Romans Study Questions
2002-12-17
The following questions were required by the Romans course I took in Bible college. They deal with the entire book of Romans. Each question is followed by my answer. Mainly left as is from when it was originally written.
Introductory Questions
1. What commentaries on Romans would you recommend for an educated layman? a pastor? a scholar? a layman?
These were some selections I found in the University library that seemed to be worthy to mention.
Word Biblical Commentary (James D. G. Dunn). This work is in two different volumes going verse by verse throughout the epistle, complete with an introduction and background with detail, and then moving on, verse by verse with detail using Greek, but with explanation. This work would be good for those who have some exposure to language study, but could be used by all groups mentioned above.
The New American Commentary (Robert H. Mounce). About one quarter the size of Cranfield and the Word Biblical Commentary above, Mounce writes a more condensed commentary. The main body of the commentary does not make much use of the Greek text, but puts those details in the footnotes to add to what he had written above. This work, considering its brevity, would be good to use probably for a layman, but probably not to be used for extensive exegetical work. The work, however, considering the ability of the author to exegete Greek texts, we can be comfortable that his message is sound and with good basis.
Cranfield’s work seems to be highly technical, and good for the use for scholarly work. Other Romans commentaries mention his name in their works. A layman without exegetical training may find the work difficult at times, though the others will find this a good reference for the pastor and the teacher. This will be the primary commentary that I will reference.
See also John Murray’s The Epistle to the Romans.
2. How was the church at Rome started?
It is not for certain how the church was started. Cranfield seems to think the gospel came to Rome via a presence of Christians “in the discharge of their ordinary secular duties or business rather than through any specially undertaken evangelistic enterprise” (I:17). Later tradition attributes the founder of the Roman church, and even earlier tradition credits Paul and Peter as co-founders. Though these are unlikely, since Paul’s letter to the Romans did not mention Peter, and Paul had yet to actually go there, for he had desired to go to Rome (cf. Romans 1:10-15). Cranfield hypothesizes that there was a presence of both Jewish people and Gentile there, but there is no conclusive evidence of what the ratio between them would be. There possibly could have been multiple groups instead of one church at large, considering the use of the word ekklesia, which is not used to refer to the Christian community as a whole here. This would make sense considering the size of Rome (Cranfield, I:22).
3. What was Paul’s purpose in writing Romans?
Paul had not been able to visit Rome until the time he had written this letter (Romans 1:13) and had hoped to do so. He also wanted to minister among them as well, being an apostle to the Gentiles, though he was not the founder of this church. His eventual goal was to go to Spain and preach the gospel there (Romans 15:28).
As Cranfield notes on pages 23-24 in volume I, it is interesting why there is a fifteen chapter span of intense theology and exhortation. He mentions a detailed list of reasons that seemingly all could be true. As it is good to point out, Romans 16:17-20, might be an indication as of why. To explain this, Paul exhorts many of the churches he address to combat heresies and dissention that seem to plague the church. To use an example, Paul writes his protégé Timothy in 1 Timothy for him to be a Godly man and to defend the church against these aforementioned negative elements that are destructive to the church. To the Romans, whom he had not known, nor had he been to Rome, perhaps Paul is writing to them on many issues, not knowing perhaps their current disposition as believers in the body of Christ, explaining sound doctrine to them and how they should live as a result of the reality of such doctrine. This is only a partial hypothesis, considering the study of Romans so far and of what we know of Paul. As Cranfield states, it is good to keep one’s mind open when confronting the several questions regarding the reason for all of the doctrine in his letter.
4. What is the Theme of Romans?
While reading throughout the book of Romans, and trying to relate Paul’s line of thought and purpose for this letter, it seems to follow the path of logic for the Gospel of salvation for the first eleven chapters (from total depravity to glorification), and then from chapter 12 until the end he exhorts what living as a believer should look like. The message is indicated in detail perhaps because Paul has not been there, as the church was founded by somebody else. Since his ministry was finished in the east, he therefore did not go to Rome because the church had been founded (cf. Romans 15:18-21). He then would stop at Rome on his way to Spain to see them, for he had heard of their faith (cf. 1:8). Since he had never been there, Paul desired to go into detail of the Gospel message, with ample support from the Hebrew Scriptures, that they might be further enlightened, and perhaps to be further prepared for his coming. The theme theologically speaking could perhaps be mentioned as follows: The depravity of man required the righteousness of God to substitute his punishment through Jesus’ suffering and death, and, having accepted His mercy by faith, the believer should walk by faith in brotherly love, both Jew and Gentile. But more succinctly, Paul states his theme in a verse: “For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith” (Romans 1:16-17).
Romans 1
5. What does the resurrection of Christ have to do with his being declared the Son of God (Romans 1:4)?
Cranfield states that Jesus’ resurrection was the beginning of His glorified life (I:62). Knowing that Jesus was the Son of God as opposed to being merely the son of David, the context of this passage places the emphasis of Jesus being declared the “Son of God with power.” On what I have gathered, the declaring of Him being the Son-of-God-in-power according to the Holy Spirit (having a sense of sanctification, cf. Cranfield I:64) began with His resurrection (ex; since, from the time of, Cranfield I:62). This is not to say His divinity began with the resurrection, but to say that after His ministry and the passing of all of these events, the resurrection was a pivotal point where Jesus won victory over sin and death, thus declaring Him the Son-of-God-in-power.
6. What does the phrase “obedience of faith” mean? Note. It forms a frame around the book (see Romans 1:5 and Romans 16:26). Write a theme of the book in terms of this phrase.
Cranfield seems to think, among a number of possibilities, that it would mean “the obedience to Him which faith consists.” Literally, of course, it is obedience of faith, faith being in the genitive case. Cranfield mentions this former definition; it would best be identifying this as a genitive of apposition. It is interesting to note that Wallace mentions that the two parts that would make up such a phrase would be dependent on each other (Wallace, 96). If this is the way we would want to look at this passage, then the former noun ‘obedience’ would be an ambiguity that would be clarified by ‘faith’ (Wallace, 95). It is also interesting to mention Cranfield’s other comments that would support his conclusion. Paul in his message would use this phrase as bookends in this highly theological epistle that obedience to God is “the essence of which is a responding to His message of good news and faith” (Cranfield, I:66). True faith would include the desire to obey God. Considering that all believers have the Holy Spirit (Romans 8:10), this would make sense. The entire process of salvation requires obedience to the faith; that is, humankind must first believe in Jesus to be justified, but then must continue to live by faith thereafter.
Another way to define it, which makes the most sense regarding the context, is to say this phrase in the genitive could be rendered, ‘obedience, namely, the Faith.’ This is the Gospel of grace, that by faith in Christ we can be right with God. Being obedient to God is trusting in Christ for the forgiveness of sins.
7. The church in Rome was a flagship church for what? For what were they known?
The faith of the church in Rome was known around the entire world (Romans 1:8). Being in the capital of the Roman Empire, things easily became difficult for them. During a period where an edict was issued to drive the Jews from Rome, the church would also feel repercussions, considering they were considered a sect of the Jewish religion. To decide critical issues in the Church in the coming centuries, bishops from the east and west would look to the bishops of Rome to make decisions on doctrine. The Roman church also has an advantage in spreading the Gospel, being the capital of the Empire. People from all over the world would come here, and it was an opportunity to share the message with people that would also bring the message to their homes throughout the world.
8. Why was Paul “a debtor” to the lost? Romans 1:14
His mission was focused on the Gentiles when in the east. When he was called by the Lord, he was commissioned to bear Christ’s name to Gentiles, kings, and children of Israel (Acts 9:15). As he went into the ministry, he began in each city in the synagogues. This is the natural place to look, since this is where one would find worshippers of the Lord. But when the Gentiles more readily accepted Christ, the Jews grew angry and jealous of Paul. The Gentiles, then, became his main focus of ministry, and he was therefore obedient to Christ’s commandments that were given to the original 12 apostles (Acts 1:8). In Romans 1:14, he states that he is a debtor to “Greeks, and to the Barbarians; both to the wise, and to the unwise.” Cranfield seems to think that this refers to the whole of Gentile humanity, but they represent different types therein (Cranfield, I:83). Even our English translations bear witness to this. The Greek and the Barbarian are very different. During the rise Hellenism, we see that Greek nationalism among the city-states was running high, especially in the days of the Persian invasions. Eventually, those who were not Greek or did not speak Greek became to be known as Barbarians (barbaroi, we see interaction with barbarians when Paul was shipwrecked at Malta in Acts 28:1-6). To all of such people was his ministry, and this was a reason why he wanted to go to the saints in Rome (Romans 1:13-15).
We cannot forget the passion he had for the Jewish people either, saying he would be accursed for them if this were possible (Romans 9:1ff). There is a reality that all peoples need the Gospel, for “it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth” (Romans 1:16), yet in the future discussion in the rest of the chapter, the Gentiles especially, have traded in the reality of an eternal God for manufactured idols, and were given up by God to serve the false gods and do things worthy of death.
9. Define the phrase “the righteousness of God.” Explain the possibilities of the use of the genitive “of.”
The main question that Cranfield proposes is whether the genitive is a genitive of origin or a subjective genitive. Cranfield supports the former (I:95-99). The latter he refutes (among which there are five different views), because it would be an inconsistency of Paul’s usage of the phrase. Thinking on these things, it makes sense, considering that in the previous verse, that the gospel is the “power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth.” Though the argument against a genitive of origin is an interpretation coming from perhaps an anthropocentric understanding of the gospel (Cranfield, I:99), we would need to neglect the themes that we have mentioned beforehand. All of these themes seem to mention the condition of man and his need for salvation. Though God is righteous and does righteous things, it is this power of God and righteousness of God that is given unto humankind for their salvation. The main purpose of this phrase as a genitive of origin is that it is God’s righteousness, the only true righteousness, that is imputed on us when we trust in Christ. Therefore, we can render the phrase, ‘righteousness from God.’
10. Examine Habakkuk 2:4. Describe what the prophet is talking about in terms of his contextual environment. What is the word “righteous” in Hebrew? What does it mean?
Translation from Masoretic Text: Behold the puffed up (lit. swollen), his soul is not upright in him, and the righteous will be in his steadfastness. This translation might not be what you expected, but nonetheless, I think that one can have the same application from this verse considering the context. In Habakkuk’s day, there was great injustice and idolatry in the land, especially in those days following the days of Josiah. A certain fearful expectation came from the north as Nabopolassar and Nebuchadnezzar, kings of the Chaldeans, were slowly taking over the Assyrian empire. It is no wonder why Habakkuk is in distress. In Habakkuk 2:4, we see a type of parallelism, juxtaposing two kinds of people. The former is one who is not upright; the latter is one who will persevere considering the harrowing conditions existing shortly before and during the Babylonian conquest. Tsadiq is the Hebrew word for righteous; dikaiosune is the Greek word. The former, in the adjective form, is used to describe one’s conduct or character, in regards to the fulfillment of conformity to a norm (Cranfield, 94). Perhaps it would not be wrong to remember an argument that James puts forth that faith without works is dead (James 2:26). The practical working out of faith can save one in a physical sense. Returning to Habakkuk in Romans, this is true for both situations: the Israelites that were righteous in the days of Habakkuk could persevere even in harrowing times, and for the believers in the first century Church, they also walk by faith, since persecution was a part of their lives. Either way, walking by faith often saves in a practical sense, but always saves in a soteriological sense.
11. What are the two possibilities of how God makes his truth known in Romans 1:19? Compare translations to see the two major options (i.e., some see one thing referred to here, others see two). What are they? Describe them in theological terms.
King James Version: Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.
The KJV states that their knowledge of God is known in them because God showed it to them. Thinking this process out and reading the appropriate commentary, I think that humans being in the image of God is an important part to seeing there is one main idea here, though different parts contributing. Let me explain: Humanity being a part of creation as well as being in the image of God contributes to the knowledge of humankind that might know God in a general revelation-sense. Looking also at the context of the paragraph, it is through nature that God’s invisible attributes can be seen. Humankind knows intrinsically about God because of their special role in creation, but also knows through the general revelation of the creation around them. This is one idea that is being expressed, but in two different ways.
12. What does “suppress the truth” mean?
The phrase of a present participle in the genitive, matching anthropon in case, shows what humankind does, attempting to cover up what they already know in their hearts to be true. They know God and His righteousness, but ignore Him and hold His truth down in unrighteousness (cf. Cranfield, I:112). Nonetheless, the testimony of God is still written on their hearts since they are images of God, and His signature is still evident in His creation around them, so it is a useless attempt to assault God in a force of pride that people might create an alternate truth in an effort to become God.
13. Why is “natural function” significant in Romans 1:26-27? Does Genesis 1:26-28 and Genesis 2:18-24 help?
God, making humans in His image, created them to rule over creation. He made the man and the woman partners in this, to procreate and work together. Now when a man and a woman get married, they become one flesh. These were not only to be beneficial for Adam who was initially alone (Genesis 2:18), but it was also a commandment for the man and woman to “be fruitful and multiply” (Genesis 1:28), and to rule the earth. Being ‘one flesh’ stresses a partnership between them. This order, according to humankind who suppresses the truth of God, is no longer an absolute. Therefore, the lusts of man now in Romans 1:26-27 is an example how ultimate truth gave way to relative truth and personal opinion, since in pride, people make themselves gods and serve themselves in self-gratification.
14. How do you preach Romans 1:18-22 today? Create a preaching outline.
Romans 1:18 cannot be divorced from the preceding verses. The verb apokaluptetai, which is in the present tense and passive voice, is used in this very form in both Romans 1:17-18. The righteousness of God from faith to faith is revealed in the gospel, just as the wrath of God was revealed on all ungodliness and unrighteousness. This reinforces that righteousness can be achieved by faith alone, and that a person’s righteousness is from God.
Without the revelation of the gospel, humankind is condemned to continue in sin, even though they knew of God and His wrath against ungodliness. They suppressed the truth, and in their own wisdom did what was right in their own eyes, calling themselves wise. As a natural conclusion of them becoming wise in their own eyes, we see man’s inclination to then forge gods into their own image, the reverse of what truly happened, and also into images of animals. In essence, people create gods that they can control.
The use of connective words is also noteworthy. We will see God’s righteousness in his judgment in the passage also, with Paul’s line of reasoning. In Romans 1:18, the use of ‘for’ or ‘gar’ with the same word ‘apokaluptetai’ shows us what corrupted man is without the gospel of Jesus Christ. Paul also uses ‘because’ and ‘therefore’ to continue a sequence of events that take place that lead them to further alienation from God.
I. As the righteousness of God is revealed in the gospel through faith, the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against ungodliness and unrighteousness.
II. God has created man with a heart that knows of Him, though they do not honor Him as God.
III. Man is without excuse because of the knowledge of God through general revelation. Cf. Psalm 19:1-6.
IV. Though the hearts of humankind were darkened, they believed themselves to have been enlightened and became wise. Cf. Genesis 3:6.
15. What are the three reasons God “gave them over” in Romans 1:24, 26, 28?
Seeing the progression of the sin of humankind in the preceding verses, there came a point where God seems to let them, in their stubbornness, do what they want to do and think what they want to think. A repeated phrase paredoken autous ho Theos is used in all three instances. As Cranfield suggests, it seems good to say that this would be a temporary giving up for them to learn from their wretchedness (I:121). Since the beginning of time, the majority of Gentiles did not follow God Most High, but created for themselves idols. When Christ came in the fullness of time, He came to a generation that was tired of polytheism and emperor worship and, in the age of Greek philosophy and mystical religion, knew that they needed something else, and longed for a more personal religion. Philosophy and mystical religion had failed, so Jesus came to this generation at the right time.
First, they began ‘hold the truth in unrighteousness’ (Romans 1:18). They ignored the general revelation of God. Their thoughts became futile, yet they claimed to be wise (Romans 1:22), and made gods in their image (Romans 1:23). Because of these particular things, God gave them over first to uncleanness, in their lusts of their hearts (Romans 1:24). As a result of this, they dishonored their bodies, worshipping the creature (Romans 1:25). The value of humankind decreased when they are no longer thought to be in the image of God, and God is in the image of men. While humankind was doing this, God turns them over to vile passions, such as homosexual tendencies (Romans 1:26-27). The ordination of marriage, which leads to creation of new human life also is replaced for the pure reason of gratifying people’s own passions. Leaving God outside their minds, they are given over to a reprobate mind, doing countless number of sins. In short, I see a progression of sin that leads to a progression of humankind’s alienation of God. There comes a point, though people could have turned to God, they actively chose not to, and when sins reach a certain point, God judges them (cf. Genesis 15:16). The judgment can be seen as nothing else than as an act of mercy, for if God left them to their sin, the judgment in the end would be far worse than if He had not cut their lives short.
Romans 2
16. Who is the “you” or the “man” of Romans 2:1?
The subject of discussion shifts to someone who is Jewish, or at least one who is familiar with Jewish Law. Paul’s language in chapter 1 indicates he is talking about all people, because he is speaking of general revelation, and not special revelation. The Jews had both general and special revelation since the latter was the knowledge revealed in the Old Testament. All people have general revelation, and have no excuse to ignore the existence and reality of the God of Judgment. Now when Paul criticizes ‘man’ in chapter 2, we have good reason to believe that all men are without excuse.
To bring up another one of Paul’s points, considering the attitude of moral superiority of the Jews alluded to in Romans 2:1, it would be good to mention that the Greeks also had a form of superiority, not so much morally speaking, but intellectually speaking, which might fit the context of judging others. Considering that the Roman Empire was seasoned with the Hellenism and Greek pride, I think that once again that the context can allow for ‘man’ to be all people, both the Jew and the Greek, for Paul would have used the term Ioudaisos (cf. Romans 2:9-10), though? he does later on. So in Romans 2:17, Paul might be making a pivotal point to show that the Jew and the Gentile are equally be under the sin, regardless of general and special revelation of God, especially as he moves toward his closing argument of human depravity by quoting various Psalms including Psalm 14. All men are under sin.
17. Does Romans 2:7 teach justification by works? Explain. Does the tense of “seek” help? The verb referred to is in the present, and it is active.
The verse does teach justification by works, meaning, one who is perfect under the law (which is obviously impossible). According to this passage, however, it is demonstrated to show that man cannot do what is in the law. Considering what Paul begins to discuss starting in Romans 2:17, people who have been enlightened by the law, namely, the Jew, is convicted under the law. Paul concludes his argument beginning in Romans 3:9, quoting from Psalm 14 saying that all men are under sin, regardless of Jewish heritage or Gentile heritage. Once he establishes these things, then he moves on to faith in Jesus as God’s righteousness apart from the law. The participle, being in the present, is more evidence that this passage is for Jewish people, for it was they, especially at the time of the writing, that were placing faith in their own efforts to do the law to be approved by God.
Having said this, the situation Paul is presenting a hypothetical situation. Those who were perfect before God in doing the Law of Moses perfectly would be righteous before God and inherit eternal life. In all of history, Jesus Christ is the only One to have done this, since He is the Lord of Glory Himself.
18. Examine, explain and define the word “preference” or “favoritism” in Romans 2:11.
Prosopolapsia. The word literally means partiality, but in the context of meaning partiality with sins (Danker, 887). We have already established that Paul is talking about the sinfulness and depravity of humankind. There is no escape for those who practice lawlessness in the sight of God (Romans 2:1-4). Wrath is collecting up for humankind, who will be judged each according to their deeds (Romans 2:5-6), explaining thereafter judgment of the righteous and the wicked in a chiasm in Romans 2:7-10. The chiasm is discussing the fate of these in this pattern: those who do good to eternal life, the self-seekers indignation and wrath, to the evil-doer tribulation and anguish, and to the workers of goodness glory, honor and peace; for the Jew and the Greek. The emphasis is on the fate of the wicked, since Paul is emphasizing the depravity of humankind. Then Paul states that there is no ‘partiality’ with God. In other words, those who have done any sin will be convicted by his previous statement. This supports the hypothetical connotation in Romans 2:7, 10. God does not show preference to the Jew or the Gentile when judging sin. Sin will ultimately be judged regardless of who you are. He has no tolerance for sin; it was only in His majestic grace that He patiently withheld judgment until the coming of His Son, who came to pay for our sins and will one day eradicate sin from the earth.
19. What does “justify” mean (cf. Romans 2:13)?
Dikaioo. The word means in this context means to be approved, to stand approved, or to stand accepted (Perschbacher, 102). Danker states that the word is to ‘render a favorable (or affirmative) verdict’ (Danker, 249). The idea is that the one who does the law will be released from God’s judgment. This is not of the hearers of the law, which would include all of Israel. It has been established in verse Romans 2:11 that there is no differences between sins: those who work unrighteousness are condemned. It is also here in Romans 2:12-13, the ones who do the law will stand without judgment. According to this particular verse, no one will be justified, since only doers of the Law will be justified.
20. Discuss Romans 2:14-15.
Cranfield takes this passage as speaking about Gentile Christians (I:156). The word phusei should be connected with echonta nomou, saying that Gentiles do not have the law by nature. Gentiles were not given the Law, yet Paul is stating they still have no excuse.
The concept of justification of faith will not be brought up until Romans 3:21, so we are still speaking hypothetically: Those who do what is right (i.e., nobody) will be saved, and those who do wrong will be judged. It is impossible, for the Jews who had the Law and the Gentiles who did not, to be righteous according to works. But even the works that ta ethne do that are good, though they are not meritorious of salvation, are an expression of the Law. These verses also do not make any reference to justification by faith, but talk about the condition of the heart. The heart is the issue here, and we are not speaking of faith yet. The discussion is of the sordid origin (i.e., the heart) of all of our outward sins. Humankind is therefore further condemned (Romans 2:16). Therefore, according to these things, Paul is still discussing the hypothetical, where Gentiles either do what is good according to their consciences or are convicted of their wrongdoings. The doing of what it right and good is impossible for both the Jewish people and the Gentiles. This will be ultimately apparent to them on the Day of God’s judgment (Romans 2:16, Cranfield I:161).
21. What is the value of circumcision in Romans 2:25?
Circumcision, being “the chief grounds of Jewish confidence” (Cranfield I:171), is meaningless, or annulled, if the Jew is a transgressor of the law. The preceding passage is connected, by the use of gar,to the following passage. The previous verses testify against the Jews that corporately, as the hearers of the law, have boasted in the law even though they have broken it. The circumcision of the heart is the feature and inward sign that is imperative (Romans 2:28-29).
In Genesis 17:10, when the circumcision rite was declared to Abraham, it was given as a sign of the covenant God made with Abraham. Though Abraham had sinned, such as with lying to the king of Egypt about his wife in Genesis 12:13ff and the sin with Hagar in Genesis 16, God was counted as righteous because of faith in Genesis 15:6. This sign of the circumcision was the rite that declared one to be a part of this promise that God had declared (Genesis 17:10). The promise was the blessing of many descendents, many nations being made from him, and kings that would come from him (Genesis 17:6). It also included the land that was called Canaan (Genesis 17:8). Even in Genesis 17:1, when God was commanding circumcision, God stated to Abraham, “I am the Almighty God; walk before me, and be thou perfect.” Walking before God with a heart contrary to the promises of God nullifies the rite. Again, everything is leading up to the need for faith for one to be acceptable to God.
22. Does 2:29 teach Gentiles become Jews? Explain.
There is still a difference between Jew and Gentile, which is discussed starting in Romans 3:1 and following. The argument is the true circumcision in the spirit of the law, not of mere physical circumcision. True circumcision is of the heart, an inward change of the person (explained in Romans 2:26-28, and defined in Romans 2:29). Cranfield explained the use of the word Jew in this way, that “Paul is using ‘Jew’ in a special limited sense to denote the man who in his concrete human existence stands by virtue of his faith in a positive relation to the on-going purpose of God in history” (Cranfield I:176). Eschatologically speaking, there is still a difference between Jew and Gentile, cf. Romans 11:25. But true salvation on an individual basis comes by faith, which does not encompass all Jews from all ages (cf. the argument of Galatians culminating in Galatians 6:16; Revelation 2:9; 3:9; Romans 9:6ff).
Romans 3
23. What advantage does a Jew have? Romans 3:1-2. What word is used for “oracles?” Examine it and where it is used elsewhere. What is this referring to?
The word is logion, which means oracles or divine sayings (Perschbacher, 259), or could refer to God’s promises to the Jews (Danker, 598). Stephen uses this word to refer to the law that was given to Moses on Mount Sinai in Acts 7:38. In Hebrews it is used again to describe revelation from God, where the recipients of the letter were still on the foundational level (Hebrews 5:12, cf. Hebrews 6:1). The last occasion, in 1 Peter 4:11, Peter beseeches the recipients to speak ‘as the oracles of God’, in light of living in the last days. They have received the promises as being Abraham’s seed, which revolves around the covenants. The world will be blessed through Israel (Genesis 12:3). Therefore, the promises that were spoken in God’s revelation to Israel were even brought to the whole world through them.
It is important to mention that all things that the covenants stood for all pointed to the Lord Jesus Christ. The enemies that exist in the Holy Land will be destroyed by His coming. He was the one who could keep the Law and kept it to the letter. He was the one the Law pointed to, since nobody could keep it, and people needed to be saved from condemnation. The Law showed that people needed Christ to offer that perfect sacrifice without blemish. He is the Passover Lamb. He is the scapegoat that took the sins away from the people. The list goes on indefinitely. It was this people Israel that Jesus Christ came from, and the oracles of God are the Word of God that forever points to the Lord Jesus.
24. What section of Romans does 3:3-5 anticipate?
Verses 3 and 4 look forward to Romans 9:1-11:36, which speaks of God’s faithfulness to Israel despite their corporate rejection of Jesus Christ. In verse 5, the phrase “righteousness of God” appears again, and will be discussed within this chapter. There will be an important discussion on the righteousness of God that is needed in our lives in order for us to be saved from sin and sin’s consequences.25. Discuss “may it never be” in Romans 3:4 and Romans 3:6.
The phrase is me genoito. It is in optative mood, which designates a ‘wish’ (W. Mounce, 325). It is a phrase used by Paul fifteen times, and the King James translates it as ‘God forbid’ to denote the emphasis behind the phrase. The phrase is always after a question he asks. There is nothing different about it in this context.
26. Notice the proof of man’s sinfulness in Romans 3:10-18 is not experience but the Old Testament (these are quotes from the Psalms).
This is a synopsis of the preceding verses, using Old Testament documentation as proof for the depravity of man (Psalms 5:9, 14:2-3, 140:3, 10:7, 36:1; Isaiah 59:7-8). The sinfulness of all people is not something new, but something we have known all along. Paul must spell it out in detail to reiterate this and the seriousness of sin so that the good news he will announce in the remaining chapters has the full meaning it ought to have.
27. Summarize Romans 1:16-3:20. Write a one-sentence summary.
All people, whether Jewish or Gentile, are sinners and are condemned before God.
Besides the first two verses, there is a gloomy outlook for humankind. The remainder of chapter one discusses the progression of the sins of humankind. Beginning in chapter two, Paul discusses that doing good will justify oneself, but then demonstrates that no one has done good works. Even those who have gone through the rite of circumcision have no security. Though the Jew has been given the revelation of God, the actual hearing of divine revelation is not good enough. After establishing that all people are sinful, Paul will return to the gospel discussed in Romans 1:16-17 and explain that righteousness comes from God by faith.
28. What is meant by “propitiation” in Romans 3:25?
Hilasterion. Cranfield suggests this does not refer to the mercy seat as it often does in the Septuagint. He suggests that means a propitiatory sacrifice. There is no definite article, and it seems awkward to equate Jesus with His blood that was the shed along with the mercy seat itself, an impersonal piece of Temple furniture (Cranfield I:215). The context also suggests that, through faith in his blood, the concept of a sacrifice is necessary.
29. Explain Romans 3:25-26.
The verb ‘set forth’ is in the middle voice, where there is a hint of God setting Himself forth as sacrifice in the person of Jesus. This is a demonstration of God’s righteous character, as He withheld judgment to people deserving of judgment. This is because He knew from the beginning of time past He would do this righteous action. He therefore was righteous, even by justifying (participle) the one who has faith.
30. What does Romans 3:26 have to do with Paul’s argument?
This is a summation of God’s righteous action that He took in himself to justify humanity, doing the very work that humankind could not do. The next verse says, ‘where is boasting then?’ Hypothetically, works of the law would make righteousness an intrinsic quality of people, but righteousness in reality comes only from God through faith in Christ. This puts all of depraved humankind on the same level, needing to be justified by the same grace of God. Therefore, we are all the same, not one of us better than the other. We are all sinners that need God’s grace in order for us to be saved.
For an exegetical study on Romans 3:21-26, click here.
31. Relate Romans 4:1-2 to Romans 3:27. For what reasons would Abraham be a good example of the point Paul is making?
Abraham, the father of Israel, was justified in the same way: by faith (Genesis 15:6). He also had nothing to boast about. Justification by faith is the only way to be justified before God, from dispensation to dispensation. God was the one to call Abraham from Ur where he worshipped foreign gods. If it were not for God’s working, Abraham would have been left to the futile service of false gods the rest of his life. Abraham’s personal salvation, the salvation of his descendents and the whole world was an act of God’s doing, not of Abraham’s works that he could boast in.
Abraham was thought to be one far above other people in the ways of righteousness (cf. Manasses 8). Besides Moses, Abraham, being the father of all Israelites, was exalted for righteousness in the Jewish mind. The Pharisees boasted of being his descendents in John 8:33, 39. The Pharisees also argue with Jesus when Jesus said that those who keep His saying will never taste death. They say, “Now we know that thou hast a devil. Abraham is dead, and the prophets; and thou sayest, If a man keep my saying, he shall never taste of death” (John 8:52). Paul uses the example of Abraham, that he was also a man that needed to be saved by grace. If Abraham, the righteous example the Jewish people point to as a model of excellence, was justified by faith, then we definitely will need to be justified by faith.
Romans 4
32. What did Abraham believe in order to be justified?
According to the original context, Abraham believed that God would answer his prayer and desire to have an heir from his own body. The verb aman that is used, when used in the hiphil as it is here, means to believe, but also to trust and to stand firm (Armstrong, 687). God stood firm in the promise that He would bring forth an heir from His own body. I think it is also safe to say that Abraham believed in God’s commitment to His promises as far back as Genesis 12, when He followed Him to a strange land that he might become a great nation. However, Moses thought it significant to say this statement here in Genesis 15 to show Abraham’s trust in God’s mighty act in bringing him an heir in his old age that would be the beginning of a mighty nation before the Lord. See also Galatians 3:16 and Hebrews 11:10.
33. Compare James 2:21. So, which is it? Was Abraham justified by works or faith? Are there different meanings of the word “justified” (dikaiosune)? Does 1 Timothy 3:16 help?
The usages of the word, considering the contexts, are different. Dikaiosune does mean justified, but it also means ‘quality of upright behavior’ and even ‘specific action “righteousness” in the sense of fulfilling divine expectation not specifically expressed in ordinances’ (Danker, 248). Paul’s usage in this context refers to justification at the point of conversion. James is trying to exhort believers to live righteously regardless of persecution. Once justified in the sense of Paul’s usage, ‘justification’ by works in James’ sense is a validation of the faith in which they first believed. This latter use is used also in 1 Timothy 3:16.
34. Why is David brought in as an illustration of justification by faith? What is the result of not having his sins counted against him? (See his anguish in Psalm 38, and his relief in Psalm 32). Define the Hebrew word “blessed” in Psalm 32.
The word is esher, which means either blessedness or happiness. Psalm 38 is a bitter lament because of personal sin and terrible circumstances in David’s life. This happiness is the release of judgment or any negative effect of sin in one’s life. David was a man who struggled a good deal with sin, but being a man after God’s own heart, he sought to please God and to be right with Him.
David acknowledges his sin in both Psalms, and he is forthright about his condition (Psalm 38:18). He is aware of God’s graciousness, and that God forgives sin (Psalms 32:1-2, 10-11; 38:15). It is necessary when coming to faith in Christ that we are aware of how offensive our sins are to God, as David is in these Psalms, and that God must cover our sins with the work of Christ on the cross.
It is interesting the use of the word logizomai in verses Romans 4:3, 8. It is the translation of the Hebrew chashav in both cases from Genesis 15:6 and Psalm 32:2, respectively. God imputes both righteousness, as in Romans 4:3, and sin, as in Romans 4:8. God can choose not to convict of sin, but must account for it in some way. Just as it says in Romans 3:25, God passed over sins throughout history because He knew that He would pay for it all on the cross. Faith is the difference. Sin is forgiven when one places their trust in Christ as the sacrifice for sin, but the sin remains when one does not trust Christ.
35. What is the point of Romans 4:9-12?
First, it is good to mention that circumcision is not the promise or the covenant itself, but the sign of the promise or covenant. He received the promise of land and seed while uncircumcised, and also believed and was therefore justified; the sign of these things came later. The sign came, then, that he might be the father of all who believe, though they are yet uncircumcised. Therefore, it is the promise that the righteousness would be imputed to them also, that they also might believe. Abraham is then the father of those of the circumcision, but also those who are of faith as when Abraham was uncircumcised.
The sign of circumcision was given to Abraham and his physical descendents (Genesis 17:10). When the promise was fulfilled in part by the first coming of Jesus Christ, salvation became evident in Gentiles through faith alone (Acts 10:44).
36. Relate Romans 4:16 to the context. Explain the verse.
The promise is of faith; for the faith of Abraham had preceded the Law and circumcision, and so had the promises that God made to Abraham (cf. Romans 4:12-13). The faith looks forward to the promise that his descendants might be partakers with Abraham in his promise, both to those who are of physical descent and also those who share Abraham’s faith.
Gentiles had no connection to Abraham; they are only connected to Abraham by the common faith: Abraham “is the father of us all.” According to the law, or the flesh, only physical descendents of Abraham were connected to the promise. But it is by faith that one is made acceptable before God, making only those Jews of faith heirs of the world with Abraham (Romans 4:13), and the Gentiles also who are of faith, the mystery Paul speaks of many occasions (see Romans 11:16-27; Colossians 1:25-29).
37. Explain the two occurrences of “because of” in Romans 4:25.
The word both times is dia, and they are both in the accusative. The meaning, therefore, could be taken as ‘because of’ or ‘on account of’ (Perschbacher, 90). But Cranfield notes that the uses here are different (Cranfield I:252). The first use is causal, and the second, final. The first use would best be seen as ‘on account of.’ The second use is final, for the resurrection was required in order for our justification to be complete. This is why it is essential for the gospel message to contain both the death and the resurrection of Jesus Christ. This is not just because of the hope of eternal life, but that the atoning sacrifice would not be valid without also the resurrection. A sacrifice of the Messiah would have no hope or purpose if He remained dead just as the sacrifices of animals in the Temple for centuries in the past. Such finite sacrifices never justified any human being.
Romans 5
38. Which textual variant do you take for “echomen” in Romans 5:1? Do you take it as subjunctive or indicative? Why? What is the textual representation for each reading? Note also kauchometha is subjunctive not indicative (“we should boast” not “we boast”). How might that observation make a difference in the variant you take? How does the way Romans 5:1ff fits in with the flow of the book help?
Cranfield suggested that the indicative would make more sense. I believe the context of the verse demands it. The fact that we have peace with God is apparent in Romans 5:10-11. We have the peace with God because of what Christ did on the cross; it is not a possibility or a suggestion. Also, looking at the context of the passage, the exhortation lies in kauchometha, which is used twice in the preceding verses. The boasting or glorifying ought to be first on the hope of the glory of God in verse Romans 5:2, but also in affliction, which also leads to hope (elpis).
Even with kauchometha in the subjunctive, the boast that we have is conditional. The cross ought to be our boast or our glory of our salvation. Even people saved by grace (just as I know myself from experience) often look within ourselves to find something of worth and boast or glory about how good we are. We fail to remember that it is God’s imputed righteousness on us by faith in Christ is the reason that we are justified. God’s promise of peace with God through Christ is for certain if our mindset is wrong.
39. What is the main point of Romans 5:1-4?
Knowing that we are justified before Him by faith, there is no fear of judgment from God, and worrying that we have might not have met His standards. The hope is the certain knowledge that we will be able to come into the presence of God when He comes in His glory. And affliction is evidence that these things are true, since it produces patience, which produces proven character, which produces hope. This progression leads us to be more like Christ, who suffered greatly in a greater anticipation of what His death would accomplish. We have a splendid anticipation that the coming glory of God is at the end of history; it is for certain (cf. Romans 8:18ff). The progression becomes more apparent when looking forward to the coming of His kingdom.
40. Explain Romans 5:5. See Isaiah 32:15 and Joel 2:28-29.
As the prophets discuss, the pouring out of the Spirit goes along with the times of refreshing, just like the restoration of the wilderness in Isaiah, and also the peace of the reign of God. In Joel, God will pour out His Spirit and His people will prophesy and see visions. This is the hope that people will experience. Then God will show the signs of the Day of the Lord that accompany His judgment.
41. What is meant by “His life” in Romans 5:10? Is “zoe” used this way anywhere else?
This is the life of the resurrected Jesus, in all power and in glory. This is life that cannot be quenched. This will be seen again in Romans 5:18, where Adam brought death to all, but Christ brought life to those who have faith in Him. Paul uses this also in 2 Corinthians 4:10ff, that we share in His death but also in His life. It is also used in John 3:36, that the unbeliever will not have part in that kind of life.
Once Christ died for us, He paid the penalty for our sins and turned us from being His enemies to being His friends. Once this occurred, the power of the resurrection shows in us now transformed by Christ’s work on the cross. We have that living water that Jesus talked about with the woman at the well in John 4, and we are new creatures (Galatians 6:15).
42. What is the point of Romans 5:12-19? How is Adam a type of Christ?
All of us as human beings, who came from the body of Adam, sinned. Sin, which brought death, spread throughout all of humankind. Even without the law, death reigned over humankind because of the transgression of Adam. Adam is a type of Christ because of his “universal effectiveness for ruin”; this is like that of Christ’s “universal effectiveness for salvation” (Cranfield I:283). Yet at the same time, Jesus and His work of salvation was even more effective than Adam’s work of transgression (see Romans 5:15, 17). Adam’s transgression, as horrid as it was since he had no previous example to follow, was nothing like the work of God that secures all of humankind from the penalties of sin for all time. Real life, eternal life, is guaranteed to us regardless of our sins because of the righteousness of God that is found through faith in Christ.
43. What is the significance of “all sinned” in Romans 5:12?
All people have sinned in their own action, but as a result of the corrupt nature they have received from Adam (Cranfield I:275, I:277). There is something significant about what Adam did to plunge the human race into sin, though we ourselves are not excused. Christ also did something significant to bring the entire human race out of their hopeless state. The analogy mentioned in question 42 is therefore upheld, but never rejecting the idea that we sinned are also responsible for our sins.
It follows that since Levi paid homage to Melchizedek through Abraham, being still in his great-grandfather’s body (Hebrews 7:9-10), that all of humankind was in the loins of Adam when he sinned. We were never literally in Christ physically; we only are in Christ by faith alone. It follows that though all have sinned in Adam, only those who come to Christ in faith will be in Christ, and therefore saved.
44. What does Romans 5:14 have to do with the death of infants?
They perhaps are also like those who have not heard the law (cf. Romans 2:12), and also like those who had no revelation of the law. Yet at the same time, sin and death reigns in infants, because they also had sinned in Adam.
To answer the question as to whether infants that die will be in heaven or not, I have no understanding as to if they will be there. Can the God of infinite glory whisper the gospel into their ears so that they can understand that Christ died for them? Sure, God can do anything. Various scholars have answered this concern in many ways.
A man once referred to Matthew 11:21 as an example: “Woe unto thee, Chorazin! woe unto thee, Bethsaida! for if the mighty works, which were done in you, had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes.” God knows who would repent and turn to Him if they heard the message of repentance.
Another man referred to David’s comment when his son died in infancy: “I shall go to him, but he shall not return to me” (2 Samuel 12:23). This might bring us comfort, since David was a man of faith that will be in God’s kingdom.
But it is clear that faith comes by hearing, and potentially all could come to faith since God wants all people to come to Him (2 Peter 3:9). Faith comes from hearing (Romans 10:17), therefore, a messenger from God would have to whisper the gospel in the ears of the dying infant in some way. We’ll know for a fact how it works when we ask King Jesus in His kingdom.
45. How is the “free gift” (Romans 5:15) different from Adam’s sin (cf. Romans 5:15-17)?
God’s grace is greater than the transgression that came from Adam. After Adam, all of humankind were condemned to sin. We can draw a diagram that shows the order of the events of both the transgression and the gift.
Offense --> judgment --> condemnation
Many offenses --> free gift --> justification
One offense put all of us in depravity. All of the offenses collectively put Jesus Christ on the cross, making Jesus’ work so much more powerful and encompassing. How could this be? Adam was a mere man, though he was created sinless, while Jesus Christ was God who came in the flesh.
46. Explain Romans 5:20.
The law brought to our attention the severity of our sin and our sinful state which is natural to us. The sin, which we knew of already (Romans 1:18 and following) now being apparent and convicting us under the law, we see how God’s grace abounds that we are forgiven of all sin (cf. Romans 5:8).
The law, which was the good commandment of God, caused humanity, being sinful, to become more sinful, because the law brought attention to sin (Romans 7:7ff). Grace had to be extended that much farther by God.
After studying the Law, we can know all the more that it is impossible for us to be righteous. God expects perfection, and the Law shows us that we cannot do it. That is how God’s grace abounds in Jesus Christ: that we are desperately alienated from God, but Christ bridged the gap between us and God forever by dying for us while we were in our sin.
Romans 6
47. What is the relationship of Romans 6:1 to chapter 5?
Now that we know of our sins from the Law and see how grace has abounded, we should not continue in sin. Sin abounded in the Law, but grace then abounded in Jesus Christ. In Romans 5:20, the verbs are in the aorist, but it is interesting to see what happens in Romans 6:1. The verb for ‘continue’ that is linked to sin is in the present tense, yet the verb ‘to abound’ that is connected with grace is still in the aorist (The verbs are both in the subjunctive). This means that Christ’s work is finished, even is we continue in sin. Since Jesus has died for us, we should not continue in sinful actions.
Jesus Christ’s work on the cross is a pledge of amnesty that no human ruler could ever offer. All sins are forgiven when we trust in Christ. If we continue in our sin, we either truly do not understand the depth of our sin, or we are trying to live in our sin though we have died to sin (Romans 6:2). In the case of the latter, Paul discusses in his epistle to the Hebrews (Hebrews 10:26ff) that one who continues in sin after coming to Christ still has forgiveness of sin, has a “certain fearful looking for of judgment.”
48. What is the significance of “may it never be?”
Once again it is the Pauline phrase that emphasizes the negative for a question that he himself asks. See question 25. The phrase is me genoito. The discussion is covered above in question 47 also: if we have died to sin, and it is the Lord that lives in us, why should we try to live as we did when we were hopelessly lost without Christ?
49. Explain Romans 6:2-4.
Jesus is our model. He died once for our sins, and He rose from the dead in glory to sit at the right hand of the Father. Once we have known Christ, we have died and have newness of life (and freed from sin, see Romans 6:7). Why, in our new life, should we live life as we were before we knew Christ? It is good to note that sin reigned in death: this is written in the past tense. Grace reigns in the present, but this is subjunctive (because grace does not reign without faith, so we need to supply ‘might’ because of this mood). Sin, in the last verses in chapter 5 are with the verb to reign in the past tense. In Romans 6:1, it is in the present. Now in Christ, sin belongs in the past, and we are now dead and are associated with Christ’s death. We were baptized into His death, and since Jesus was raised in glory, we should also be changed in our daily lives.
50. Define the following terms in Romans 6:6 “our old man”; “the body of sin,” and “we.”
Knowing that we will also be resurrected in glory like Christ (Romans 6:5-6a), we should no longer be the way that we were, that is, the way we were alienated from God as portrayed in Romans 1:18-3:20. Our flesh is not intrinsically evil, as a Gnostic would have believed, but our bodies are a part of the fallen world that is decaying. This means we ought not to live in futility, sin, and hopelessness as we once did, but live as new creations that are reconciled to God who look forward to resurrection that we will have in Christ. First was the spiritual death and resurrection we had when we came to Christ, and then we will also see the physical resurrection at the end of the age, with glorifies bodies that are not entangled with the sin we experience now.
The old man is Adam, in whom death entered into the world. The new Man is Jesus Christ, in whom eternal life was offered to the world. We were once in Adam, where we sinned with him in Eden. We now are in Jesus, who saved us from futility, and are new creations. Paul will discuss “the body of this death” in chapter 7, where we want to live godly and do what is good, but we still find ourselves falling back into sin. Only by the power of Christ’s Spirit will we be able to do anything that is good in God’s sight. The body of sin “might be destroyed.” The verb is in the subjunctive mood, meaning the body of sin is not necessarily done away with. In fact, it is a reality this side of heaven that we will be wrestling with God and with sin, for our old ways will be at war with the Spirit who is doing a work of renovation in our lives. Paul uses the pronoun “we” to state that all people, both Paul and the Roman recipients, and also we the readers will be involved with this inner war that is being waged.
51. Discuss Romans 6:7.
The one who has died with Christ has been justified. We are declared righteous before Him. Considering the tense over the verb ‘to justify,’ this would be something that happened in the past but has effects in the present. This is a perfect indicative. He is supporting the verses before it saying, that the believer has been justified in Christ, but the effect continues now. If this were the case, why would we want to continue in sin?
Being in Christ, we now have a choice. We have been saved from the penalty of sin, though it still has a very real presence in our lives. We were saved at one time in the past, but Christ is giving us power to flee from sin (hence the perfect tense). This is why the Spirit writes to the Corinthians: “There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it” (1 Corinthians 10:13).
52. Note how Romans 6:10 refutes the Roman Catholic doctrine of the mass.
The word meaning once for all, or ephapax, means that Christ died once, and once only, for the sins of humankind. He only needed to die once, for Jesus, being God-in-the-flesh, was a sacrifice that could cover the sins of all people for all time. This is the argument of Hebrews 10. This one sacrifice is the superior to all sacrifices at all time. This word ephapax is the same word used in Hebrews 7:27; 9:12; 10:10.
In Hebrews 7:27, the Spirit compares Jesus as High Priest to the high priests of Israel when they were offering sacrifices. High priests had to offer offerings for themselves, and then for the people. The countless sacrifices for sins by these men throughout the centuries never could do what Jesus did once-for-all: ephapax.
In Hebrews 9:12, the Spirit compares to Jesus to the sacrifices themselves. The other sacrifices were goats and calves without blemish, but they continually had to be offered. This continual sacrifice is inferior to Jesus, being God-in-the-flesh who was sacrificed once-for-all. Jesus died so that humankind would never have to offer another sacrifice ever again. For if sacrifices continue, then the sin that requires the sacrifice must also still be condemning us. God Himself had to offer the sacrifice on our behalf; we could never offer to God the kind of sacrifice He wanted. Sacrifice can now cease since Christ died once-for-all: ephapax.
In Hebrews 10:10, our true salvation is found: The completed work of Jesus Christ, once-for-all: ephapax. There is nothing else we can do, there is nothing we can offer to God. God took the matter of our sin and handled it once and for all.
The Roman Catholic Church holds to the doctrine of Transubstantiation, where the elements of communion are transformed into the body and blood of Jesus. They sacrifice anew the Lord Jesus, that they may receive grace. But Romans 6:10 shows us that we have already received His grace through faith in His name and His sacrifice for all time: ephapax. The previous verse supports this clearly as well. As Christians, we must be aware of what we believe and why we believe it. The doctrine of Transubstantiation is a dangerous doctrine that says that Jesus’ sacrifice was not good enough the first time, and that we must crucify the Son over and over again. If we believe it, we will be a slave once again to sin, and in return to paths of blind ritual and superstition we followed before we knew Christ.
53. How does one apply Romans 6:11 to this life?
Our lives are to be devoted to God because, as we were once alienated from God, that life of alienation is gone and we are alive in Christ, able to please God. We should not live like we did, but consider the old man dead. As the previous verse had said, Jesus died once for the sins of man. It was also written from the beginning of the chapter that one should not continue in sin once they believed.
When thinking of being dead to sin and being alive to God, we ought to live in the flesh for God alone. We are not here for any other reason other than to exhibit ourselves as being created for God’s pleasure and glory.
Now the first thing I think of when I attempt to apply this verse to life this side of heaven is Galatians 2:20: “I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.” There is no magic solution as to how we can turn off the old sin nature like a light switch and let Christ reign is us. If we could do it that simply, studying the Word and prayer would be passé. The whole process of learning to let Christ live in us is something that takes our whole lives. One day, when we will be in the presence of the Lord Himself, sin will be eradicated from us and from the world, and we will know what it is like not to struggle with sin. Until then, we must keep learning what it is like to trust in Christ as our Savior from sin and as Lord of our lives.
54. A second application is made in Romans 6:13. How does it anticipate Romans 12:1?
Though we are in Christ, we are still faced with the probability of obeying the sin nature. This is obvious because Paul is making this exhortation, and we know this to be true in our own lives since we all face sin’s temptation every day. We know that in verse 14, sin will not be lord over us (verb is future active indicative), for we are under God’s grace, but nonetheless there is a potential for sin to rule in us, if we allow it. It appears as though at the current time, belonging to God but yet not glorified, we should present our bodies as instruments of righteousness. The word ‘instrument’ could be an implement, or also a weapon, either offensive or defensive (Perschbacher, 295).
How could we use our bodies as instruments of righteousness? The answer may lie in refraining from gluttony and fornication, and unhealthy cravings that might seek to ravage us. In our sin nature, we seek to find fulfillment in things other than Jesus. But learning to be satisfied in Jesus is part of this ongoing learning to turn from the sin nature of the old man and putting on the new man in Christ. Jesus is the only One who can legitimately satisfy the longings we have, but we often choose sin as a way to please ourselves. Learning to trust in Him is a daily battle we face since sin is so entwined in our nature.
Romans 12:1-2 is similar to this in the fact that we ought to stop being instruments of evil and become living sacrifices, casting our evil desires aside to live for Christ alone. Romans 12:2 is important, because it shows how we might begin to turn from the old man to being the new creations into which God is making us. If we renew our mind, and think about God and what He has done for us, perhaps we will begin to learn more about how to become godly people. See also Philippians 4:8 and Colossians 3:1-3.
55. In what ways does the question in Romans 6:15 differ from that in Romans 6:1?
According to Cranfield (I:321), verse 1 deals with sinning for the sake of making grace abound. Verse 15 simply deals with the fact that sin does not matter anymore. Both questions treat sin as something that does not have any effect anymore since they are in good stand ‘legally’ in Christ because of His righteous act. Looking ahead to Romans 6:21-23, we see that sin results in death. Being alive to God in Christ, why might we turn our hearts back to death?
56. How does Paul answer the question of Romans 6:15?
There is a choice to which one can be obedient: obedience to sin, which results in death, or obedience to the Faith, which is righteousness. Now this obedience must be the obedience of faith (genitive of apposition) of Romans 1:5, where the faith is obedience (‘obedience, namely, the faith’). Now faith, or belief, is something that begins at the hour upon hearing the gospel and understanding it, but it also continues to the present. One who has true faith does not fall away permanently. Likewise, as it is written in Romans 6:7 (see also 51 above), that the justification by faith was something that happened in the past but continues to have effects in the future, as we see the verb ‘to justify’ in the present tense. We now have a choice not to be slaves to sin, therefore, we ought to be ones who want to live life as though we are truly alive to God.
57. How does Romans 6:23 relate to the context?
Cranfield (I:329) reports that there is a theme that sin is as a general that pays wages to his soldiers or slaves an allowance, namely death. Serving sin brings death. The imagery can be recalled from hoplon (implement, Romans 6:13 and question 54), with a possible meaning of ‘weapon’. The contrast is God, whom we serve, gives us eternal life as a free gift. This is the same contrast we see above in question 56.
In the context, Paul is talking about being either a servant to sin or to righteousness. Romans Romans 6:23 fits nicely with this type of thinking. In our terms we could put it another way. When we work, we get paid a salary. If we work for an employer, called sin, we will get paid death. But righteousness and eternal life are a gift. We do not work for it; God freely gives it to us. Only after receiving the gift can we become employed by righteousness, according to the analogy. I remember seeing a bumper sticker saying, “My boss is a Jewish carpenter.” This should be our motto. Only by the power of the Holy Spirit can we become His and be used by Him.
Romans 7
58. Explain the illustration of Romans 7:1-4.
The illustration is that the law is bound over the one who is living. The woman is free from the law of marriage if the husband dies. Being in Jesus Christ means we died with Him. Therefore the law no longer condemns the one who died, and we are no longer bound to the law. We died in Him, for He died for us and not for Himself (Cranfield I:336).
There is something about death that breaks bonds. Death breaks the contract of marriage, and it also breaks the contract of to the law. Since we were crucified with Christ, and are now dead, the Law is a contract that is null and void, and has no power to condemn us any longer.
59. Why would Paul ask, “Is the Law sin?” cf. vocabulary of Romans 6:2.
The questions in Romans 6:1 and Romans 7:7 start off the same: Ti oun eroumen, or “What shall we say then?” In Romans 7:5-6, Paul had just said that they had been set free from sin, and also set free from the law. It could be easy to misconstrue what he had been saying, that they are dead to sin and dead to the law (Romans 6:2; 7:6). Sin and the Law are not equivalent. Sin is only known by the law of God. This was established in Romans 5:13. The term me genoito shows up again here, ‘let it never be,’ which is used in both Romans 6:2 and Romans 7:7. Paul addresses this question because this could be an inference that one could gather from his argument.
Some Gnostic teaching infiltrated the church in later times saying that the God of the Old Testament and the God of the New Testament were different Gods, and that the former was evil. Perhaps their conclusions, besides meshing true teaching with pagan philosophy, were based on similar thinking. People could easily say, thinking along these lines, that if the Law brings condemnation, then it must be evil. The Spirit says in Galatians 3:24 that the Law was a schoolmaster to lead us to Christ, meaning, the Law demonstrated very clearly that God demands perfection and that we needed Him to give us amazing grace in unending patience. The Law, therefore, is good and is an expression of God’s demand for perfection. It is that we just can’t do it.
60. What does Romans 7:7 say about dying to the Ten Commandments?
The explanation is shown in the following verses. He says sin was ‘taking occasion by the commandment’ in Romans 7:8. Cranfield (I:351) explains this word ‘occasion’ as ‘a beginning point.’ When the commandment was given, sin abounded or ‘revived’ (Romans 7:9), and deceived and brought death through the commandment (Romans 2:11). Cranfield’s comment on the Garden in Eden explains this well. The serpent only could work deception until after the commandment of the tree was given in Genesis 2:17. So the analogy goes:
The serpent : command of the tree of knowledge of good and evil :: sin : the law
The law makes one realize their sin. The fruit of the tree made man open his eyes to see that he was naked, so he covered himself. There seems to be a connection here, since the first commandment that was ever given by God to man (besides maybe Genesis 1:28). I think it is difficult to look at Paul’s discussion without looking back to the first commandment that was ever given and broken. We no longer are under condemnation of breaking the commandments, now that we are dead in Christ.
The serpent took occasion by God’s commandment to deceive the woman Eve. Likewise sin exists and is charged to us because the Law declares us sinners. Now that we are dead, we are dead, but now joined to another (cf. illustration in Romans 7:1-4). Now if we are no longer under the Law, it can no longer charge us with sin. This does not mean that we should become a slave to our former ways of serving sinful desires. Paul discussed this issue in Romans 6:15ff.
61. Explain Romans 7:8b.
Sin is relatively powerless if there is no law (Cranfield I:351). In the law, there are sacrifices for unintentional sins. There are not any sacrifices for intentional sins. This evokes fear of the Lord, appealing to His grace and mercy, for intentional sins deserve death without mercy. Now in Jesus Christ, we can be relieved that God will not even judge us for intentional sins. Furthermore, we can understand our sinfulness more, since the righteous Man Jesus Christ has died for our unrighteousness.
In the former part of Romans 7:8, sin takes occasion by the Law by bringing our attention to the commandments. Since we are sinners, we cannot follow the Law; we actually do exactly what it tells us not to do, just as Paul discusses in the following verses. If we do not seek to follow the statutes in the Law but seek Christ as the avenue to eternal life, then we are no longer doomed to the futility of trying to follow the Law. This is summarized in Romans 7:24-25.
62. Discuss Romans 7:9.
As Canfield states, Paul is probably using the first person in a general sense, that humankind’s situation before the fall, especially man in Genesis 1:28ff (Cranfield I:351). The man and the woman were alive in every way, including spiritually, before the transgression. But the commandment, when broken, brought death upon all of humankind. More specifically, the commandments that came later, that is, the Law, did the same thing. It condemned humankind in every way. Worse yet, just as breaking the commandment in Eden had consequences of death, the breaking of the commandments of the Law also had grave consequences. Following the Law brought blessing, but the breaking the Law brought cursing (Deuteronomy 28). Humankind cannot keep commandments. We are sinners, and we will stumble. That is why Israel needed a new covenant (Jeremiah 31:31ff) and why we as people need a new heart (Ezekiel 36:26-27). We cannot do what is good ever. This is why we need Jesus.
63. How was the law to result in life? What kind of life? cf. Romans 7:10; Deuteronomy 4:1; 5:33; 8:1; 16:20; 30:16, 19.
The commandment was given so that the Israelites would live, multiply, and dwell in the land they were about to receive. This is the regular theme of obedience equals blessing and disobedience equals cursing (cf. Deuteronomy 30:19). But when one tries to follow the law, one will realize that they cannot. Paul himself thought he was following the law in persecuting Christians as a Pharisee, but he found quickly that he was not.
In all of the verses of Deuteronomy mentioned (except 30:19 though it mentions it in the following verse), they all mention that they should live and also possess and prolong their stay in the land God was about to give them. Some of the verses mention that they will live and multiply. But mainly it is talking about a prosperous life on earth in the land. The law guaranteed life neither now nor in eternity. But life in Christ guarantees life both now and in eternity.
64. How is Romans 7:12 a conclusion to Romans 7:9-11?
It is a summation that the law is holy. The law is holy and good; it is the people who are supposed to follow it who are not. That is why grace was needed. Sin came about because of people who received the commandment/law and then reacted disobediently. God is holy, and the Law He gave Israel is a divine picture of what God desires from His people. Just as people cannot come into the presence of God in their sinful condition, people could not follow the Law.
65. Notice the cycle of thought in Romans 7:14-17, 18-20. What is the point in Romans 7:17, 20, 23?
These three verses show how sin usurps the power over man (Cranfield I:360). Within ourselves we cannot do the righteous requirements of the law. What happens is that the more we look at the law to try to follow it, we find that we sin more (See also question 66).
Knowing that the Law is good (Romans 7:16) and even having the good intent of trying to keep the Law, there is still no chance of doing the Law. Radmacher notes that the Law in the New Testament is seen as a unit, and therefore, the Law cannot be kept in part and violated in part, but it must be entirely followed (Radmacher, 65). This is confirmed in James 2:10 and Galatians 3:10. Even one with good intention with a right heart before God trying to live up to certain rules like the Law will fall short, because the sin in us will always be there this side of heaven (Romans 7:17, 20). This is the explanation in Romans 7:23: that the law of sin, or our indwelling sin, is at war with the law of our minds, or the knowledge that God’s Law is good and ought to be followed.
66. Does Romans 7:15-23 discuss the struggle of a saved or lost man?
The evidence could support either way. Frankly, it does not matter too much. It is a summation of human experience. It is also Paul’s experience, but as we know it is also that of all people (cf. Romans 7:9). The reason for the passage is to explain what happens when one tries to follow the law. The righteous character of the law brings attention to areas of sin, and those in the flesh trying to focus on doing righteousness now think about the very sins the law condemns, and do them (Romans 7:7). Those who put their trust in the law or any other righteous requirement for a means of salvation will find themselves in a fruitless search for righteousness.
Romans 8
67. How does Romans 8:1 fit into the context of the preceding paragraph?
Cranfield says that Romans 8:1 is logically connected to Romans 7:1-6. Romans 7:7-7:25 had dealt with what life is like when one tries to live under the law. Paul had already established that we are in Christ, and that we have died with Him.
Now Romans 7:5-6 each have commentary. Romans 7:5 might be clarified in Romans 7:7-25, talking about the bearing of fruit of death. Romans 7:6, then, is clarified in the following section in Romans 8:1. Now in Christ we are dead to the law; therefore, there is no condemnation, and no wrath of God accumulating in our lives of chasing after legal requirements and failing. Trusting in Christ puts an end to our work of the Law and secures our relationship with God forever.
68. How do Romans 8:3 and Romans 8:4 explain Romans 8:2?
What we could not do, God did through His Son, coming in the image of one of us. He then condemned sin in the flesh. This is the law of sin in Romans 7:23 and Romans 8:2. Once He did this, the righteousness of the law was fulfilled in us. It has been established that we are in Him, which was restated in Romans 8:2 in a different way (“the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus”). This being ‘made free’ is connected to ‘in Christ Jesus.’
We are made free from sin and death because Jesus, who was perfect, came and lived a perfect life and was victorious over sin one hundred percent (compare this with the phrase ‘condemned sin in the flesh’). Since we are in Christ, and we have the Spirit dwelling within us, He fulfills the Law for us and in us. He did it all, we don’t have to worry anymore if we were good enough to please God (which we weren’t). Jesus was perfect before God and He did everything in the Law for us. The stress in this passage is that we are saved by the working of the Spirit and not our doing of the Law since Paul repeats the exact phrase word for word in Romans 8:1, 4: “who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.”
69. Note the importance of Romans 8:9b in the doctrine of pneumatology.
All believers in the Church Age are indwelt by the Holy Spirit. Anyone who claims to be a follower of Jesus but does not have the Spirit, is not truly a believer. Romans 8:9 as a whole also is a statement that defends the doctrine of the Trinity. The first time Paul refers to the Holy Spirit he uses the phrase Pneuma Theou, or Spirit of God. The second time he uses Pneuma Christou, or Spirit of Christ. The Holy Spirit and the Son are both equally God.70. What does “you must die” mean in Romans 8:13?
This is what Cranfield noted as a periphrastic future (I:394). The outcome of death is certain, and perhaps not only this, but that it will be hopeless and without God. These cannot please God (Romans 8:8). They have not put to death the deeds of the body. How does one do put to death the deeds of the body? Be in Christ (Romans 8:1), and Christ in you (Romans 8:10-11). The context, could suggest that this is not eternal separation from God, because he is talking to believers. This sounds more like an exhortation, that since we have the Spirit within us, then we should walk accordingly. The latter interpretation does sound more relevant. Justification by faith alone is the Gospel we know. If we add to it, we lose sight of the gospel. It is if we do not walk according to the Spirit, we will die.
We all know that even people who place their faith in Christ that sin does not just disappear from our midst. It is a life-long struggle to say no to sin and yes to Jesus. God tolerates sin up to a certain point because of His great patience, but eventually responds. For unbelievers, when sin reaches a point, God judges them, such as Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 18:20-19:29), and also with the Amorites (Genesis 15:16). For believers, God disciplines sin, and sometimes takes their lives away as part of this discipline. Examples of these are Nadab and Abihu (Leviticus 10:1-2), the nation of Judah (part believers and part unbelievers, Habakkuk 2:4), and Ananias and Sapphira (Acts 5:1-11). Scriptures that refer explicitly to sins of believers ending in death are found in Hebrews 10:26-31 and 1 John 5:16. If we continue to sin boldly even after we have heard about the grace of God in Christ and have placed our trust in him, there is an expectation that God will end our lives. We as believers were placed here for good works and to bear fruits of godliness; this is why God keeps us on earth after we accept Christ. If we do not do this, then not only are we not serving God and His kingdom, but we are also a bad testimony to Him and are a hindrance to the Gospel ( cf. Israel in Romans 2:24; believers that do not follow Christ even after He has lifted them up, John 15:6).
71. What does “led by the Spirit” mean in Romans 8:14?
“The daily, hourly putting to death of the schemings and enterprises of the sinful flesh by means of the Spirit is a matter of being led, directed, impelled, controlled by the Spirit” (Cranfield I:395). The role of the believer, however, is more passive, but an allowing of the Spirit to move in one’s life. The verb ago is passive voice. It is interesting that the entire salvation process, from the moment we trust in Him and are justified before Him, throughout our lives in sanctification, to glorification in the future, is entirely engineered by God. What exactly is our role? The main aspect of our role is to turn from relying on our efforts and abilities in living life to relying on Jesus for all things. We must trust Him in all aspects of our lives, and we must find fulfillment only by Him. There are many things in which we try to find fulfillment even after coming to Christ. We try to find value in ourselves for things that we own or traits we inherently possess (which are gifts of God anyway). But we have genuine value because we were made in the image of God and because Jesus died for us. Once we have grasped this fact and counted all other things as loss, then we have begun to have true understanding of the Lord.
72. Discuss the conditional clause in Romans 8:17.
In the case of ‘eiper,’ we can be sure of our glorification; when we are led by the Spirit, we surely are the sons of God, and His heirs. We can be sure that, when led by the Spirit, suffering will occur in a world that does not know our Lord (Cranfield I:408). But we can be absolutely confident that we will be heirs of the glorious God and co-heirs with Jesus, which is far superior to regular living, regardless of any suffering that might occur (cf. Romans 8:18ff).
This word ‘eiper,’ according to Perschbacher, is a strengthening of ei, rendering it “if indeed” or “if it be so that” (Perschbacher, 120). The second ‘if,’ “if so be that we suffer with him...” is this word ‘eiper.’ The first ‘if,’ “And if children,” is ‘ei.’ Salvation in Jesus Christ is for certain since the Spirit Himself bears witness with our spirit in us that we are His (Romans 8:16-17). With the usage of the word eiper, suffering is for certain on some level since we are joint-heirs with Christ (cf. Cranfield I:407-408), and it follows that just as we suffer as He suffered, will be glorified in the future as He was glorified.
The conditional clause is not a hypothetical situation. We are children of God because of His Spirit, and because of that, we are joint-heirs with Christ, and because of that, we suffer for His sake, and because of this, we will be glorified in the future.
73. Explain Romans 8:18-22.
Paul concludes strongly (logizomai) that suffering is absolutely nothing compared to the glory to come. There is something about us as believers that God will reveal His glory in us (eis hemas). The creation, which was subjected to decay, is waiting for the times of refreshing. These times will be marked at the return of Jesus. It was subjected in hope, meaning that in the beginning when the Fall occurred, death came to man and all things, so that Jesus Himself could die to bring the world back to blessing. And in verse Romans 8:21, we know that in the future in the eternal kingdom, death and decay will be something of the past.
74. Are the three “groanings” of Romans 8:22, 23, 26 connected in any way?
We along with the world groan considering the cursed status of the world (question 73). There is an idea of the groaning in the word used (stenagmos), but also aspiration (Perschbacher, 378). There is an anticipated hope, which is ascertained by the indwelling Holy Spirit, as discussed in the previous verses. Even the Spirit groans within us as well, waiting for the time when Jesus will appear. I think it is not impertinent to look back to verse Romans 8:15 as the Holy Spirit also cries within us to God our Father, who confirms our very salvation. There is an idea that things should not be the way they are, but that the world was made to be the Paradise it once was, where there was no pain or death. Death is an alien force that entered the world. Pain should not exist, but it does. There will be a day when God will put an end to it all and restore the world to the full blessing it once knew, and we all long for that day.
75. How does Romans 8:28 relate to the context?
Once again, there is a hope to look forward to, and that all of the suffering in this world will work out to perfection, once God establishes His reign over all the earth and restores the creation to its original perfect state. Looking back over the last several verses, the state of this world now is nothing like what we will see in the future when we will be in the midst of God’s glory. Things will never be perfect this side of heaven, but for those who place their trust in Christ will know the world when it will be perfect, with the perfect King ruling over it.76. What is the meaning of “foreknew” in Romans 8:29?
The word ‘to foreknow’ is proginosko, which means to know beforehand. The word for ‘predestine’ is proorizo. Perschbacher states that it means ‘to limit or mark out beforehand, to design definitely beforehand, ordain beforehand, or predestine’ (Perschbacher, 348). There is something beyond foreknowledge in the prophetic sense not limiting God to omniscience, but there is a sense also of His omnipotence, that He at a point in the past (aorist), called men to be conformed to the image of His Son. Who? Those who love God (Romans 8:28). These are the same ones he had written in the previous verses about the ones who are led by the Spirit, who are heirs of God, waiting patiently for His return. Whomever God knew would trust in Him would be the ones He chose that would be conformed to the image of His Son.
It is a very debatable topic: do people choose to follow God or does God choose us to salvation? There somehow must be an element of both that God chooses us for salvation, and that we are held accountable to come to Christ. For a more detailed discussion, see the article here.
77. How are the questions and answers of Romans 8:31-34 related?
- Since God has chosen us to be conformed to His Son’s image, bought with His blood, nothing can hinder us from an eternal standpoint (Romans 8:31)
- Since He gave us His Son to cover our sins, then how much more He will give us the other things that we need (Romans 8:32)
- God justifies, and is sovereign as we have seen. The accuser, the devil or his angels, cannot condemn us (Romans 8:33)
- Jesus, who was raised from the dead, is at the right hand of the Father, and no one else can condemn us because of His intercession. This means that our advocate is always there, declaring our innocence before God (Romans 8:34)
Now what? Since God knew that we would come to Him, He chose for us the greatest glory of heaven. Because of His purpose in us according to His divine love, there is nothing that He will not do for us, and He will not allow anything to separate us from His love. This will be seen in the following verses.
78. How does the quotation of Psalm 44:22 in Romans 8:36 fit the context?
Cranfield (I:440) says that this is appropriate considering that this characterizes the life of God’s people since the beginning of the fallen world. In the original context, it is the faithfulness of the people in light of persecution. Interestingly enough, this is the last verse before the Psalmist begins with his formal petition to God, which is a standard in a lament psalm. Now, in the context of Romans 8, Paul quotes this, after saying that nothing can separate us from the love of Christ. Often in a lament Psalm there is a vow of praise that follows the petition, but this is not the case with Psalm 44. Perhaps the comfort that Paul gives us is a way that the Holy Spirit puts closure on that lament psalm that had no vow of praise of deliverance from troubled times.
The emphasis of this verse is to stress that it is because of faithfulness to the Lord that the His people are suffering. The psalmists (the sons of Korah) say that “If we have forgotten the name of our God, or stretched out our hands to a strange God; Shall not God search this out? for he knoweth the secrets of the heart” (Psalm 44:20-21). Our suffering has nothing to do with our sin, because our sin was covered by the cross of Calvary. We need to take comfort that Jesus will make things right: if not this side of heaven, then in eternity future. Because God gave us His Son, His greatest treasure given to us to give us life, then we should rest in God who will restore our mortal bodies to life.
Romans 9
79. Discuss the logic of Romans 9:6-13.
The passage is Israel-specific. Since Paul had been brokenhearted that Israel did not come to repentance before Jesus, one could question the faithfulness of the word of God. But Paul defends the effectiveness of the word of God saying that not all the people of Israel are truly saved. Not all of Abraham’s eight sons were chosen to be of the promise, just Isaac. And not both of Isaac’s sons were chosen to be a part of the promise, but Jacob only. Primogeniture, works, or any other quality of these children were not prerequisite, only by God’s selection.
80. Does Malachi 1:2-5 say God hated Esau as a person?
Cranfield seems to think the best way to understand the words love and hate in the context of both Malachi and Romans is election and rejection respectively (II:480). The Edomites were men under God’s merciful care, but nonetheless, they were not apart of the covenant of God, nor did they receive the blessing nor the inheritance that God gave the Israelites. This especially can be seen when God answers Israel’s petition of how God has loved them. God chose them to be His people. If they are not experiencing His love, then the fault is theirs, by disobedience and coldness of heart. This is the case of the Israel we see throughout the book of Malachi.
81. Does Romans 9:14-18 teach election to reprobation? Discuss.
Verses 14-16 teach about the mercy of God, and that He chose Israel to enter into a covenant relationship with them. This mercy was built upon this selection. This portion does not teach anything of election to reprobation, but election into His covenant. The corollary is that we are the elect of the new covenant. Now, in the case of Pharaoh, his heart was hardened from without, considering that Amenhotep II was the son of Thutmose III, the great king who ruled the east to Palestine and north reaching to Anatolia. A ruler considered to be divine, Amenhotep would not tolerate being rivaled by a foreign God. So, for the sake of His covenant people, God hardened his heart, or made him stubborn, so He could fulfill His promises to Abraham in Genesis 15:12-20. I think Paul sums up in verse 18 that God does harden people, but only perhaps for the sake of His elect (Is not the reason for much of Israel being hardened even in these days so that the gospel can reach every last Gentile nation? Romans 11:25).
God hardens the heart from without. Amenhotep II was so full of pride that he was ripe for judgment, and therefore gave him over to his own desires (cf. Romans 1:18ff, especially Romans 1:28). The same is for the nation of Israel in first century at the time of this writing. The blindness they have is because they believe that because of the works of the law and because of being a descendant of the right nationality saves them. But they were also sinners, needing a Savior that would die for them, and they refused to believe it. For more discussion, see God’s Mercy To His People.
82. What is Paul’s answer to one who objects to God’s elective decree (Romans 9:19-21)?
God created His creation to do according to His special purpose. If He desired to glorify Himself by choosing a people for Himself, what can we do about it? And if He chose to harden one for the sake of the elect, then how can we press charges against God? Knowing God’s righteous character, it is imperative that we trust Him, knowing that He is going to reign in glory in the future.
It is also imperative to see that God is not choosing for heaven or for hell, as many might think. This would cause a theological dilemma, that perhaps God created sin. The choosing to make a vessel to honor and another for dishonor is a matter of electing unto a covenant. The vessel that is made is not a person, but a people. The first group of vessels are the Jews and the nations in the context of the Mosaic covenant. The second group of vessels are the church, made up of Jews and Gentiles, and those outside the church. This is in the context of the New Covenant which was initiated by God alone in the blood of Christ. For this second group of vessels, He made the first vessel out of the people who came to Faith in Christ, and the second vessel out of people who do not come to Faith in Christ. It becomes complicated to follow, but God extends His mercy to all people. It is to those of the covenant that He extends far more mercy in His covenantal love, especially in the case of the New Covenant.
83. What is the point of Romans 9:23-29? How does the Hosea quote fit here?
The quotes are from Hosea 2:23 and Hosea 1:10. In the case of Hosea 1:10, not all of the verse is stated there. Hosea 1:10 starts after Paul had said that Israel had turned away from God. Then Hosea says that the number of children would be great, so that they could not be numbered, yet the people who would be considered His people were other people (cf. Hosea 1:9): God calling Israel Lo Ammi, or not my people).
As a whole, God is distinguishing people as His who are both Israelite and Gentile. Isaiah speaks about a remnant that will be saved, that He might be faithful to the promises made to the patriarchs. God will have mercy on whomever he has mercy, cf. Romans 9:15, examine the use of the verbs, future tense followed by present.
God is talking about the emergence of the church. Israel had always been His covenantal people, and though they always will be, God is making a new covenant to the inclusion of Gentiles. The church has some of the Jewish people, but mostly non-Jewish. Isaiah talks about a remnant that will be saved, and this fits into the context of Israel rejecting the Gospel discussed throughout the entire chapter. In Romans 11:26, all Israel will be saved once all of the Gentiles had been evangelized, but until then, only a remnant will be saved. Until that time, many Jewish people will seek to earn salvation by works of the Law (Romans 9:32).
Romans 10
84. Discuss the two kinds of righteousness mentioned in Romans 10:1-4.
The ‘righteousness of God,’ a phrase that Paul has used throughout his epistle, is the righteousness that is in God’s character. The word order is different here than in the previous examples, but the idea is the same, a genitive of origin. The righteousness of God is righteousness that comes from God. This is revealed in Jesus Christ, by faith in Him (remember Romans 3:22, and even Romans 1:16-17). But the Jews, being zealous for God, went beyond the bounds of the very law they could not keep by making traditions as a ‘hedge’ to protect them from breaking the law. These rabbinical traditions became of equal authority with the law. Therefore, they designed their own righteousness. This was not from Law, Prophets, or Writings, nor by the revelation of Jesus Christ who came to them, but from uninspired sources. We as people, both Jewish and non-Jewish, could never keep the Law, and that is why we needed a Savior. Faith is the only way we can please God.
85. Explain Romans 10:4.
The word for ‘end’ is ‘telos.’ One could say in other words that the end of commandment is Jesus who is the only one who kept the commandment. This word ‘telos’ could mean purpose or aim (see Murray’s The Epistle to the Romans). The ‘telos,’ according to Aristotle, was the concept of a person’s potential, especially as a person’s role in society. These things are not entirely the case here, but let us not abandon the idea. Here, there is the concept of the end that commandment had ended in a more general sense, maybe or maybe not referring to the Mosaic Law. It is important to notice that Jesus is the end of the law to everyone believing.
Cranfield takes the word telos not to be ‘end,’ but to be ‘goal.’ Paul establishes here that Israel had misunderstood the law, yet they missed it in the respect that tried to make their own righteousness. Therefore, the righteous status of the law is available to all who believe (Cranfield II:519). This is the best contextual solution for an explanation on this verse. The goal of the Law is to show that people cannot be righteous before God. No matter how they try, they will always stumble and sin. That is why the Law is considered a schoolmaster or tutor in Galatians 3:24f. It was to teach us that we are sinners and need God to declare us righteous. Therefore, faith in Jesus, the perfect Son of God who took away the world’s sins, is the telos of the Law.
86. How does Paul use the Old Testament in Romans 10:6-8? Is the Law of Deuteronomy 30 the word of faith? Explain.
This portion of Deuteronomy 30 is located in the text after Moses talks about how God will bless them again if they turn back to God after they are punished. In Deuteronomy 30:10, blessing follows in obedience to the voice of God, to keep the commandments written in the Book of the Law, and to turn to God with all of one’s heart and soul. Following this is the quoted passage. This commandment is not some mystical and remote oracle, that it needs to be brought from heaven or under the sea, the word was written down in the Book of the Law which they had written down. Verse 15: Good and evil they have to choose from. Verse 16: love the Lord God, keep His commandments, and then there will be blessing. Then he returns back to cursing in disobedience. The passage is of a sinusoidal nature, showing both good and evil, and the corresponding results of obedience and disobedience. The commandment was received, it is not remote, now they should seek God.
As for the Romans passage, the focus is faith, according to the gospel. Remembering that Deuteronomy 30:10, one must be obedient and turn to God with heart and soul. This latter phrase excellently describes the word we know of faith.
Cranfield (II:526) now describes the genitive in Romans 10:8 as the ‘word which calls for faith.’ If disobedience had such a great toll as it did in the history of Israel, faith is required. So the word of faith, in the context of Paul, is the seeking of God who is near, who walked among them as Jesus Christ. This is the word of faith: the gospel. Jesus came down from heaven, was raised from the dead, but He was among us.
87. Discuss confession in Romans 10:9-11.
The confession is that of confessing kurios Iesous. Cranfield says that this perhaps was a formula connected with baptism (Cranfield II:527). Not only this, the use of the word kurios with Jesus, is stating something about who Jesus is. Kurios in the Septuagint was substituted for the Tetragrammaton. The confession is something greater than Jesus’ existence, and not a mere elevated power, but that Jesus is God. It is also good to mention that confession with the mouth will simply reflect what the heart believes (Cranfield II:527). This is the word that is near us, in our heart and in our mouth, as Paul had just said in verse 8.
88. What does “hearing” mean in Romans 10:17?
Hearing (akoe) is the medium by which the utterance of the gospel and the belief takes place. The breakdown happens here in the case of Israel. The hearing is associated with a message. Their disobedience starts here, for they have heard the message, verse 18. They hear and do not receive. The stumbling of Israel is part of the avenue God uses for the Gospel to go to the ends of the earth, just as Pharaoh’s hardness of heart was used by for the salvation of Israel from Egypt.
89. Explain Romans 10:18-21.
The first verse explains more about the ‘hearing’ in the previous verse. The hearing is not equivalent to believing. The gospel, like the glory of God in the heavens and in general revelation, has gone throughout most of the Hellenized world (Murray, 61). The nation of Israel has heard this gospel, but has not accepted it on a national level. Next, Moses and Isaiah, representing the Law and the Prophets, testify that a conglomeration of aliens would provoke Israel to jealousy, and that these aliens would find God. Israel knew this ahead of time, see Romans 10:19 (Murray, 63). God, though loyal in His covenantal love toward Israel, brought the Gentiles to Himself. Just as God used the hardness of Israel as an opportunity to bring the nations to Himself, He uses the nations to bring Israel to jealousy, and eventually repentance (see Romans 10:19). Israel heard the message, knew what was going to happen around the world a millennium and a half ahead of time, but failed to submit to their God. God gave national Israel plenty of opportunity to turn to Him (Romans 10:21), but they did not turn to Him and sought their own righteousness (Romans 9:31; 10:3). This is our human nature: to resist the will of God no matter how much He reaches out to us. Thank God for His grace and the power of His Spirit.
Romans 11
90. Contrast the question of Romans 11:1 with that in Romans 11:11.
The questions are both similar, in that they both start with lego oun, and are answered me genoito. The first question is asking whether God has cast away (apotheo) His people. We know from the previous verse that this is not true, but that God is lovingly patient with them. The latter question has to deal with whether that Israel’s stumble is to be a permanent fall (pipto), which we also answer in the emphatic negative.
As to pushing His people away, God is loyal to His people, leaving a remnant, as in the days of Ahab and Elijah where God kept Elijah and the seven thousand from worshipping Baal (1 Kings 19:18; Romans 11:3-4). In this case, there were some Jewish believers in the world, just as Paul was (Romans 11:1). The latter question says that this fall is not without purpose, but that salvation might come to the nations and Israel might be provoked to jealousy. This might lead some of them to be saved (cf. Romans 11:14). But Israel’s overwhelming rejection of the Gospel will not be permanent, for in the end all of Israel will repent and be saved (Romans 11:26).
91. How does Paul answer the question of Romans 11:1 in Romans 11:2-10?
These other verses affirm that there is a remnant within Israel that believes the gospel. In the low points of Israel’s history where they were either religiously syncretistic or rejecting God, like in Ahab’s day, there was a core group that God kept for Himself. This group was according to an election of grace. These people were given over to their self-righteousness and their own works, remaining hard in heart. See question 93 for a discussion on hardness, as well as the essay, God’s Mercy to His People.
92. What does “foreknew” mean in Romans 11:2?
According to Cranfield, this ‘foreknowing’ is that of collective Israel, not of the individuals therein, like that the individual concept we see in Romans 8:29 (Cranfield, II:545). This is because of the 2 verses preceding, Romans 10:21-11:1, are speaking of collective Israel. God foreknew His people Israel and elected them into His covenant. The following verses (vv. Romans 11:4-7) speak of the individual elect within Israel, but looking forward to Romans 11:11, that the Gentiles, and even the elect within Israel are not without purpose, that national Israel might be saved. This is the hope that Paul will speak of in future verses.
93. Discuss the concept of hardening in Romans 11:7-10.
This term is a different word than used in Romans 9:18. That word in Romans 9:18, skleruno, which is to leave hardened. The word used here is poroo, which is to become unimpressible or callous (Perschbacher, 361). The idea is the same though, that these people were hardened by a divine hardening (Cranfield 2:549). The hardening, in the same way as Pharaoah in chapter 9, is for the sake of the elect. Pharaoh was hardened for the sake of the redemptive act in the Exodus that would make God famous in the Ancient Near East. We can see this as the nations fear them as they approach the promise land. Likewise, these people were hardened for the sake of a different people, the Gentiles. ‘Hardening’ of the heart and blinding them to the truth brought glory to God by bringing a large amount of people to salvation. This hardening, as to be remembered, is a giving over to their hearts’ desires and seeking righteousness in their own effort (cf. Romans 9:32), not cutting them off from His grace and giving them no choice in their own damnation (cf. Romans 10:21).
94. Explain Romans 11:11-15.
The purpose of the hardening and stumbling of Israel is for the sake of the salvation of the world. See the usage of the words above, question 93, and Cranfield II:549. The world will be saved because of this stumbling of Israel. It is a sorrowful thing what has happened to Israel, as Paul testifies in Romans 9:1ff. But a greater good is in the mind of God, that His kingdom will encompass the nations as well as Israel. The word pleroma, which is translated ‘fullness,’ gives the idea of full acceptance. It had just been said that their falling will bring about salvation in the entire world. Paul had said formerly in Romans 2:24 that God’s name had been blasphemed among the Gentiles because of the Jews. Now we see something different. In verse 12, we see ‘de’ (‘but’). The pleroma, or full acceptance (Perschbacher, 333), of Israel is something to be considered. Now if Israel is the cause for the bringing of the nations to God even in their hardening, then God will surely accept them. They are still His people (Romans 10:21; 11:1-2); therefore, they still have a special plan in God’s mind, though it may be their hardening that initially must occur before they can be brought to their full acceptance.
95. How does Romans 11:16 fit with the argument of the passage?
The firstfruit and the root are holy, which somehow makes the rest of the lump and the branches holy. For the latter case, Murray and Cranfield agree that this refers to the Patriarchs [From here through the next several questions, I will refer to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as the Patriarchs, not necessarily the 12 sons of Jacob], comparing the use of the word fathers in Romans 11:28. The aparche is different amongst these commentators, Murray suggests that this also refers to the Patriarchs (Murray, 85). Cranfield takes this to be the Jewish Christians (2:564). He also states that these is no reason to think that he riza and he aparche must be of the same metaphor. This is logical. When I think of this term for firstfruit (that is, the first sacrifice which is a term used for the actual firstfruit), I think of a product of something that already exists. The Patriarchs were the beginning of Israel, therefore, it is appropriate to think of them as the root. But the firstfruits were the product designated for the first sacrifice. What would be the first eligible fruit for sacrifice for the tree that was already planted? Jewish Christians. Therefore, as this might fit into the passage, this very tree with the branches being grafting in (Gentiles), the very tree with a firm root and some producing branches (the bad ones were cut off), the Jewish and the Gentiles together are the ones producing the fruit. Does this actual firm root change? Not necessarily. So through Abraham all the nations are blessed, but also, the new branches to grow from the root will reap the blessing, cf. Romans 11:12-15).
To depart from the commentators, I must look at the passage differently. Though there is good reason to believe that the Patriarchs could be the firstfruits, it is even more logical to say that the Firstfruit is Jesus Christ. Jesus is the firstborn from the dead (1 Corinthians 15:20; Colossians 1:18), firstborn of the new creation (Romans 8:29), and is the Seed of promise to Abraham (Galatians 3:16). As “Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness” (Romans 4:3; cf. Genesis 15:6), it is not Abraham who is holy, but the God Most High that made him holy. And since the Jewish people are of the same lineage of Christ (Romans 9:5), Jesus is the firstborn, firstfruit, and root. He is the Branch that gives righteousness to all of the other branches (Isaiah 11:1, 10; cf. Zechariah 3:8). If we place centrality on mere human beings, then how can sinners make a holy myriad of people holy? Jesus, related to the Jewish people by common human ancestry, makes the entire people holy.
96. Discuss the figure of the branches in Romans 11:16-21. Who or what is the root?
The Patriarchs, especially Abraham, as I first proposed, could be the root. Now the Gentiles too have been blessed through Him, as we have already known in Genesis 17; Genesis 18:18; 22:18. There is no reason that a Gentile, now brought into a covenant with God, should lift himself up with pride, but be aware that they are in place of the nation chosen to be God’s. They were there because of the irruption of blessing through the call of Abraham at the end of third millennium B.C. The warning is to be fearful before God, because they were not of the blessed nation of Israel. I will explain further in the next question. But after close examination, Abraham could not be this root. The only explanation of a root that could make all the branches holy would be Jesus Christ (see question 95, Isaiah 11:1, 10; most importantly see Romans 11:18 in its context).
This also teaches that the Gentile community in the church should have a lofty attitude in the midst of Jewish people that fail to come to Christ. The Gospel is “the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek” (Romans 1:16). For this reason, Paul always went to the synagogues in the cities to preach first, and then went to the Gentiles.
97. Does Romans 11:22 teach loss of salvation?
Cranfield comments on the latter part of this verse: “The clause is a warning against a false and unevangelical sense of security” (Cranfield, II:570). It is impossible for one to lose salvation. There is a sense, however, that the Gentiles being lifted up in pride, could resemble the hardness of Israel. This is what was to be avoided, as Paul warned. When we trace through what happens to Israel in history, we see cycles of disaster happening to them. There is more sin recorded of the 12 sons of Jacob then there is of Abraham. In Judges, in the first few chapters, we see how the generation that entered the Promised Land, who swore to be obedient to God did not raise their children to be the same way they were. They sinned against God and paid the consequences by foreign invaders. As a nation, their faith was sinusoidal and inconsistent. This happened to the Gentiles too. There is no need to explain too much about Church History, that the similar things happened. When Constantine brought peace to the Christians, the Church has never been the same. Compare the medieval church with the first century church, for example. The Gentiles of the medieval church suffered under bad teaching. The salvation message was blurred with concept of receiving grace, and the church probably did not grow nearly as fast as it could have. The same individuals were saved, but the Gentiles definitely suffered spiritually for a long time. One could compare this to the burning of the branches in John 15:6. When a disciple does not remain in Jesus and continues to walk away from Him, the non-believing world dismisses him as being a valid witness for Jesus Christ. Likewise, there is judgment on those believers who continue to sow to the flesh (Galatians 6:8) and continue to sin willfully (Hebrews 10:26-27). This cutting off reflects this kind of judgment from God and rejection from the world.
98. What is the “fullness of the Gentiles” in Romans 11:25?
Cranfield suggests that this might mean the whole of those elect of the Gentiles by God, possibly meaning the Gentile world as a whole (II:575-576). The word pleroma can mean fullness or full contents, and Cranfield’s explanation would make the most sense according to the context. I might add this also could mean that the gospel has reached “every tribe, tongue, people, and ethnos” (Revelation 5:9). Considering that there are about 2000 languages of whose people have not gospel message or a translation of the Bible, we know that the gospel message has not gone out to all of the world (cf. Matthew 24:14).
99. Support pre-millennialism from Romans 11:25-32.
The key is in verse 26, when Jesus will come to take away the ungodliness of Zion. Evil will be removed at the coming of the Deliverer. There will not be a gradual moving toward goodness, righteousness, and purity brought about by human effort to usher in the kingdom. There is no place in Scripture that advocates such a view.
100. Why does Paul have the ascription of praise in Romans 11:33-36.
Everything said up to this point has been pointing back to Romans 1:16-17. The righteousness of God has been made available to us by faith in the one whom He sent Jesus, a hilasterion for our sins, that being in Him we are dead to sin, dead to the law, removed from the hopelessness of legalism, and knowing that we were called by Him for His purposes. We know that the suffering of this fallen world is nothing compared with the coming of the Kingdom, and that His people Israel will be saved regardless of what their situation is now. God is faithful. Not only this, but He now makes some of these things known to us in these last days. But who can know the depths of His wisdom? This is for what Paul praises God.
Also, Paul had just written how heavy a heart he had because of his people’s rejection of the Gospel in Romans 9-11. Knowing that Israel will finally repent on a national level in the future brings about great joy, and seeing how amazing God’s power is in bringing the entire world to Himself causes one to praise God.
Romans 12
101. To what does the “therefore” in Romans 12:1 refer?
Now begins his exhortation since he has spoken at length about this Gospel that is the deep expression of the mercy and wisdom of God. Oun, or ‘therefore,’ is now Paul’s way of saying that because of all that he has said, this is what we need to be and this is what we need to do. See Cranfield II:595: oun has its “full force” here at this transition.
102. What is meant by the “will of God” in Romans 12:2?
Murray (2:115) suggests that Paul is referring to the will of commandment. It is the idea in this passage that our activity should show God’s desires; that we should exhibit the heart of God as we are transformed into godly men and women. This is for the sake of biblical love and community (cf. Romans 12:3-5, and following). It is the apologetic that will show that God and His work on earth is real and exhibited in our lives. By allowing ourselves to be transformed, the message of the Gospel will be validated.
103. Does humility mean a Christian says that he is nothing? cf. Romans 12:3-8. Discuss.
The believer should not think of himself as nothing, but recognize the position he has before God. This passage says that they have been endowed with a particular skill that will enable him to be an able agent of God’s work. They should be humble because they have their role in the church, but they cannot replace everybody, nor can they be the whole church in themselves. Everyone should do as they have been given by God, not being more or less important than anybody else in the church. The following verses will also explain how they will be a biblical community when facing the outside world as well (starting in verse 14). The different parts of the body need each other, and each one should use his or her gift to the edification of the other.
104. In the Greek Text how are verses Romans 12:9b-13 related to Romans 12:9a?
The verses 12:9b-13 summarize and describe 12:9a. Romans 12:9a is not a full sentence, but reads: ‘The sincere love’ or ‘the authentic love’, or something of this sort. Then the rest describes what this love looks like, using a string of present active participles that are all in the masculine nominative plural. The plural is because Paul wants the people to treat each other in these ways. This is what a biblical community should look like. This is for the reason that we want to show the very perfect and good will of God through the windows of our very hearts, which validates the message of the Gospel. Miracles is often the validation of the message when the Gospel is new in an area. But love is the primary vehicle used as authenticity of the message of the Gospel. Compare the use of miracles in Acts, and then turn to John 13:34-35.
105. Summarize Romans 12:14-21. What is meant by “burning coals” in Romans 12:20?
The passage deals with the continuation of what has been said already about being humble according to your God-given gifts, and showing authentic love. Now, there is a sense of the members of the church being humble before the world, and blessing both friend and enemy. The things Paul talks about here apply to intra-church relational dynamics but also the church’s relationship to the world. Paul is still explaining what he means in verse 1 and especially verse 2. If they show love for enemies, then they will truly show the mind and heart of God, that “good and acceptable and perfect will of God.” For God loves all of us and sent His Son to die for us, for all of us were considered His enemies.
The burning coals, according to the majority of commentators, could either refer to divine judgment or bringing shame on the enemy. The latter seems most appropriate in the context. Both Cranfield (II:650) and MacArthur (p. 1718) attest to an Egyptian custom of one putting coals one’s head by showing the burning pain of his shame and guilt. The enemy is thus humiliated, but the message of the gospel of love is worked out in one’s life so that this enemy knows that God is real and His message and His people stand firm. The showing of love for enemies can only be something from God; the world has no part in any such things.
Romans 13
106. Does Romans 13:1-7 say anything about capital punishment?
The government reserves the right, or may reserve the right to execute criminals. In verse 4, it is seen that they punish evildoers. Do what is right, pay your taxes, do what is good and this will not be a problem for the believer. The believer, on continuing Paul’s theme thus far since Romans 12:1, avoid evil and the appearance of evil for the sake sanctification and the testimonies of God. If we are caught in violation of the law by doing evil, this brings shame on the Lord we serve.
It is the government’s God-given right to execute criminals (Romans 13:4), for the government is appointed by God (Romans 13:6). In a society that is democratic, such as the United States of America, I do not believe it is necessarily evil to be against the death penalty. If there is potential for a criminal’s life to be spared, and in the process the criminal learns to trust God in his getting a second chance, then that is another person saved. But we can never deny the right of the government to execute criminals because God has given them this power.
107. Does Romans 13:8 mean Christians are not to borrow money?
The word for owe is opheilo, which means also to incur a bound (Perschbacher, 300). The idea is that one should not accumulate debt. The concept is that there should not be debt over a long period time that could cause contention. Though Paul says allelon, meaning with one another, this would probably most make sense in the case of being in debt to the outside world also, so as to maintain good relationship (or as much so as possible, depending on the time and culture) with the outside unbelieving world. The goal of the commandment is love, see Romans 13:9-10.
108. What does it mean to “make not provision for the flesh” (Romans 13:14)?
This means to give no forethought to the flesh and its lusts, which Cranfield affirms to be any rebellion against God, or anything in our human fallenness, to the satisfaction of our own desires. According to Danker, pronoia could be rendered “thoughtful planning to meet a need” (Danker, 872). The hour of salvation is growing nearer, and always getting nearer, and it is important to be ready and equipped with the armor of light, or Jesus Christ. If we lose focus, and deviously plan to find fulfillment in anything other than the Lord Jesus, it will greatly hinder the progression of the Gospel, the affect Body of Christ, and mar the believer’s walk with God. The phrase, therefore, is not to have the idea of sin in our minds, because sin starts in the mind before it turns into action. Therefore, be transformed by the renewing of your mind...
Romans 14
109. What is the problem in Romans 14? Is this a Jew/Gentile problem?
The problems mentioned here are of both. The dietary restrictions mentioned here, as we see in Romans 14:2, the eating of meat could be associated with meat sacrificed to idols, which would be harmful to a Gentile convert because of their past association of meat with pagan ritual. Because of their scarred past, they cannot bring themselves to eat meat. I think there is a corollary to the Jewish people in the eating of unclean foods (cf. Acts 10:10-15). They have been told not to eat meat such as from the swine. The principle is flexible, that one must accept the brother who cannot have the liberty to eat what he wishes, and that nothing is unclean of itself (Romans 14:14). Love your brother, for you will have to give an account before God. The concept continues... love your neighbor as yourself (Romans 13:9-10). The holy days are the same situation. This is probably more Jewish specific. If you keep the holy days, he does it unto the Lord (Romans 14:6).
This is a human situation: we always naturally think ourselves better than others. We do such and such, and this makes us more spiritual. But the rituals, either the ones found in the Law or the ones we made up amount to nothing, but whether or not we love each other well. But we are all sinners, falling short of God’s standard, and ought not to judge another. God alone is the one who judges, and if we do not judge but love one another, then we have no fear before Bema Christou, the Judgment Seat of Christ (Romans 14:10).
110. Who is the weaker brother in Romans 14:1-23?
The weaker brother is that one who forgoes the law of liberty because of his own personal convictions. He keeps dietary laws, holy days or some sort of ritual. The one who is not bound by any such conviction has no right to flaunt his freedom to cause distress or sorrow (lupeo), and will have to confess this directly to God. The weaker, likewise, may not condemn the one who is free from such convictions. Whatever our convictions may be, we ought to keep them to ourselves (Romans 14:22), and do whatever it takes to love one another in the way the Lord would want us. Though two brothers may serve the Lord in different ways, they are both equally the Lord’s servants for whom Christ died.
111. Notice the verbs “judge” and “regard with contempt” in Romans 14:10. In the situation at Rome, who would judge and who would regard others with contempt?
This is what Paul was talking about in verse 3. A very Law-oriented Jew might be quick to condemn what he would think is a lackadaisical Gentile. The Gentile also might be wondering why a Jew would hold to something that is not required in the new creation of the Christian community. Many people from both groups could potentially point to the meat-eater and think of him who takes a part of pagan rituals. Anybody could be quick to condemn.
To compare the phrase to Bemati tou Christou, it is Jesus who is the only one who has right to judge others. In Rome is the judgment seat of Caesar, who judges who is right and who is wrong. It is eventually Nero who will put Paul to death. Paul appealed to the judgment seat of Caesar (tou Bematos Kaisaros) in Acts 25:10. It is very significant that Paul mentions the judgment seat of Christ here as being the final authority and judge.
112. Does Romans 14:17 argue against an earthly, literal kingdom?
Paul is trying to denote what the kingdom of God, as a present reality should look like (Cranfield II:717). This is not the kingdom of God we think of in eternity future. The kingdom of God here should be characterized by dikaiosune, eirene, and chara, all of which are connected with the Holy Spirit. It would make the most sense with this use of the word kai between all three words together with en pneumati hagio. If this is what characterizes the church, it would seem absurd to quarrel over food at the expense of another person. This is not to undermine the reality of a real earthly kingdom in the future, but this is suppose to clarify how we should be living our lives now. There will be eating and drinking in the kingdom of God (cf. Revelation 19:9). But this is not what is most important.
113. Explain Romans 14:23.
To summarize what Cranfield has to say on the subject of this verse, which seems most logical, is that whoever violates their own “confidence that denotes one’s Christian faith” as it “permits one to do a particular thing” commits an action of sin (Cranfield II:728-729). If I can eat the meat that was sacrificed to an idol according to my own confidence in my own conviction, than I am okay. But if my heart says ‘no,’ yet I do it anyway, then I sin.
Romans 15
114. How does Romans 15:8-9 confirm premillennialism?
It is Jesus who has become the servant of the circumcised, not the church, nor anybody else. Jesus Himself can bring in the kingdom of God, not the gradual conversion of the world by the church.
115. What do the quotations in Romans 15:9-12 have to do with the context?
Cranfield says that these verses are supposed to support Romans 15:7-9a. Jesus came to be a servant to the Jews as well as the Gentiles, so therefore, we must receive one another. Psalm 18:49 supports this because David vows praises in the midst of the Gentiles, linking himself with them. Deuteronomy 32:43 shows this especially because we see the Gentiles praising God with His people (Jews) in the Book of the Law. Psalm 117 is less apparent, but looking at the whole psalm in the Old Testament, the Psalmist cries: “Praise the Lord, all ye nations.” Then he says in Psalm 117:2, For His merciful kindness is great toward us. Finally the quote from Isaiah 11:10, in Romans 15:12, that the Messiah, a Jewish king, from the seed of Jesse, will give hope to the Gentiles (ethne) and reign over them. The stress is the fulfillment of the promise of the Patriarchs includes Gentiles being saved. Jesus is a “minister of circumcision,” the One who has circumcised our hearts and brought us near, even those of us who were of the heathen Gentiles. Unity is what Paul is getting at, “that ye may with one mind and one mouth glorify God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ” (Romans 15:6).
116. Summarize Romans 15:14-29.
Paul has written this letter to the Romans to reinforce the gospel message in great detail. He had always wanted to go to Rome, but not for the sake of preaching the gospel, because he wants to bring the gospel to unevangelized territory. Spain is the ultimate destination, the farthest distance west of the known world at that time. Before he will move to this uncharted territory of a new mission, he must give the gift from Macedonia and Achaia to Jerusalem.
Romans 16
117. What does Phoebe have to do with the Epistle to the Romans?
Phoebe was the person who delivered this letter to Rome. She was from the church of Cenchrea, which is near Corinth. She was a ‘servant’ of the church, in which the Greek word is diakonos, Cranfield believes that this is an actual title, and not a generic word for servant (II:781). So Phoebe is someone who has been a great helper to Paul as much that she was entrusted with this important task. It is quite probable that Phoebe was an actual deacon. For a word study on diakonos and a discussion of the role of deacons, click here. For an essay on the role of women in the church, click here.
118. Trace the journeys of Priscilla and Aquila (Romans 16:3).
Priscilla and Aquila were Jews from Rome, but departed when Claudius made the Jews leave Rome (Acts 18:2). Paul met them in Corinth. They were all tentmakers by trade. These three then traveled together to Syria. When they got to Ephesus, Priscilla and Aquila stayed there. There they were apparently leaders of some sort, and taught Apollos, follower of John the Baptist, the entire will of God in Jesus Christ (Acts 18:24ff). This Jewish man became a fearless servant of God when confronting the Jews. Now Priscilla and Aquila must have been allowed back into Rome by the time Paul wrote this letter, since he greets them.
119. How do you account for all the names in Chapter 16?
Though he had never been to Rome (at least while being a Christian), he knew a lot of people there. He looked forward to seeing them as well (Romans 15:23). Many of these people we do not know anything about, but there are some like Priscilla and Aquila whom he was very close to, since they also protected him in some way (Romans 16:3). Aristobulus (Romans 16:10) is believed to be brother of Herod Agrippa I and Narcissus (Romans 16:11) is believed to be Emperor Claudius’ secretary. Herodian is probably associated with the Herod family. Rufus (Romans 16:13) is believed to be the son of Simon of Cyrene, who carried the cross of Jesus (cf. Mark 15:21).
People who greeted the Romans with Paul in the letter include Timothy, Jason (Acts 17:1), Sosipater (Acts 20:4). And Gaius (1 Corinthians 1:14). Tertius apparently was the one who wrote Paul’s words down (Romans 16:22).
A Few Final Words
This is the end of the Romans project at this time. The Lord has revealed much to me through this project, and for those who have read it, I hope this study has been rewarding to you as well. May the Lord Jesus continue to bless your life that you may be the salt of the earth and ambassadors of the Kingdom of Heaven. “To God only wise, be glory through Jesus Christ for ever. Amen” (Romans 16:27).
Sources
Armstrong, Terry A., Douglas L. Busby, and Cyril F. Carr. A Readers Hebrew-English Lexicon of the Old Testament: Four Volumes in One. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1989.
Cranfield, C. E. B. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, Volume 1: Introduction and Commentary on Romans I-VIII. Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark, 1975.
Cranfield, C. E. B. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, Volume 2. Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark, 1979.
Danker, Frederick William, ed. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3rd edition. Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 2000.
MacArthur, John A. The MacArthur Study Bible. Nashville: Word Publishing, 1997.
Mounce, William D. Basics of Biblical Greek Grammar. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1993.
Murray, John. The Epistle to the Romans. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 1965.
Perschbacher, Wesley J., ed. The New Analytical Greek Lexicon. Peabody: Hendrickson, 1990.
Radmacher, Earl D. Salvation. Nashville: Word Publishing, 2000.
Wallace, Daniel. Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996.