<br/>“<em>Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists…</em>” (:2)<br/>Alexander “hath greatly&nbsp;<em>withstood</em>&nbsp;s:w. resisteth our words” (<em><a href='B:620 4:15'>2Ti 4:15</a></em>)- the words of elders like Paul. This doesn’t mean that elders are beyond any criticism- for the same Greek word is used of how Paul “withstood” Peter when he gave in to legalism and rejected grace (<em><a href='B:550 2:11'>Gal 2:11</a></em>):&nbsp;<br/>&nbsp;“<em>What God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers are not a terror</em>…” &nbsp;(:2,3)<br/>“Terror” translates the Greek word used for how “fear” came upon the ecclesia when the elders exercised their powers of the Holy Spirit (<em><a href='B:510 2:43'>Act 2:43</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 5:5'>Act 5:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 5:11'>Act 5:11</a></em>). Initially, Corinth showed such “fear” towards Paul (<em><a href='B:540 7:11'>2Co 7:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:540 7:15'>2Co 7:15</a></em>). Elders should rebuke publicly those who sin, that others in the ecclesia might “fear” (<em><a href='B:610 5:20'>1Ti 5:20</a></em>). The situation in the first century as far as the authorities of the world are concerned was actually the very opposite of what we read here in Romans. The same word occurs in <em><a href='B:670 3:14'>1Pe 3:14</a></em>, telling the believers to endure persecution from the authorities, not to cave in to their demands, and “be not afraid of their&nbsp;<em>fear</em>”. Note that the Greek word for “afraid” occurs in <em><a href='B:520 13:3'>Rom 13:3</a></em> - we should be “afraid” of the powers God has placed in the ecclesia. The fact the two words occur together in both Romans and Peter leads us to the conclusion: ‘Respect and “fear” those who are elders truly; but don’t fear / respect those who are elders in name only and are in reality far from grace”:&nbsp;<br/>“<em>not a terror to good works, but to the evil. If you wish to live without fear of the authorities?</em>&nbsp;(:3)<br/>The Greek word for “fear” is the same word in <em><a href='B:550 2:12'>Gal 2:12</a></em>, which criticizes Peter for being “afraid” of the Jerusalem elders who were teaching legalism. Paul doesn’t mean we should fear an elder merely because they have the office of an elder; but we fear / respect those who are indeed spiritually “higher” than us:&nbsp;<br/>“<em>Do that which is good And you shall have praise from the same</em>”<br/>This certainly isn’t true of worldly authorities and rulers. They don’t praise righteousness, and they certainly didn’t in the first century. Yet the same word is used in <em><a href='B:540 8:18'>2Co 8:18</a></em> of how Timothy was “praised” in the ecclesias. Good elders and healthy ecclesias will give praise / encouragement to those who deserve it:&nbsp;<br/>“<em>For he is a minister of God</em>” (:4)<br/>Gk:&nbsp;<em>Diakonos</em>, sometimes translated “deacon”. The word is used 31 times in the N:T:, nearly always about ecclesial elders / ministers / servants. Paul speaks of himself and Timothy with the very same words: a “minister of God” (<em><a href='B:540 6:4'>2Co 6:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:590 3:2'>1Th 3:2</a></em>), who therefore ought to be listened to:&nbsp;<br/>…to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain<br/>This seems to be a reference to the ability which some elders had in the first century to execute physical affliction upon those who were disobedient. Peter smote Ananias and Sapphira dead. Paul seems to warn the Corinthians that he could “not spare” them if he convicted them of apostasy on his next visit. It&nbsp;even seems that the sicknesses spoken of in James 5 are a direct result of sinful behaviour, and the gift of healing could be exercised by the elders in the case of repentance. Jesus Himself threatened immediate physical judgment, presumably through the hands of His representatives, upon some in the ecclesias of Revelation 2, 3. Respect for elders is something taught throughout the N:T. letters- “remember them that have the rule over you” (<em><a href='B:650 13:7'>Heb 13:7</a></em>). Here the writer clearly refers to elders in the ecclesia, for he bids his readers consider the end of those men’s faithful way of life and to follow their example. And yet they are described as ‘rulers’. It’s as if the point is that the real rulers of a first century believer were not the Roman administrators, but the ministers of God within their ecclesia. In illiterate ecclesias or those without access to the written scrolls containing God’s word, the elders would have played a more critical role in their relationship with God than in our age.</p><p><em>“…&nbsp;For he is a minister of God to you for good. But if you do that which is evil- be afraid For he carries not the sword in vain. For he is a minister of God, an avenger of God’s anger to him that does evil. Therefore you must be in subjection, not only because of God’s anger against sin, but also for the sake of your conscience. For this cause you pay tribute also</em>”<em>&nbsp;(:4-6)</em><br/>This could be referring to the Lord’s well known example of paying tribute, and simply saying that the principle of submission to authority should extend out of the ecclesia, to all those who have power over us- so long as this does not contradict our conscience toward Christ. But it could also be a reference to some form of tithing or regular support of elders. There is historical evidence that this went on early in the Christian church.<br/>“Be subject” uses a Greek word elsewhere used about submission to elders (<em><a href='B:530 16:16'>1Co 16:16</a></em>). Note how the word occurs in <em><a href='B:530 14:34'>1Co 14:34</a></em> - the sisters were commanded “to be under obedience” to their men Gk:. I take this to refer to the need for those sisters to be submissive to their appointed elder. When we meet the word again in the command “Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord” (<em><a href='B:560 5:22'>Eph 5:22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:560 5:24'>Eph 5:24</a></em>; <em><a href='B:580 3:18'>Col 3:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:630 2:5'>Tit 2:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:670 3:1'>1Pe 3:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:670 3:5'>1Pe 3:5</a></em>), I take this as meaning that they should treat him as they would an elder- in that Paul assumes he will teach and inspire her as the elders ought to have been doing:&nbsp;<br/>&nbsp;“<em>For they are ministers of God's service, attending continually upon this very thing</em>” (:6)<br/>The question arises,&nbsp;<em>what</em>&nbsp;thing?&nbsp; If the reference is to their reflecting of God’s judgment against those who sin, this is simply not true of human Governments. The first century authorities were persecuting the Christians, fabricating untruth against them, killing them, and insisting that those who refused to accept Caesar as Lord be punished. The words can only be true of the ministers of God of whom we read elsewhere in the N:T:- i:e:, the ecclesial elders:&nbsp;<br/>The Greek phrase for “attending continually” is a catchphrase usually employed to describe the zealous pastoral care of the early apostles: “These all&nbsp;<em>continued</em>&nbsp;with one accord in prayer…<em>continuing daily</em>&nbsp;with one accord…and breaking bread…we will&nbsp;<em>give ourselves continually</em>&nbsp;to prayer, and to the ministry another Romans 13 idea of the word” (<em><a href='B:510 1:14'>Act 1:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 2:46'>Act 2:46</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 6:4'>Act 6:4</a></em>). By using the phrase, Paul is undoubtedly pointing us back to the example of the early apostles / elders:&nbsp;<br/><em>“Render to all their dues” (:7)</em><br/>The Greek for “dues” is found in <em><a href='B:520 15:27'>Rom 15:27</a></em> about the due which the Gentile believers owe to materially support their Jewish brethren. We have no ‘due’ to this world (<em><a href='B:520 13:8'>Rom 13:8</a></em> Gk:, s:w:), but our due is to love each other in the brotherhood. But admittedly Paul does seem in the next verses to extend the principle of submission further than just within the ecclesia. In the same way as elders should only be respected if they had earnt that respect, and were leading brethren in the way of Christ, so too the authorities of the world should only be followed insofar as they did not lead believers into disobedience to Christ: “…tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour. Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law. For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. Love worketh no ill to his neighbour: therefore love is the fulfilling of the law” (:8-10 AV).</p><h4>We must remember that the <em><a href='B:520 13:1'>Rom 13:1</a></em> passage about submission to human authority was written before Nero's persecution of Christians. It seems to be written on the assumption that justice is being done by officialdom. Romans seems to have been written around AD60. The background situation in Rome, to which Paul was speaking, needs to be understood if we are to understand Paul in his context. In AD58 there were major revolts in Rome against the taxation system (as recorded in Tacitus,&nbsp;<em>Annals</em>&nbsp;13:50,51). Jews were exempt from paying some taxes (they were allowed to pay them to the temple in Jerusalem); and Roman citizens also were exempt. There was therefore a huge amount of resentment from the Gentile, non-Roman citizen population who had to pay heavy taxes (1). It could well be that some of the Roman Christians were tempted to share in this unrest; and Paul is instead urging them to obey those who had the rule over them, in the sense of paying their taxes, rendering tribute to whom tribute was due. Ben Witherington, one of academic scholarship's most well-known and learned students of Paul, significantly doesn't see in the Romans 13 passage any suggestion that Christians should therefore bear arms, as this would contradict Paul's teaching about&nbsp;<em>non</em>-violent response to evil in the same section of Romans; rather does he understand the teaching about submission to authorities as being specifically in this taxation context (2).</h4><p>(1) Tacitus,&nbsp;<em>Historiae</em>&nbsp;5:5:1, Josephus,&nbsp;<em>Antiquities Of The Jews</em>&nbsp;16:45,160-161; references in Ben Witherington,&nbsp;<em>The Paul Quest</em>&nbsp;(Leicester: I:V:P:, 1998) p. 180:&nbsp;<br/>(2) Ben Witherington,&nbsp;<em>The Paul Quest</em>&nbsp;(Leicester: I:V:P:, 1998) pp. 178-184. He comments that "most ancient persons took it for granted that governing authorities have their authority from God" (p. 181). When Paul writes this to the Romans, he could well be quoting a well-known maxim- and thus using it in order to persuade the Roman Christians to pay their taxes.</p><p><em><a href='B:520 13:1'>Rom 13:1</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Let every one of you be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no power but by God, and the powers that be have been ordained by God-&nbsp;</em>I have suggested the possibility of this section referring to elders within the church. But it is also possible to understand the section as referring to civil powers, seeing that this was written before Nero's persecution of the Christians. We would then have a classic example of where Paul's letters address specific issues within a very specific time limited context. What he writes here about the nature of 'the powers that be' was true for the Rome ecclesia at that point in time; but it was not true for them some years later under Nero's persecution, nor was it true for believers under Hitler etc.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 13:2'>Rom 13:2</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment</em>- Judgment from the powers that be, rather than condemnation from God. The implication is that there were individuals within the church at Rome who were seriously misbehaving and would face criminal justice as a result. The letter of 1 Peter seems to address the same problem in the Jewish congregations of southern Turkey. Put this together with the shameful behaviour of the church at Corinth, and the similar very bad issues addressed in the other NT epistles. Titus is warned to strengthen the eldership, whilst there were many very bad behaviours amongst the congregation on Crete; and we find the same approach taken in advising Timothy about the mess at Ephesus. The overall picture is rather poor; the impression is of churches composed of many who seriously misbehaved, living alongside some wonderfully spiritual examples. The Lord's letters in Revelation give the same impression. Yet churches of our age face the problem of supposedly stronger members quitting because of the perceived unspirituality of the majority. And we see that there was no way that Paul was advising disfellowship of immoral members of the congregation apart from in nuanced and extreme situations such as 1 Corinthians 5.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 13:3'>Rom 13:3</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. If you wish to live without fear of the authorities- then do that which is good And you shall have praise from the same-&nbsp;</em>As noted on :2, this implies there was serious criminal misbehaviour amongst some in the church at Rome. And yet Paul writes in such warm terms about the church in chapter 1. This is the great challenge of Christianity; to accept the weakness of others, not turn away from it nor justify it, within the larger framework of knowing that they too are partakers of grace and salvation.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 13:4'>Rom 13:4</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For he is a minister of God to you for good. But if you do that which is evil- be afraid For he carries not the sword in vain</em>- The mention of the sword implies the death penalty, which means that the church contained members guilty of serious criminal misbehaviour.</p><p><em>For he is a minister of God, an avenger of God’s anger to him that does evil</em>- The connection is with how the same word is used in <em><a href='B:520 12:19'>Rom 12:19</a></em>: "Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God; for it is written: Vengeance is Mine, I will repay, says the Lord". It would be possible to conclude that some within the church were behaving in a criminal way towards others in the church, doing things to them which warranted the death penalty. And yet Paul has so much to say to them about grace and the certainty of salvation by faith. These considerations enable us to review chapters 1 and 2, which seem to speak as if murder and some of the worst forms of sexual perversion and abuse were being practiced within the church, just as they were by Israel in the desert.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 13:5'>Rom 13:5</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:690 3:18'>1Jn 3:18</a></em>.</p><p><em>Therefore you must be in subjection, not only because of God’s anger against sin, but also for the sake of your conscience-&nbsp;</em>God's judgment would be manifest through the local authorities. But subjection to the authorities was not just in order to avoid judgment against sin, but because of a sense of conscience. Those authorities represented Him, and therefore quiet obedience to them was part of conscience towards God.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 13:6'>Rom 13:6</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For this cause you pay tribute also-&nbsp;</em>In the opening commentary on <em><a href='B:520 13:1'>Rom 13:1</a></em> I gave evidence that in Rome there was widespread objection to paying taxes. Paul assumes their obedience- "you pay tribute". This is a great feature of Paul- he had such a positive spirit about brethren whom he knew to be far less than himself spiritually.</p><p><em>For they are ministers of God's service, attending continually upon this very thing-&nbsp;</em>This kind of religious language led me to suggest in the opening commentary that the authorities in view may in fact be within the church. But if not, then we can say that the language of the sanctuary is being consciously used about the ministers of the state. Just as believing slaves were to see their masters as representing Christ, so the Roman believers were to see tax collectors as requiring obedience&nbsp;<em>as if</em>&nbsp;they were part of the Divine system of things. And this is one of the arts of spiritual life- to see all our human interactions in this world as being performed as unto the Lord we have in Heaven and within the context of His system.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 13:7'>Rom 13:7</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Render to all their dues. Tribute to whom tribute is due, custom to whom custom, fear to whom fear, honour to whom honour-&nbsp;</em>This could mean 'to all magistrates', and surely Paul has his mind on the Lord's command to render unto Caesar what is his due (<em><a href='B:470 22:21'>Mat 22:21</a></em>) rather than get involved in any form of anti-Caesar movement on the basis of refusing to pay taxes. The Christian movement indeed rejected Caesar as Lord, but there was no need to articulate this through not paying taxes to him. But the next verse shows that Paul develops a wider context here. Not simply should taxes be paid, but a general spirit of respect towards others, including "honour".</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 13:8'>Rom 13:8</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:520 1:14'>Rom 1:14</a></em>.</p><p><em>Owe no one anything, apart from to love one another-&nbsp;</em>The 'owing' would be in the context of accumulating tax debts in the hope they would never be demanded or enforced. Or perhaps Paul does literally feel that material debt to others is to be avoided at all costs. He has spoken of honouring and respecting persons in :6 and :7, and he sees keeping out of debt as a way of ensuring that we can respect persons for who they are and without the background factor of appearing to respect those to whom we are in debt. In low income situations, petty debt is a way of life; perhaps Paul is urging avoiding this. The debt we have is to love others, for we have been so loved by the Lord, and we are to realize that our need to pay that back must be articulated in terms of loving our neighbour- not that we can ever repay our debt to the Lord. Paul's conception of love to the world around him was clearly rooted in the need to preach to them, rather than provide material help. He felt he had a debt to love others (<em><a href='B:520 13:8'>Rom 13:8</a></em>); yet also a debt to preach (<em><a href='B:520 1:14'>Rom 1:14</a></em>). His debt was to love in the form of preaching.</p><p><em>For he that loves his neighbour has fulfilled the law-&nbsp;</em>The law was fulfilled by the Lord's death on the cross. The death of the cross is the ultimate love of neighbour as self, the final honour, respect, submission etc. which forms the context here. The Lord's work and death can therefore really be participated in by us- in the small daily things of life such as kindness and respect to others.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 13:9'>Rom 13:9</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For this, you shall not commit adultery, you shall not kill, you shall not steal, you shall not covet- and if there be any other commandment-&nbsp;</em>Paul's references to the Gospels suggests that he had carefully meditated upon the passages to which he consciously alludes. The fact and way in which he&nbsp;<em>alludes</em>&nbsp;rather than quotes verbatim reflects the fact he had thought through and absorbed the teaching of the passages rather than learning them parrot fashion. For example, in <em><a href='B:470 19:18-19'>Mat 19:18-19</a></em> the Lord Jesus combines two quotations from the Law: <em><a href='B:20 20:12-16'>Exo 20:12-16</a></em> followed by <em><a href='B:30 19:18'>Lev 19:18</a></em>. Paul, in a different context, to prove a different point, combines those same two passages, although separating them by a brief comment (<em><a href='B:520 13:9'>Rom 13:9</a></em>). This surely indicates that he had meditated upon how his Lord was using the Law, and mastered it so that he could use it himself.</p><p><em>It is summed up in this word, namely: You shall love your neighbour as yourself-&nbsp;</em>The intention of all the various laws was "love". Likewise the fruit of the Spirit is in the singular- "love". Love is the point of maturity to which we are all travelling (1 Corinthians 13). The cross was the fulfilling of all law in that there love was articulated to its ultimate term.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 13:10'>Rom 13:10</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Love works no evil to his neighbour. Love therefore is the fulfilment of the law-&nbsp;</em>This looks at love from a negative aspect- love is the summation of all commandments, it is positively a loving of neighbour; but also working no evil is likewise another way of putting it. Yet the two sides are in parallel- positively, proactively doing good to neighbour is the same as working no evil to neighbour. This addresses the idea that 'I do no evil to others; I just keep myself to myself and have my own personal beliefs about Jesus, sit behind my screen and press the right buttons at times, no need for church, I just believe in my heart'. Such an attitude is increasingly popular in our disconnected and dysfunctional world, where people seem unable to cope with personal relationships. But to work no evil is part of doing proactive good. And remember that love is the fulfilment of the law, as epitomized in the Lord's death upon the cross. One could go further, and argue that by not doing the proactive love to neighbour, we are actually working evil to neighbour- for sins of omission are every bit as real before God as sins of commission. Perhaps Paul has in mind the LXX of <em><a href='B:240 3:27-29'>Pro 3:27-29</a></em>, where withholding good from our neighbour is paralleled with devising evil against him or her.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 13:11'>Rom 13:11</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And consider this too: Knowing the time, that already it is time for you to awake out of sleep-&nbsp;</em>God actually saw us as saved right from the beginning of the world; He purposed, and effectively it was done. Perhaps this is the hardest thing our faith has to grapple with. "Knowing the time, that for us, the hour already is to be aroused out of sleep" and be resurrected (<em><a href='B:520 13:11'>Rom 13:11</a></em> YLT) may mean (contrary to the implication of the AV) that for us who are with God now, the time of resurrection and salvation is now with us, and therefore we should live lives which answer to this fact. The day of salvation is in that sense&nbsp;<em>today</em>&nbsp;(<em><a href='B:540 6:2'>2Co 6:2</a></em> Gk:). So sure is God's word that it is as if the concept of a delay between its utterance and the fulfilment is something not to be considered. Thus "the vision" is an ellipsis for 'the fulfilment of the vision' in <em><a href='B:420 2:3'>Hab 2:3</a></em>. Although our day by day spirituality fluctuates, God is beyond time. He sees us either as an essentially good tree bringing forth good fruit, or as essentially bad (<em><a href='B:470 7:23'>Mat 7:23</a></em>). And yet my sense is that here we have yet another example of where the early believers fully expected the Lord's return in their lifetimes. This was not simply because they were mistaken, or because the Lord's scheduled return in the first century was delayed because the church wasn't ready for it. This expectation of the Lord's soon return is, it could be argued, actually part of the Christian faith. We are to live in expectation of His imminent return, whether or not we consider current events to align with the relevant prophecies.</p><p><em>For now is our salvation nearer to us than when we first believed-&nbsp;</em>The "salvation" is "the day" of the Lord's return (:12). We are chronologically nearer to that final salvation than when we first believed. This suggests a specific start point for 'first belief'; confirming that there is a specific point when a person becomes a believer, rather than belief being something drifted into as a result of upbringing or exposure to Christian preaching. And that specific point in time is surely baptism. "Nearer" uses the same word used by the Lord in saying that we know His coming is 'near' because of the fulfilment of the signs in the Olivet prophecy (<em><a href='B:470 24:32-33'>Mat 24:32-33</a></em>). Those signs were indeed fulfilled- His coming was indeed scheduled for the first century. But it was delayed, because the required preconditions of Israel's repentance, the spreading of the Gospel and the required spiritual fruit in the church were just not met. And so it has been delayed until our days. And we face the same urgent challenges in those same areas which the early church failed in.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 13:12'>Rom 13:12</a></em><em>&nbsp;The night is far spent, and the day is at hand-&nbsp;</em>See on :11. Whilst Paul clearly expected the Lord's return in his time, the statement and spirit of it is not wrong. For we are to live&nbsp;<em>as if</em>&nbsp;the day of His coming is imminent. And of course we can die at any moment- and that for us will effectively be His return. The entire Gospel message begins with the usage of the same Greek word: The Kingdom&nbsp;<em>is at hand</em>&nbsp;(<em><a href='B:470 3:2'>Mat 3:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 4:17'>Mat 4:17</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 10:7'>Mat 10:7</a></em> etc:). We are therefore to live in expectation of the imminent breaking forth of God's Kingdom. And in a spiritual sense, the Kingdom has 'come near' s:w. "is at hand" in that our experience of life in Christ is our experience of the eternal life of God's Kingdom (<em><a href='B:490 10:9'>Luk 10:9</a></em> "The Kingdom of God is come near / is at hand to you"). And yet in the literal sense, we see the day approaching s:w. "at hand", "near"; and we are to draw near to God in response (<em><a href='B:650 7:19'>Heb 7:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 10:25'>Heb 10:25</a></em>). <em><a href='B:660 4:8'>Jas 4:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:660 5:8'>Jas 5:8</a></em> are very clear. We draw near to God and He draws near to us, in that the Lord's coming draws near.</p><p><em>Let us therefore cast off the works of darkness and let us put on the armour of light-&nbsp;</em>It’s been pointed out and exemplified beyond cavil that Paul uses much Essene terminology. I suggest he does this in order to deconstruct it. When he urges the Roman Jews to “cast off the works of darkness and put on the armour of light”, calling his converts “the children of the light and children of the day” (<em><a href='B:590 5:5'>1Th 5:5</a></em>), Paul is alluding to the Essene ideas. But he’s saying that the children of light are to wage spiritual warfare against themselves, their own hearts, quit the things and habits of the flesh etc. – rather than charge off into literal battle with physical armour against the Romans. Likewise when Paul insists that God hardened Pharaoh’s heart (<em><a href='B:520 9:14-18'>Rom 9:14-18</a></em>), he is not only repeating the Biblical record (<em><a href='B:20 9:12'>Exo 9:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 9:16'>Exo 9:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 33:19'>Exo 33:19</a></em>), but he is alluding to the way that the Jewish&nbsp;<em>Book of Jubilees</em>&nbsp;claimed that Mastema the personal Satan and not God hardened Pharaoh’s heart.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 13:13'>Rom 13:13</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Let us behave decently-&nbsp;</em>Gk. 'honestly'. The context has spoken of paying taxes and not behaving as criminals.</p><p><em>As in the day</em>- The "day" spoken of in the context is that of the Lord's coming and His Kingdom. We are to live the kind of life we shall eternally live in God's Kingdom. In this sense we have the eternal life.</p><p><em>Not in revelling and drunkenness, not in sexual immorality and debauchery, not in strife and jealousy-&nbsp;</em>We will not spend eternity doing these things, so we should not be doing them now. Again we sense that all these things were going on in the church at Rome, and yet Paul still speaks so lovingly and positively of them all. The very same set of issues were clearly evident in the church at Corinth. Again see on :2 the picture of the early converts is not very pleasant. All the more commendable therefore are those faithful ones who lived out their spiritual lives within such churches; and the Lord's letters in Revelation make just that point. But we note they were never exhorted to quit fellowship or association with the weak mass of Christian believers.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 13:14'>Rom 13:14</a></em>&nbsp;<em>But put on the Lord Jesus Christ-&nbsp;</em>We must even after baptism "put on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make not provision for the flesh, to fulfil the lusts thereof" (<em><a href='B:520 13:14'>Rom 13:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:560 4:14'>Eph 4:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:580 3:12'>Col 3:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:580 3:14'>Col 3:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:590 5:8'>1Th 5:8</a></em>), even though&nbsp;<em>at baptism&nbsp;</em>we put on the Lord Jesus (<em><a href='B:550 3:27'>Gal 3:27</a></em>; <em><a href='B:580 3:10'>Col 3:10</a></em>) and in prospect the flesh was co-crucified with Christ's flesh (<em><a href='B:520 6:6'>Rom 6:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 6:18'>Rom 6:18</a></em>). By putting off the things of the flesh and putting on the things of the Lord in our lives, we live out the baptism principle again; and thereby we are "renewed in the spirit of your mind" (<em><a href='B:560 4:22-24'>Eph 4:22-24</a></em>). See on <em><a href='B:580 2:6'>Col 2:6</a></em>. Baptism in this sense is an ongoing experience of death and resurrection with the Lord.</p><p><em>And make no provision for the flesh, to gratify its desires-&nbsp;</em>This is the simple key to overcoming temptation. "Provision" is related to the word for 'providence'. God's overall providence in calling, planning and predestinating us to salvation has been mentioned earlier by Paul in this letter. Our response is to likewise seek to structure our own lives so that we do not provide opportunities for the flesh, but rather for the Spirit.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 14:1'>Rom 14:1</a></em>&nbsp;<em>As for the one who is weak in faith</em>- Remember that this practical section of Romans from chapters 12 to 16 is based upon the pure theology of Romans 1-8. Abraham, the spiritual father of us all, was&nbsp;<em>not&nbsp;</em>"weak in faith" (<em><a href='B:520 4:19'>Rom 4:19</a></em>). The same words are used; and the point is that even those in the church who do not have the faith of Abraham should still be accepted. And the later context of Romans 14 explains more. The 'weak in faith' were those who tried to obey Jewish food laws (:2); and some had been made weak in faith by the insensitive attitudes of others in the church (:21). But for whatever reason, the weak were to be received- in contrast to the attitudes of those who assume that 'fellowship' must be based upon being able to jump certain doctrinal or practical bars. We note that again in <em><a href='B:530 8:11'>1Co 8:11</a></em>, the weak are those who are legalistic- and yet they are the very ones who consider themselves strong by their legalism.</p><h4><em>Welcome him</em>- The reason is because both God and the Lord Jesus have received or welcomed him (<em><a href='B:520 14:3'>Rom 14:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 15:7'>Rom 15:7</a></em>). The 'receiving' in view was presumably towards some who wanted to be in the church but who had been denied. The argument is similar to what had to be used with Peter- God had received the Gentiles, so Peter was to likewise. So perhaps it was the Jewish element who were unwilling to accept Gentiles in Rome. And this must be a principle for us too. We are not to be out of step with the Lord's acceptance of folks. It simply cannot be right to reason that 'They may well be good brethren in Christ, but we can't accept them because::. '.</h4><p><em>But not so as to just quarrel with him over opinions-&nbsp;</em>Of course, the Jewish legalists would have argued back as many do today: 'These are not matters of opinion, they are fundamental issues, God is a holy God::. etc:'. The church was not to be a place of quarrelling. People were to be accepted with the positions they held without seeking to endlessly argue with them- that is surely the idea.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 14:2'>Rom 14:2</a></em>&nbsp;<em>One man has faith to eat all things-&nbsp;</em>The faith was surely faith in Christ's cleansing work by which He had ended the Mosaic law and all conception of clean and unclean food.</p><p><em>But he that is weak eats herbs</em>- Vegetarianism was associated with hyper legalistic Judaism, whereby every kind of meat was feared to be not completely bloodless or&nbsp;<em>kosher</em>. But those who had this position were "weak". Yet they were not to be argued with but accepted. This is not to say that Paul has no argument about this issue, for he clearly does elsewhere, as did the Lord Himself. But the point was that endless argument of a casuistic nature was not the way to resolve the issue. And again we have a valuable principle there. Presumably Paul does not engage with the Judaistic argument in the same way as he did in Galatians because he has already argued that justification is by grace and not the works of the law, and perhaps that point was accepted in general terms- whereas in Galatia it was not.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 14:3'>Rom 14:3</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Let not the one who eats despise the one who abstains, and let not the one who abstains pass judgment on the one who eats; for God has accepted him</em>- Those with a more Biblically correct position are tempted to "despise" those who 'don't get it'. But all such spiritual elitism is wrong. Paul uses the same word used about how the Pharisee despised the publican (<em><a href='B:490 18:9'>Luk 18:9</a></em>)- to demonstrate that such spiritual superiority was in fact a form of the very Pharisaism which they were despising. The legalists were likewise inclined to judge their brothers who ate anything- using the weight of the Mosaic law to condemn. Paul alludes to both groups in :10, where he uses the same Greek words in appealing for brethren not to "judge" and "set at nothing" (s:w. "despise") their brethren- because they all stood before the Lord's judgment seat as sinners.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 14:4'>Rom 14:4</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Who are you to judge the servant of another?</em>- In :3, a distinction is made between the liberals who "despise" others, and the legalists who "judge" others. The reference here in :4 to not judging may therefore refer specifically to the legalists; or Paul's point may be that effectively, the liberals too were judging their brethren. The idea is that even if we consider the Biblical evidence judges another individual negatively,&nbsp;<em>we&nbsp;</em>are not to pass that judgment. That is not for us to do. This is a subtle but important difference. The Bible may indeed condemn a particular behaviour, but it is not for us to condemn the individual who does it.</p><p><em>To his own lord he stands or falls. Yes, he shall be made to stand up. For the Lord has power to make him stand-&nbsp;</em>We are all slaves; not the Master. Likewise we are all guests at the Lord's table who should by rights never be there; it is not for us to tell others to leave that table of grace. The 'falling' in view in Romans is stumbling over the rock of Christ and 'falling' into condemnation (<em><a href='B:520 11:11'>Rom 11:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 11:22'>Rom 11:22</a></em>). But Paul believes that God is able to make those who fall stand up, through imputing righteousness to them. For this has been his earlier argument in Romans. It is not for us, therefore, to judge those who fall. For God is seeking to make them stand up, and as the merciful Master, He may well count them as having stood up anyway, despite their fallen state. It is not therefore for us to judge those who fall. It may be that Paul's implication is that God is more likely to uphold His failing servant than we would be; therefore, let's not condemn our brother, because God is more generous-spirited than we are in His judgment.</p><p>The first century society was built around the concept of&nbsp;<em>oikonomia</em>, household fellowship. The head of the house was the leader, and all the extended family and slaves had to follow his religion and be obedient to him. For slaves, this was on pain of death. However, the call of Christ was to&nbsp;<em>individuals</em>; in conscious allusion to the&nbsp;<em>oikonomia</em>&nbsp;concept, Paul speaks of how we are the “household-servants” of Christ- not a human master (<em><a href='B:520 14:4'>Rom 14:4</a></em> RVmg:). Individual conversion to a religion was unheard of at the time. Indeed, religion was something for the wealthy to play with, as a hobby.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 14:5'>Rom 14:5</a></em>&nbsp;<em>One man esteems one day above another. Another esteems every day alike</em>- "Esteems" is the same word used in :1 about not having quarrels over opinions, or how one esteems / judges things. The matter was to be left within the mind of each person and not endlessly quarrelled over. Yet Paul is quite clear in Colossians 2 and elsewhere that the position that all days are the same is the right one. The Sabbath and all holy days have been ended by the Lord's work. But clearly he is willing for believers to remain of a different mind; the important thing being not to argue and have discord.</p><p><em>Let each man be fully assured in his own mind-&nbsp;</em>Paul has argued using the same word that Abraham was "fully assured" of salvation by faith through grace, and not by works (<em><a href='B:520 4:21'>Rom 4:21</a></em>). This is only one of several allusions to Abraham in this section. But even if a believer cannot get to Abraham's level and still seriously misunderstands- they are to be accepted. This has serious challenges for those who demand a certain level of faith, understanding and practice before extending Christian fellowship.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 14:6'>Rom 14:6</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:510 18:18'>Act 18:18</a></em>.</p><p><em>He that regards the day, regards it to the Lord-&nbsp;</em>"Regards" really means to regard highly. Paul didn't agree that some days were to be more highly regarded than others. But he advises that we respect those who have this wrong view, and consider that they are performing their mistaken service as "to the Lord". This is just how he has reasoned in chapter 13 about respecting local magistrates- service and obedience was to be performed to them 'as unto the Lord', just as slaves were to serve their earthly masters 'as unto the Lord'.</p><p>There is no lack of evidence in the NT that the Lord’s sacrifice precluded the need to do these things. And yet Paul and the Council of Jerusalem made concessions to the Jewish brethren who couldn’t bring themselves to accept the Truth in these areas, in the hope that continued practice of these things within the context of the Christian community would make them see for themselves that they were inappropriate. Paul says that Sabbath keeping is a matter of personal conscience (<em><a href='B:520 14:1-10'>Rom 14:1-10</a></em>), even though elsewhere he argues so forcibly that to do this is to return to the weak and beggarly elements. Here, as with the demons issue, there was a clear concession to some degree of human non-acceptance of Divine truth and the implications arising from it. It seems that although the Law was done away by the cross, by the time of <em><a href='B:540 3:7'>2Co 3:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:540 3:11'>2Co 3:11</a></em> it could still be spoken of as “that which is being done away” (RVmg:). There was a changeover period allowed, rather than a bald insistence that acceptance of Christ and the meaning of His death must mean that the old Jewish ways were dropped instantly.</p><p><em>And he that eats, eats to the Lord, for he gives God thanks; and he that eats not, to the Lord he eats not, and gives God thanks</em>- Paul assumes that believers of whatever persuasion will thank God before meals; and this should remain one of our good traditions.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 14:7'>Rom 14:7</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For none of us lives to himself, and none dies to himself-&nbsp;</em>Note that it is not living for&nbsp;<em>others</em>&nbsp;which is the immediate point; but living and dying to&nbsp;<em>Jesus</em>&nbsp;(:8). "None of us" is a very generous statement by Paul; he assumes that each of his readership are living and dying not to themselves but to Christ (:8). His positivity is expressed whilst at the very same time facing their immaturity and misunderstandings head on.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 14:8'>Rom 14:8</a></em><em>&nbsp;For whether we live, we live to the Lord. Or whether we die, we die to the Lord. Whether we live therefore, or die, we are the Lord's-&nbsp;</em>This is exactly the language of Romans 6 concerning baptism. The death of self and living now unto the Lord Jesus is the exact terminology used. Again Paul is positively assuming that the status taken on at baptism is being lived out in practice. He speaks of this level of total dedication to the Lord as a reason why we should not therefore be involved in judging our brethren, or getting involved in endless doctrinal disputes with them.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 14:9'>Rom 14:9</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:510 17:31'>Act 17:31</a></em>.</p><p><em>For to this end Christ died and lived again, that he might be Lord of both the dead and the living-&nbsp;</em>There are some passages which appear to teach misread that we go on living after death. It has been observed that <em><a href='B:520 14:8-9'>Rom 14:8-9</a></em> implies that Jesus is our Lord after death as well as in life: “For whether we live, we live unto the Lord; and whether we die, we die unto the Lord: whether we live therefore, or die, we are the Lord's. For to this end Christ both died, and rose, and revived, that he might be Lord both of the dead and living”. We are the Lord’s after death, in the same way as Abraham lives unto Him (<em><a href='B:490 20:38'>Luk 20:38</a></em>). We are still with Him. He doesn’t forget us when we die, just as I will remember my mother till the day of my death, regardless of when she dies. But if the Lord doesn’t come, I will die, and my memory, my love, my fondness, will perish (for a small moment). But God doesn’t die, His memory doesn’t fade and distort as ours does; images of us don’t come in and out of His mind with greater intensity and insistence at some times than at others; He remembers us constantly and will remember us after our death, right up until when the Lord comes. Because of this, He is the God of Abraham; Abraham is alive in the mind of God, He remembers his faith and his offering of Isaac, just as much as He was aware of it in Abraham’s lifetime. The works of the dead follow them, in the sense that once they finish their labours their works are still in the memory of the Father (<em><a href='B:730 14:13'>Rev 14:13</a></em>); for what father would not remember his dead child’s ways and deeds? This is why <em><a href='B:520 14:8-9'>Rom 14:8-9</a></em> says that Jesus is our Lord after death just as much as He was and is during our lifetimes. Why? Because we are “the Lord’s”, because we were “added to the Lord” through baptism (<em><a href='B:510 2:41'>Act 2:41</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 2:47'>Act 2:47</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 5:14'>Act 5:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 11:24'>Act 11:24</a></em>), because we are true brothers-in-Christ. From God’s perspective, the dead believers are cheering us on as we run the race to the end; He remembers them as they were, and knows how they would behave if they were alive today, looking down upon us as we run the race (<em><a href='B:650 12:1'>Heb 12:1</a></em>). Or in another figure, the blood of the dead believers cries out from under the altar, demanding vengeance on this world: on the Catholic, Protestant, Babylonian, Roman, Nazi, Soviet systems that slew them for their faith (<em><a href='B:730 6:9'>Rev 6:9</a></em>). To God, their blood is a voice, just as real as the voice of Abel, which cried out (in a figure) for judgment against Cain (<em><a href='B:10 4:10'>Gen 4:10</a></em>). After their death, those who had already died are spoken of as being given “white robes” and being told to rest a bit longer (<em><a href='B:730 6:11'>Rev 6:11</a></em>).</p><p>The fact Jesus is Lord has vital practical import for us. In <em><a href='B:520 14:7-9'>Rom 14:7-9</a></em>, Paul speaks of the need not to live unto ourselves, but to rather live in a way which is sensitive to the conscience and needs of others. Why? “For to this end Christ both died, and rose, and revived, that He might be Lord both of the dead and living". Because He is our Lord we therefore don’t live for ourselves, but for Christ our Lord and all those in Him. When Paul in 1 Timothy 6 exalts that Christ is King of Kings and Lord of Lords, dwelling in light which no man can approach unto, this isn’t just some literary flourish. It is embedded within a context of telling the believers to quit materialism, indeed to flee from its snare.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 14:10'>Rom 14:10</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:540 11:2'>2Co 11:2</a></em>.</p><p><em>But you, why do you judge your brother?-&nbsp;</em>The "you" refers to those legalists who judged the liberals. Those who despised or 'set at nothing' others are surely the liberals despising the conservatives. Hence "You again::." refers to a different group.</p><p><em>Or you again, why do you set at nothing your brother? For we shall all stand before the judgment seat of God-&nbsp;</em>We read in <em><a href='B:300 42:2'>Jer 42:2</a></em> of a supplication being “accepted”, or ‘to fall down before’ (RVmg:). To fall down before the Lord Jesus is to be accepted of Him. Paul speaks of us all&nbsp;<em>standing</em>&nbsp;before the judgment seat of Christ after first of all casting ourselves down; and this in the context of saying that God is able to make the weak brother<em>&nbsp;stand</em>&nbsp;in His sight (<em><a href='B:520 14:4'>Rom 14:4</a></em> cp. 10,11). We will all be in the position of the weak brother. Don't "set at nought" your brother- because the judgment seat of Christ is coming for you too (<em><a href='B:520 14:10'>Rom 14:10</a></em>). We will&nbsp;<em>all&nbsp;</em>be "set at nought" then; that's the implication. We will all have to be made stand by God's grace. We will&nbsp;<em>all&nbsp;</em>be made to stand, i:e. be accepted (<em><a href='B:560 6:11-13'>Eph 6:11-13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:580 4:12'>Col 4:12</a></em>)- or at least, Paul is saying, that's how you should look at your brethren, as if they too will be accepted. For if we have no right to condemn our brethren; we must surely assume they will be accepted. In&nbsp;passing, note how Paul warns in&nbsp;this context that we can cause our brother to fall down or stumble (<em><a href='B:520 14:13'>Rom 14:13</a></em>). Some at the last day will not be ‘stood up’, they will remain prostrate and then slink away. And why? Because they will have been made to fall by their brethren. Our faith and our community of believers is fragile, more fragile than we may think. In all the pressures of these last days it is so terribly easy to cause each other to stumble, to fall, with the ultimate consequence that they will not be stood up at the judgment. This is the evil of causing offence, stumbling, making another to fall down.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 14:11'>Rom 14:11</a></em>&nbsp;<em>As it is written-&nbsp;</em><em><a href='B:290 45:23'>Isa 45:23</a></em> "Every knee shall bow, every tongue shall confess" is quoted by Paul in <em><a href='B:520 14:11-12'>Rom 14:11-12</a></em> as being specifically concerning our position at the judgment seat. It is therefore fitting to read <em><a href='B:290 45:24-25'>Isa 45:24-25</a></em> as being concerning our thoughts then: "Surely, shall one say, in the Lord (Jesus) have I righteousness and strength::. and all that are incensed against him shall be ashamed (cp. our earlier reconstruction of the rejected initially arguing with the Lord in anger, and then slinking away in shame). In the Lord shall all the seed of Israel be justified, and shall glory". In God's presence (judgment language: <em><a href='B:510 3:19'>Act 3:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:600 1:9'>2Th 1:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:600 2:8'>2Th 2:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:720 1:24'>Jud 1:24</a></em>; <em><a href='B:730 14:10'>Rev 14:10</a></em>) no flesh will glory, but will glory in the Lord (<em><a href='B:530 1:29'>1Co 1:29</a></em>). The RV makes all this even more personal: "Only in the Lord, shall one say unto me, have I righteousness and strength" (<em><a href='B:290 45:24'>Isa 45:24</a></em> RV). The words of grateful realization will be directed specifically by us to the Lord Himself.</p><p><em>As I live, says the Lord, to Me every knee shall bow and every tongue shall confess&nbsp;to God-&nbsp;</em>To God (in Christ). This is parallel to "every one of us shall give account of himself to God" (<em><a href='B:520 14:11-12'>Rom 14:11-12</a></em>). "Account" is the Greek '<em>logos</em>'- we will '<em>logos</em>' ourselves in the sense that we will verbally confess ("every tongue") the innermost essence of our spiritual lives. "Confess",&nbsp;<em>exomo-logeo&nbsp;</em>is related to&nbsp;<em>logos,&nbsp;</em>"account". This will lead us to confess with our tongue that Christ is really our Lord (<em><a href='B:570 2:11'>Phi 2:11</a></em>). Confessing our sinfulness will lead us to show our appreciation of His Lordship. That which has been spoken or thought in darkness will then be heard in the light- in that day "there is nothing covered that shall not be revealed" (<em><a href='B:490 12:2-3'>Luk 12:2-3</a></em>). He will confess our righteous acts, and we will confess our sins (<em><a href='B:290 45:23-25'>Isa 45:23-25</a></em> cp. <em><a href='B:570 2:10'>Phi 2:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 14:11'>Rom 14:11</a></em>). For the wicked, it will be the opposite. They confess their righteous acts, He tells them their sins. And in this way the good and bad deeds of all the responsible will come to the light.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 14:12'>Rom 14:12</a></em>&nbsp;<em>So then each one of us shall give account of himself to God-&nbsp;</em>The connection between <em><a href='B:520 14:12'>Rom 14:12</a></em> and <em><a href='B:470 12:36'>Mat 12:36</a></em> "every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account of it in the day of judgment" suggests that Paul recognized that we all speak idle words which we will have to give account of at judgment. Therefore, because of our rampant tongue, we will stand in deep need of grace. So therefore, Paul says, you’d&nbsp;better be soft on your brother now, in this life.</p><p>“Every knee shall bow to me::. every tongue shall confess::. so then every one&nbsp;<em>of us</em>&nbsp;shall give account" (<em><a href='B:520 14:11-12'>Rom 14:11-12</a></em>) is an example of where 'all men', 'every man' means 'every one of us the responsible'. “The dead” will be judged (<em><a href='B:730 11:18'>Rev 11:18</a></em>)- not everyone who ever died, but the dead who, God counts responsible. "The grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared unto all men" (<em><a href='B:630 2:11'>Tit 2:11</a></em>)- certainly not to every human being that has ever lived; but to the "all men" of the new creation. The Lord tasted death "for every man" (<em><a href='B:650 2:9'>Heb 2:9</a></em>)- for every one who has a representative part in His sacrifice through baptism.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 14:13'>Rom 14:13</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:470 13:22'>Mat 13:22</a></em>.</p><p><em>Therefore let us not pass judgment on one another any longer, but rather decide-&nbsp;</em>There is to be one thing we judge or decide- that we never cause another to stumble.</p><p><em>Never to put a stumbling block-&nbsp;</em>The "stumblingblock" was used earlier in Romans with regard to the Lord Jesus and His grace being a stone of stumbling for the Jews (<em><a href='B:520 9:32-33'>Rom 9:32-33</a></em>; <em><a href='B:670 2:8'>1Pe 2:8</a></em>). He could be made a stumblingblock by Gentile believers insisting that Jewish believers disobey the Mosaic law by eating thinks like pork; if the Jews did so with a bad conscience, they might end up turning away from Him completely The word "stumblingblock" is used in exactly this context in :20,21 and <em><a href='B:530 8:9'>1Co 8:9</a></em>. So sensitivity is required in order to not make another stumble. It is not enough to insist that we are right from God's word, and therefore what we demand must be accepted by others. Their weakness of understanding and therefore of conscience must still be taken into account. Pure Biblicism has no place for this kind of thinking, and results in the utter belligerence and insensitivity which has led so many to stumble from the pathway to God's Kingdom.</p><p><em>Or hindrance in the way of a brother-&nbsp;</em>"Hindrance" is&nbsp;<em>skandalon</em>&nbsp;and strictly refers to the twig on a trap, which once triggered opens up the trap into which the animal falls. The Lord is crystal clear in His teaching that those who create such triggers for others shall be cast out at the last day (<em><a href='B:470 13:41'>Mat 13:41</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 18:7'>Mat 18:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:490 17:1'>Luk 17:1</a></em>). Hence Paul urges that we must soberly decide / judge&nbsp;<em>never</em>&nbsp;to do this to another believer. This needs to be taken far more seriously by those who insist on rejecting others from their communities because of positions on divorce or fellowship. Paul concludes by soberly warning avoidance of those who cause such&nbsp;<em>skandalon</em>&nbsp;(<em><a href='B:520 16:17'>Rom 16:17</a></em>). Walking in the light, loving our brother, means that we have no reason of causing&nbsp;<em>skandalon</em>&nbsp;(<em><a href='B:690 2:10'>1Jn 2:10</a></em>). Love is not causing another to stumble.</p>


text:
<h4><em><a href='B:520 14:14'>Rom 14:14</a></em>&nbsp;<em>I know, and I am persuaded by the Lord Jesus-&nbsp;</em>Paul really did meditate on every word of his Lord. Thus he says he was&nbsp;<em>persuaded</em>&nbsp;by the Lord Jesus that all foods were clean- this is how he took the Lord's teaching in <em><a href='B:480 7:19'>Mar 7:19</a></em>. Those words&nbsp;<em>lived</em>&nbsp;to Paul, they were as the personal persuasion of his Lord, as if Christ was talking to him personally through the Gospel records.</h4><p><em>That nothing is unclean of itself</em>- This is another window onto the fact that essentially, sin is committed within the mind. It is the mental attitudes which go along with eating or not eating which are the key issues before God. Because there is nothing unclean of itself.</p><p><em>Save that to him who thinks anything to be unclean, to him it is unclean-&nbsp;</em>Paul's approach could have been: 'The truth is that "nothing is unclean". So those who still think in terms of clean and unclean are wrong. It's their problem- they should accept the truth about this matter and get over it. By believing some things are still unclean they are denying the power of the Lord's sacrifice, how awful:::'. But he doesn't. He asks us to accept that these believers really think some things are unclean and so for them, if they eat them, they would be sinning in their conscience. The bald black and white, truth / error scenario doesn't help here; the sensitive Christian must go beyond this in sensitivity to those who are still immature, rather than hitting them with a choice as to whether to submit to Divine truth or not. We can be sure that the Father likewise practices this policy with us all over many areas where we also misunderstand and are genuinely miseducated. It is by our response to others like that as we encounter them in life that we work out our own final standing before Him.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 14:15'>Rom 14:15</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For if your brother is grieved by what you eat-&nbsp;</em>The grief or distress would be in their conscience, being encouraged to do something which they believe is sinful. Paul only uses the same word in Romans to describe his distress for Israel and those still under the Law (<em><a href='B:520 9:2'>Rom 9:2</a></em>). This is the grief we should have. We the mature should therefore feel grief for the legalists; and not cause them grief in their conscience.</p><p><em>You walk no longer in love-&nbsp;</em>Blind, bald insistence upon true principle in this case can lead others to stumble; and this nets our condemnation, not our commendation for understanding the theoretical truth about something. The way of love involves sensitivity to others. Recall that Paul has said that there should not be argument about these matters, not receiving these weaker ones to endless disputations (:1). Rather their weaker position must be accepted and lived with in sensitivity. This is a far ranging principle which so many Protestant groups obsessed with 'truth' have seriously failed to grasp.</p><p><em>By what you eat, do not destroy-&nbsp;</em>The emphasis is upon "you". Our example is more powerful than we can imagine. The 'destruction' refers to condemnation at the last day; the Greek word is used in this way elsewhere (<em><a href='B:470 5:29-30'>Mat 5:29-30</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 9:17'>Mat 9:17</a></em> with reference to the new covenant destroying the old bottles of the legalists; <em><a href='B:470 10:28'>Mat 10:28</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 10:39'>Mat 10:39</a></em>). So will God condemn a person for eating pork when they see you eat it, just because it is sinful in their conscience? Even when God sees that there is nothing unclean of itself? Maybe. Perhaps this is the degree to which God is sensitive to human conscience. But we must give due weight to the fact that whether our conscience commends or condemns us, it is not by our conscience that we shall be justified at the last day (<em><a href='B:530 4:4'>1Co 4:4</a></em>). I would rather think that if a person e:g. eats pork when they feel it is a sin, they will thereby be emboldened to consciously sin in other areas too, and their spiritual lives will fast tumble downhill until they lose faith completely.</p><p><em>The one for whom Christ died-&nbsp;</em>The tragedy of making another stumble is that Christ died for their salvation; you have made His death in vain for them. This is the message of the new wine, Christ's blood, being put into old wineskins; they are destroyed, and the new wine is poured out on the ground wasted. To make Christ's death to be in vain is serious, and can be the basis of our condemnation.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 14:16'>Rom 14:16</a></em>&nbsp;<em>So do not let what you regard as good be spoken of as evil-&nbsp;</em>'Spoken of as evil' is literally 'blasphemed'. The Greek word can be used of bad speaking against a person and not only against God. Paul uses the same word in this very context in <em><a href='B:530 10:30'>1Co 10:30</a></em>: "If I eat my food with thankfulness, why is evil spoken of me, for that for which I give thanks?". By allowing continual argument about the food issue, persons and things such as pork meat started to be spoken evil of. This is exactly why Paul wisely commands that those who have these 'weak' positions should be accepted but not argued with (:1).</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 14:17'>Rom 14:17</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For the kingdom of God is not about what we eat and drink-&nbsp;</em>This verse doesn't speak only of the fact that in the future Kingdom of God on earth, we shall not be debating what we eat- and so we shouldn't be now. <em><a href='B:520 15:13'>Rom 15:13</a></em> uses the same Greek words to explain that God through the Holy Spirit fills us with "joy and peace". These are internal mental attributes; and we are given them by God through the Spirit / mind which is given to us, as explained in chapter 8. <em><a href='B:550 5:22'>Gal 5:22</a></em> likewise says that the Spirit within us brings forth the fruit of joy and peace. "The Kingdom of God" was the core message of the Lord Jesus, and His teachings and parables about it refer mainly to life lived under the Kingship of God right now. Within that spirit of thinking and living, we do not argue about issues like food. There is a clear connection with the theological section of Romans- the life of the Spirit is all about righteousness (<em><a href='B:520 8:10'>Rom 8:10</a></em>)- the same terms used in this verse. The practical import of that is that we are not going to be mentally bogged down in endless disputes about legal issues. We are therefore not to keep arguing about them (:1), but just accept the weak and immature as they are, by grace.</p><p><em>But about righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit-&nbsp;</em>All the law, every possible type of legislation, is comprehended in the one simple law of loving our neighbour (<em><a href='B:520 13:9'>Rom 13:9</a></em>). We aren’t free to do, dress or speak just as we like; the law of love binds heavy upon us. The things of God’s Kingdom don’t revolve so much around laws (e:g. about what we should eat and drink) but around “righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit” (<em><a href='B:520 14:17'>Rom 14:17</a></em>). It is attitudes which are important rather than specific acts of obedience.</p><p>In <em><a href='B:20 33:8'>Exo 33:8</a></em> Moses asks to see God's glory, and in reply he is told God will proclaim His Name before him, which is done in <em><a href='B:20 34:5-7'>Exo 34:5-7</a></em> by the declaration of God's righteous attributes. Solomon building a temple "For the name of the Lord, and an house for His Kingdom" (<em><a href='B:140 2:1'>2Ch 2:1</a></em>) suggests that God's Kingdom is another manifestation of His Name, because it will be filled with His attributes. This helps us understand <em><a href='B:520 14:17'>Rom 14:17</a></em>: "The Kingdom of God is not meat and drink::. but righteousness::. joy", i:e. the characteristics of God's Name.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 14:18'>Rom 14:18</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For he that herein serves Christ is wellpleasing to God</em>- The language is that of sacrifice, which is how God was 'served'; and "wellpleasing" is the word for 'acceptable', used about the acceptability of sacrifice. By patiently accepting the weakness and immaturity of others, and living the Spirit life of joy and peace which is not bogged down in endless arguments over interpretation, we are in fact serving the Lord Jesus; and that service is a sacrifice acceptable to God.</p><p><em>And approved of by men</em>- Taking the higher path of not conflicting over these matters was in any case the way to acceptability with men. Not that this is of itself what we should be seeking; but Paul is addressing the unspoken issue of everyone wanting to be seen by men to be doing the right thing.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 14:19'>Rom 14:19</a></em>&nbsp;<em>So then let us follow after things which make for peace</em>- The endless disputations about law do not make for peace, neither with God which is how Paul often uses the idea of peace nor with men. Again we note that Paul came down on one side of the argument- for he writes that there is nothing unclean in itself. But this point was not to be pushed and made the source of endless argument. For peace between believers is the fruit and intention of the Spirit. And again there is a connection back to the more theoretical section of Romans, where Paul uses the same word in saying that Israel who 'followed after' legalistic righteousness did not attain it (<em><a href='B:520 9:30-31'>Rom 9:30-31</a></em>).</p><p><em><a href='B:490 14:32'>Luk 14:32</a></em> records the parable of the man with a small army going to meet the General with a far larger army- and then wisely desiring "conditions (lit. 'things') of peace". The man is clearly us, and the General coming with His hosts is evidently the Lord Jesus; we are to come to peace with Him before the final meeting of God and man in judgment. But this Greek phrase 'things of peace' recurs in <em><a href='B:520 14:19'>Rom 14:19</a></em>, where Paul speaks of making every effort to live at peace&nbsp;<em>with our brethren</em>, e:g. being sensitive to their scruples about food. Paul clearly understood that our peace with God cannot be unrelated to our peace with our brethren. To make peace with God and His Son as required in <em><a href='B:490 14:32'>Luk 14:32</a></em> must have some practical issue- and practically, it means living at peace with the rest of God's children.</p><p><em>And things whereby we may edify one another</em>- Paul repeats this in <em><a href='B:520 15:2'>Rom 15:2</a></em>: "Let each of us please his neighbour for his good, to encourage him". "Encourage" is s:w. "edify" or 'build up'. We take our place within the congregation thinking how we can build up the one next to us. And that requires wisdom; we have to choose our issues, losing a few battles to win a war. And arguing over the food issues was not going to build anyone up. Let that one go, just as the Lord let go the issue of folks believing in demons; focus instead on something positive which will really improve or build up our neighbour within the church. This approach of course is at variance with the mindset which insists that because truth has been perceived over one issue, we must keep on and on about that issue, until we either drive our brother out of the church or we split the community.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 14:20'>Rom 14:20</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Do not overthrow the work of God for the mere sake of food-&nbsp;</em>Paul has shown in :15 that we can destroy a brother by insisting on our particular point, no matter how correct we may be see note there. The "work of God" refers to His work to save that individual whom we can cause to stumble. Our own stubbornness and belligerence regarding our own correctness of understanding can actually be working against God's work. And because He allows us freewill, He permits us the power to both stumble and build up our brother. Much depends on us. "The work of God" is specifically faith in the Lord Jesus (<em><a href='B:500 6:29'>Joh 6:29</a></em>). We can destroy another's faith in Jesus because of an argument about food. This is how fragile and delicate is the faith of others. And yet we can too easily ride roughshod over the faith of others by our insistence on our correct interpretations. Paul earlier in Romans has argued that God saves without works of men (<em><a href='B:520 4:2'>Rom 4:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 4:6'>Rom 4:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 9:11'>Rom 9:11</a></em>). Salvation is His work::. and yet we can disallow His work for others by making them stumble. We must take seriously our potential to do this. In no way can we therefore go along with any policy or position which leads to the stumbling of others. And this may have radical implications for us in our social life within the believing community, just as it did for the likes of Paul and Peter in the first century church. Our relationship with the Lord God is personal. Each of us is "the work of God”, and we should therefore respect each other's spiritual individuality, even if it is based on misunderstandings such as misinterpretation of Old Testament passages about food.</p><p><em>All things indeed are clean-&nbsp;</em>Again Paul clearly comes down on one side of the food argument- no food is unclean of itself. And yet his view is that the weak should be admitted to the church but there is to be no disputing about their wrong understandings (:1).</p><p><em>However it is evil for that man who makes another stumble by what he eats</em>- Paul here redefines clean and unclean food in a new covenant context. Eating unclean food is made equal to doing something which makes your legalistic brother stumble. This is what defiles and places us outside God's realm of holiness.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 14:21'>Rom 14:21</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:510 18:18'>Act 18:18</a></em>.</p><p><em>It is good not to eat meat nor drink wine or do anything that causes your brother to stumble</em>- The 'good' thing here is that spoken of in :16: "So do not let what you regard as good::.". What is good or clean meat is to not do anything that causes your brother to stumble. "Or do anything::." takes this whole argument far beyond the immediate context of whether we can eat pork or only&nbsp;<em>kosher</em>&nbsp;chicken. The principles reach to our day. The legalists were convinced that the Bible taught a difference between clean and unclean food- for "the Bible tells me so". But the more mature could see that the Lord's words, and the implications of the Lord's sacrifice, meant that these laws should no longer be kept. Because 'the Bible told them so'. And they were in fact right, as Paul labours by twice stating that there is nothing unclean in itself. But they only won on points. The far wider issue was not causing another to stumble by keeping on about the fact, and accepting weaker brethren to only have "doubtful disputations" with them (:1). The principles are so clearly relevant to all the struggles over interpretation and practice which have riddled all the various denominations of Christendom.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 14:22'>Rom 14:22</a></em>&nbsp;<em>The faith which you have</em>- Eating previously unclean food was possible by faith in the Lord Jesus and His work. It would seem from how he writes that Paul is especially addressing the more mature element in the church; for in :1 he tells them to accept the weak into the church.</p><p><em>Keep between yourself and God</em>- Our faith and understanding is in a sense very intimate, "before God" (Gk:), in His presence. By endlessly engaging others in the "doubtful disputations" of :1, that faith was no longer private, but was being forced upon others. The idea seems to be that one may eat privately what they wish, but should not eat or drink before a weaker believer in a way which makes him stumble (:21).</p><p><em>Happy is he that has no reason to pass judgment on himself for what he approves-&nbsp;</em>This is the blessedness of a good conscience.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 14:23'>Rom 14:23</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:580 2:18'>Col 2:18</a></em>.</p><p><em>But he that doubts-&nbsp;</em>Romans 14, 15 have many allusions back to the earlier, 'doctrinal' part of Romans. Between them, those allusions teach that we&nbsp;<em>are&nbsp;</em>to be as Abraham; and yet we will be accepted if we can't rise up to his standard. <em><a href='B:520 14:1'>Rom 14:1</a></em> exhorts us to "receive the&nbsp;<em>weak in faith"-&nbsp;</em>when we have been told that Abraham was&nbsp;<em>not&nbsp;</em>weak in faith (<em><a href='B:520 4:19'>Rom 4:19</a></em>) and we should seek to be like him. But we are to receive those who are in his seed by baptism, but don't make it to his level of personal faith. <em><a href='B:520 14:5'>Rom 14:5</a></em> bids us be&nbsp;<em>fully persuaded-&nbsp;</em>as Abraham was "fully persuaded" (<em><a href='B:520 4:21'>Rom 4:21</a></em>). Yet, <em><a href='B:520 14:23'>Rom 14:23</a></em> he who&nbsp;<em>doubts</em>&nbsp;is damned- and Abraham didn't&nbsp;<em>stagger&nbsp;</em>s:w. <em><a href='B:520 4:20'>Rom 4:20</a></em>). Thus ultimately, he must be our example, even if some in the ecclesia will take time to rise up to his standard, and unlike him are "weak in faith".</p><p><em>Is condemned if he eats, because he eats not from faith</em>- This is the opposite case of those who can happily eat whatever on the basis of their faith in the Lord's work; which is how "faith" is used in Romans.</p><p><em>And whatever is not of faith is sin</em>- "Of faith" is a phrase used earlier by Paul in Romans; and I have argued that the practical section of the letter is full of reference to the theological foundations given in the opening section. "The just shall live by s:w. "of" faith" (<em><a href='B:520 1:17'>Rom 1:17</a></em>). If we are not living in justification in Christ, free from the Law, then we are in sin. This is the tough dualism Paul presents in the opening chapters of Romans. If they ate unclean food whilst still thinking they were thereby justified by the Law, then they were in sin- for Paul has proved that legalistic obedience to Law leaves us in sin, and only faith in Christ can get us into a status outside of "sin". The Jews could only be justified by or 'of' faith (<em><a href='B:520 3:30'>Rom 3:30</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 4:16'>Rom 4:16</a></em>). Rightness before God is only "of faith" (<em><a href='B:520 5:1'>Rom 5:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 9:30'>Rom 9:30</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 9:32'>Rom 9:32</a></em>). Any other way leaves us "in sin". And yet we are left with a significant logical problem: If indeed justification and salvation are&nbsp;<em>only</em>&nbsp;"of faith" in Christ and not by keeping Mosaic commandments, then why does Paul as it were allow this whole question of obeying Jewish laws to be as it were a matter of personal conscience? I can only conclude that he accepts that God's grace in Christ is such that even those who did not fully 'get it' would still be saved. And that is grace indeed. This also answers the question as to what was to become of the Jewish Christians amongst Paul's readership who didn't fully accept his arguments. Were they thereby condemned? If they sought justification by obedience to Law, then yes- "he that doubts is condemned":&nbsp; But if they still hankered after obedience to Law and couldn't emotionally accept the full implications of that status- well Paul seems content to allow them some concession to that weakness.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 15:1'>Rom 15:1</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:520 12:1'>Rom 12:1</a></em>.</p><p><em>Now we that are strong-&nbsp;</em>As noted at the end of chapter 14, Paul is writing specifically to those who knew the Law to be ended and who rightly felt free to eat anything.</p><p><em>Ought to bear the infirmities of the weak, and not to please ourselves</em>- In chapter 14, Paul has defined "the weak" as those who could not come to terms with grace and who persisted in misinterpreting Bible teaching about food laws. In effect, they were in denial of much of Paul's inspired reasoning earlier in Romans. But he has urged these "weak" be accepted in the church (<em><a href='B:520 14:1'>Rom 14:1</a></em>), but not endlessly argued with. The more mature had "to bear" their weakness of understanding and behaviour. This is at variance to the pure Biblicist, truth vs. error scenario, where those who are Biblically in the right keep on attacking the weak and will not fellowship them. The Greek for "infirmities" is the word used about how Abraham was&nbsp;<em>not</em>&nbsp;weak or infirm in faith (<em><a href='B:520 4:19'>Rom 4:19</a></em>); and how the Law was "weak through the flesh". Those still under the Law simply did not have the faith of Abraham. And others had been made weak or infirm by the intolerance of those who understood better than them (<em><a href='B:520 14:21'>Rom 14:21</a></em> AV "is made weak"). But the strong were to accept them into the church (<em><a href='B:520 14:1'>Rom 14:1</a></em>) and carry / bear them. And this is indeed how life is in any church; there are some who will need to be carried to the Kingdom. That is how it is. And it is the serious sin of those supposedly 'strong' to refuse to carry them.</p><h4>The Lord Jesus didn’t sin Himself but He took upon Himself our sins- to the extent that He&nbsp;<em>felt</em>&nbsp;a sinner, even though He wasn’t. Our response to this utter and saving grace is to likewise take upon ourselves the infirmities and sins of our brethren. If one is offended, we burn too; if one is weak, we are weak; we bear the infirmities of the weak (<em><a href='B:520 15:1'>Rom 15:1</a></em>). But in the context of that passage, Paul is quoting from <em><a href='B:290 53:11'>Isa 53:11</a></em>, about how the Lord Jesus bore our sins on the cross. We live out the spirit of His cross, not in just bearing with our difficulties in isolation, but in feeling for our weak brethren:&nbsp;&nbsp;We should be able to say with Paul that we are indeed co-crucified with Him. For most of us, this co-crucifixion isn't in terms of literal pain or violent persecution for His sake. So in what terms, then, are His sufferings articulated in us? Surely, therefore, in our mental suffering with Him. Thus Paul can quote a prophecy of Christ's crucifixion and apply it to our sufferings as a result of bearing with our weak brethren (<em><a href='B:520 15:1-3'>Rom 15:1-3</a></em>).</h4>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 15:2'>Rom 15:2</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Let each of us please his neighbour for his good, to encourage him-&nbsp;</em>The ordinary people must take responsibility. Each of us should build up his neighbour- and ‘neighbour’ is usually to be understood in the NT as our neighbour within the ecclesia (<em><a href='B:560 4:25'>Eph 4:25</a></em>; <em><a href='B:660 2:8'>Jas 2:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:660 4:12'>Jas 4:12</a></em>). In the context, encouraging or Gk. 'building up' is by bearing the weaknesses of the weak. According to <em><a href='B:520 14:1'>Rom 14:1</a></em> ff:, those weaknesses involve their misunderstanding of the Lord's sacrifice and <em><a href='B:520 15:3-4'>Rom 15:3-4</a></em> suggest that these weak brethren insulted the 'stronger'. Building up others, loving our neighbour, was to be by accepting their weaknesses of understanding and conscience.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 15:3'>Rom 15:3</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For Christ also did not please himself, but as it is written: The reproaches of them that reproached You fell upon me-&nbsp;</em>We must receive one another, even as the Lord has received us (<em><a href='B:520 15:7'>Rom 15:7</a></em>)- and this includes receiving him who is even weak in the faith (<em><a href='B:520 14:1'>Rom 14:1</a></em>). We should be looking for every reason to receive and fellowship our brethren, rather than reasons not to. The essence of living this kind of life is the cross of Christ. Paul brings this out in <em><a href='B:520 14:21'>Rom 14:21</a></em> to <em><a href='B:520 15:3'>Rom 15:3</a></em>: “It is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor any thing whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak…We then that are strong ought to bear the infirmities of the weak, and not to please ourselves:&nbsp; Let every one of us please his neighbour for his good to edification. For even Christ pleased not himself; but, as it is written, The reproaches of them that reproached thee fell on me”. The quotation is from a Psalm which refers to the crucifixion of Jesus. Yet Paul applies this to us, in our bearing with the weaknesses of our brethren and seeking not to offend them. For this is the living out of the crucifixion life in ours. This is putting meaning into words, reality into the regular action of taking bread and wine in identity with that sacrifice. Sensitively bearing with our brethren, not doing anything that weakens or offends them, but rather building them up by our patience and tolerance of their scruples and limited perceptions. This is the cross, for us. The more we realize the height of the calling, the more even like our Lord we balk at what we are really being asked to do. It is so hard not to offend others and to commit ourselves to only building them up. As hard, in barest essence, as the cross of Calvary, on a day in April, on a Friday afternoon, about 1970 years ago.</p><p>The love of Christ in the cross is to have a continual inspiration upon us- endless love, countless moments of re-inspiration, are to come to us daily&nbsp;<em>because of the cross</em>. This is how central it is to daily life. The crucifixion prophecy "The reproaches of them that reproached You fell upon me" is quoted in <em><a href='B:520 15:3'>Rom 15:3</a></em> about Christ's crucifixion; but on this basis Paul appeals to&nbsp;<em>us</em>&nbsp;to please not ourselves, but to edify our neighbour; and thus the prophecies about Christ's sufferings for us were written for&nbsp;<em>our&nbsp;</em>learning and encouragement (<em><a href='B:520 15:2'>Rom 15:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 15:4-5'>Rom 15:4-5</a></em>). This works out as being the case insofar as we are to see in His sufferings a direct, personal compulsion to&nbsp;<em>us</em>to respond in selfless service of others. The connection between Him there on that piece of wood and us today, struggling to live life in selfless service, is absolutely live, concrete and powerful:&nbsp;&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 15:4'>Rom 15:4</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For whatever things were written previously were written for our education, that through patience and through the comfort of the scriptures we might have hope</em>- Paul has just quoted a prophecy of the Lord's sufferings; and he has drawn a bridge between Him there, and us today. His sufferings are ours. In the first century Roman context, our patience with legalists and their taunts is a form of sharing His experience on the cross. Those things were therefore written for us, as well as Him. And they are therefore for our "comfort". The&nbsp;<em>paraklesis</em>, "comfort", is literally a 'coming near'. He there in His time of dying comes near to us, in that all He suffered is in essence what we do in various ways.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 15:5'>Rom 15:5</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Now the God of patience and of comfort grant you</em>- Patience and comfort are internal attributes; and God is willing to give these things to us. They are if you like spiritual, relating to the spirit or mind; and God is eager to give us that spirit- His Spirit.</p><p><em>To be of the same mind one with another, according to Christ Jesus</em>- What God gives is His Holy Spirit, or as it is termed elsewhere, the mind or spirit of Christ. We are counted as Christ, His righteousness is imputed to us. But God seeks to make this how we actually are- by the transforming power of the Spirit within. Each believer is given the same mind of Christ- and so unity between believers is achieved on account of "Christ Jesus". And yet in chapter 14 we see Paul accepting that some of the believers were "weak" in their understanding of some aspects of the Lord's sacrifice. But he focuses on the fact that despite that, they are of the same spirit of Christ as those who understand better. Unity is not the same as uniformity, neither is it achieved by identity of belief or understanding, let alone common ascent to a document such as a statement of faith. The verb translated "be of the same mind" is that used in <em><a href='B:520 14:6'>Rom 14:6</a></em> about those who regard or mind the Sabbath as holy and those who do not. They could legitimately have a different mind to each other over the interpretation of Scripture for both sides considered they had God's word behind their positions. But they were of the same mind with each other if they had the spirit of Christ- this was the essential unity, and not identity of Biblical interpretation. The same word is used in <em><a href='B:570 2:2'>Phi 2:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:570 2:5'>Phi 2:5</a></em>, where Paul appeals for believers to be of the same mind- and then defines that as being the mind of Christ. This is how we are of one mind- by having the same devotion to the mind or spirit of Christ and being open to receiving it. Paul has earlier used the word in describing how those who are justified by grace receive the gift of the Spirit which results in minding the things of the Spirit (<em><a href='B:520 8:5'>Rom 8:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 8:27'>Rom 8:27</a></em>). Our efforts to consciously be of one mind toward each other (<em><a href='B:520 12:16'>Rom 12:16</a></em> s:w:) are therefore an effort to allow the mind of Christ to be our rule and guide in all human relationships.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 15:6'>Rom 15:6</a></em>&nbsp;<em>That with one accord you may with one mouth glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ</em>- "With one accord" is a phrase often used of the early church, who were clearly made that way by their common receipt of the Holy Spirit in their hearts, despite their major differences. The Spirit of the Lord Jesus is to glorify His Father- and all those who have received that spirit will do so.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 15:7'>Rom 15:7</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Therefore receive one another-&nbsp;</em>This forms an&nbsp;<em>inclusio</em>, a kind of bookmark, concluding the section which began in <em><a href='B:520 14:1'>Rom 14:1</a></em>. They were to receive one another on the basis that they each had the spirit / mind of Christ. The basis for receiving another is because God has received them (:3). And clearly enough, Paul understood the Father and Son to have received these 'weak' ones who had not fully accepted everything revealed about the Lord's work and sacrifice:&nbsp;<br/><em><br/>Even as Christ also received you each one, to the glory of God-&nbsp;</em>This may be a warning against blanket positions on fellowship, whereby people are not treated as individuals but as blocks of persons. Each one of us was received by the Lord and so each one we encounter is to be received.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 15:8'>Rom 15:8</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For I say that Christ has been made a minister of the circumcision for the truth of God, that he might confirm the promises given to the fathers</em>- Paul seeks to bring together Jew and Gentile in the church at Rome by reasoning that the Lord's death as a Jew and for Israel was the basis for Gentile salvation. He died in the first place for Israel, those under the law, to redeem God's Israel (<em><a href='B:550 4:4'>Gal 4:4</a></em>). When was Christ made a servant "minister"? According to Philippians 2, in His death on the cross. "The truth of God" is a phrase Paul elsewhere uses in Romans for the Gospel which is the universal truth for all men, Jew and Gentile. It was by the Lord's death that the promises to the Jewish fathers which are the basis of the Gospel were "confirmed". He was the sacrifice previsioned in Genesis 15 which was God's confirmation of the Abrahamic covenant. God's covenant commitment to us is amazing. In Genesis 15, He made a one-sided commitment to Abraham. The idea of the dead animals in the ceremony was to teach that 'So may I be dismembered and die if I fail to keep my promise'. <em><a href='B:300 34:18'>Jer 34:18</a></em> speaks of how Israelites must die, because they passed between the pieces of the dead animal sacrifices in making a covenant. But in Genesis 15, it is none less than the God who cannot die who is offering to do this, subjecting Himself to this potential curse And He showed Himself for real in the death of His Son. That was His way of confirming the utter certainty of the promises to Abraham which are the basis of the new covenant which He has cut with us (<em><a href='B:520 15:8'>Rom 15:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:550 3:17'>Gal 3:17</a></em>). Usually both parties passed between the dead animals- but only Yahweh does. It was a one-sided covenant from God to man, exemplifying His one-way grace. The Lord died, in the way that He did, to get through to us how true this all is- that God Almighty cut a sober, unilateral covenant with us personally, to give us the Kingdom. We simply can't be passive to such grace, we have no option but to reach out with grace to others in care and concern- and we have a unique motivation in doing this, which this unbelieving world can never equal. From one viewpoint, the only way we can not be saved is to wilfully refuse to participate in this covenant. See on <em><a href='B:470 28:10'>Mat 28:10</a></em>.</p><br/><p>15:9&nbsp;<em>And that the Gentiles might glorify God for His mercy-&nbsp;</em>It was because of the Lord's death and resurrection that the promises to Abraham were confirmed. He became thereby in the fullest sense the seed of Abraham who would inherit the earth for ever. And all who identify with Him and become "in Him" by faith and baptism are thereby assured of the salvation promised to Him and Abraham. This was the thought of <em><a href='B:520 4:16'>Rom 4:16</a></em>: "To the end that the promise may be sure to all the seed. Not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all". The promise was made sure or confirmed (:8) in the Lord's death. And thus His death initially for Israel became the world's salvation.</p><p><em>As it is written: Therefore will I give praise to You among the Gentiles, and sing to Your Name</em>- The quotation from <em><a href='B:230 18:49'>Psa 18:49</a></em> is of David wanting to praise God among the Gentiles. Paul reads this as meaning that David looked forward to a day when the Gentiles would praise God, and he would be there amongst them doing the same.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 15:9'>Rom 15:9</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And that the Gentiles might glorify God for His mercy-&nbsp;</em>It was because of the Lord's death and resurrection that the promises to Abraham were confirmed. He became thereby in the fullest sense the seed of Abraham who would inherit the earth for ever. And all who identify with Him and become "in Him" by faith and baptism are thereby assured of the salvation promised to Him and Abraham. This was the thought of <em><a href='B:520 4:16'>Rom 4:16</a></em>: "To the end that the promise may be sure to all the seed. Not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all". The promise was made sure or confirmed (:8) in the Lord's death. And thus His death initially for Israel became the world's salvation.</p><p><em>As it is written: Therefore will I give praise to You among the Gentiles, and sing to Your Name</em>- The quotation from <em><a href='B:230 18:49'>Psa 18:49</a></em> is of David wanting to praise God among the Gentiles. Paul reads this as meaning that David looked forward to a day when the Gentiles would praise God, and he would be there amongst them doing the same.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:520 15:10'>Rom 15:10</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And again He says: Rejoice, you Gentiles, with His people</em>-&nbsp;"Rejoice, O ye nations, with his people" (<em><a href='B:50 32:43'>Deu 32:43</a></em>) is quoted here in the NT concerning Gentile response to the Gospel. But they will rejoice and respond&nbsp;<em>because</em>&nbsp;of God's terrifying judgment of His enemies outlined in the context (<em><a href='B:50 32:41-44'>Deu 32:41-44</a></em>). In some way, the harder side of God attracts, in that men see in truth that He is God and they but men. His rod and staff of correction are our comforts (<em><a href='B:230 23:4'>Psa 23:4</a></em>). Israel will finally realize that God’s judgments upon them have brought them to know Him: “They shall know that I am the Lord, in that I caused them to go into captivity” (<em><a href='B:330 39:28'>Eze 39:28</a></em> RV):&nbsp;</p>


