sign in sign up
<<
Home , By the Grace of God, Romans 1

LEE BROWN'S NOTES ON THE : ROMANS 1-4

I. PROLOGUE [OPENING]: ROMANS 1:1-17

The prologue [opening] of this epistle divides into three parts: a salutation (1:1-7); an introduction (1:8-15), and a statement of theme (1:16-17).

A. SALUTATION (Romans 1:1-7). Letters in ancient Greco-Roman times followed a standard pattern with three parts: sender, recipient, greetings ("A to B, greetings"). Example of this standard pattern may be seen in :23 ("The apostles and the brethren ... to the brethren ... greetings") and 23:26 ("Claudius Lysias ... to ... Felix, greetings") as well as James 1:1 ("James ... to the twelve tribes ... greetings"). First Thessalonians also follows the pattern closely. Paul, in most of his letters modified this pattern to suit his purposes. For example, Paul changes the word "greetings" [chairein from G5463, chario_] to a related word "" [G5485, charis] and adds "peace" (see discussion on 1:7 below). Occasionally he adds "mercy" (1 Tim 1:2; 2 Tim 1:2; cf. 2 Jn 1:3).

Paul's salutation is a very long sentence (92 words in the original Greek!) with a very carefully designed chiastic structure.

A. Paul: servant [slave], called, set apart (1:1) B. Gospel promised: Through prophets [Jewish origin] (1:2) C. Christ our Lord [Son, son of , Son of God] (1:3-4) B' Gospel results: Obedience of faith among Gentiles (1:5) A' Romans: called, beloved, saints [set apart] (1:6-7a)

Paul describes his relationship with Christ (A) and his readers' relationship with Christ (A'). He emphasizes the Jewish role in the promise of the Gospel (B) and the results of the gospel among Gentiles (B'). The three stages of the work of the Son are the focus of the central passage (C).

The superscription (identification of the sender) takes up the first six verses. The address (identification of the recipients) and the greeting are found together in 1:7.

ROMANS 1:1 Paul, a bond-servant of Christ Jesus, called as an apostle, set apart for the gospel of God, 1. Paul is not the founder of the church at , and he had never been to see them. So he carefully introduces himself by identifying his Master (Christ), his calling (apostle), and his assignment (the gospel). 2. Bond-servant [G1401, doulos: slave]. Usually Paul, in his letters, begins by identifying himself as an apostle (1 Cor, 2 Cor, Gal, Eph, Col, 1 Tim, 2 Tim). Before he does that here, he chooses this title first. The title "slave" implies both ownership and obligation, as well as both obedience and loyalty. a. Paul calls himself a "slave" because he is totally committed to Jesus as his Lord. He is not just owned by Jesus as some property; he is in full service to Him (24/7). Every moment he is considering how he might serve his Master. We must not color this term with our history of the word, slave . For example, people in the Roman emperor's service boasted of being "slaves of Caesar" and Jews boasted of being "slaves to YHWH" -- both expressions focusing on a single-minded devotion (e.g., "no other gods"). There are two sides to this expression however; it includes both humility and honor. Roman society was divided into two classes: free and slave. The position of slave carries a status of humility. Honor could be attached to this position only by the dignity of the master and the relationship of the slave to the master. If the master was glorious (YHWH, Caesar, Christ), then the slave reflected that glory to some degree. Additional honor came when the slave occupied a position of great responsibility. b. OT background. Paul's readers acquainted with the OT would see the parallel with some key people in the OT who were called servants of YHWH: (Gen 26:24; Psa 105:6, 42), (Num 12:7-8; Deut 34:5; Josh 1:1-2, 7; 14:7; 2 Kings 18:12; Psa 105:26; Rev 15:3), Joshua (Josh 24:29); (2 Kgs 10:10), David (2 Sam 7:5, 8; Psa 89:3; Isa 37:35),

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 1 Nehemiah (Neh 1:6), prophets (Isa 20:3; Jer 7:25; Amos 3:7; Zech 1:6). On the one hand, Paul pictures himself as continuing this line of servants [slaves of YHWH]. In addition, in a subtle way, he is calling Jesus the Lord [YHWH] of the OT. c. Love slave. The OT also has a wonderful picture of this choice to be slave. A person who was a temporary slave (cf. indenture servant) could choose not to be set free after the term of service was concluded. "It shall come about if he says to you, 'I will not go out from you,' because he loves you and your household, since he fares well with you; then you shall take an awl and pierce it through his ear into the door, and he shall be your servant forever. Also you shall do likewise to your maidservant" (Deut 15:16-17; cf. Exod 21:6). "For you have been bought with a price, therefore glorify God in your body" (1 Cor 6:20; cf. Act 20:28; 1 Cor 7:23; 1 Pet 1:18-19; 2 Pet 2:1; Rev 5:9). d. Jesus as Servant (Slave). However, the servant theme goes even deeper. Israel and the Messiah are viewed as the Servants of YHWH in the OT (Isa 42:1-4; 49:1-6; 50:4-11a; 52:13 - 53:12). The Son "emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant [slave], being made in the likeness of men" (Phil 2:7). Jesus came to serve (Matt 20:27-28). Others in the NT also chose the designation of slave (Act 4:29; James 1:1; 2 Peter 1:1; Jude 1:1; Rev 1:1 [John]). Paul used it elsewhere (Gal 1:10; Phil 1:1; Titus 1:1). Finally, we are called to be slaves (Mk 10:44; 1 Cor 9:19). 3. apostle [G652, apostolos: one sent with a commission]. Everyone is expected to make Jesus Lord of their lives and to choose to be His slave. But only select people have the authority of being an apostle. Elsewhere Paul vigorously defended his status of being an apostle of equal standing with the twelve chosen by Jesus. Occasionally the title apostle is used in a wider context, but here and elsewhere, Paul is claiming to be in that unique group of those appointed by Christ Himself. 4. called [G2822, kle_tos]. This authority comes from being called and commissioned. He did not appoint himself to this office, nor was he appointed by others (such as was done in ). He received his commission directly from Jesus Christ (:5-6, 15; 22:14-21; 26:16-18; Gal 1:11-17). Paul's call was at the same level as Abraham (Gen 12:1-3) and Moses (Exod 3), and the Twelve. 5. set apart [G873, aphorizo_] for the gospel. This statement takes us one step further. Within the calling of being an apostle, he was also set apart for the gospel. Other apostles may have other assignments, but Paul's assignment was the gospel. And he was sent specifically to the Gentiles (Acts 9:15; 22:21; Rom 11:13; Gal 1:16; 2:9; 1 Tim 2:7; cf. Isa 49:6); however, a ministry to the Jews was not excluded (Acts 9:15). Paul realized that God had started preparing him for this task even before he was born: "But when God, who had set me apart {even} from my mother's womb and called me through His grace, was pleased to reveal His Son in me so that I might preach Him among the Gentiles" (Gal 1:15-16). 6. Paul the Pharisee. The basic meaning of the name Pharisee [G5330, Pharisaios] is one set apart . Paul was "set apart" as a Pharisee (the meaning of Pharisee). Now he is set apart to the gospel. 7. "Set apart" is intended to be paired up with saints in v.7. Saints literally means "holy ones" and a fundamental characteristic of sanctification (being made holy) is to be set apart. 8. Gospel of God. Gospel [G2098, euaggelion] is a compound word basically meaning good news . Gospel of God does not mean good news about God. Rather it is the good news from God. The word God defines the origin and character of the gospel. But it must not be thought of as simply a message from God. It is a great truth that should capture us. The Gospel of God is the very expression of God. It is his love, and this love captures us. The Gospel is Jesus! He is the greatest expression of God's love we will ever know. But we cannot have the fullness of this Love unless we open ourselves to experience It/Him. 9. slave, apostle, set part, gospel. All these terms come together to show the power of this letter. For example, Paul is not writing on his own; he is writing as one under authority. And the message he writes has its source in the gospel which is the very expression of God. 10. being a slave. Paul viewed himself as slave to Jesus as well as slave to all (1 Cor 9:19). But he realized that he could not be Christ's slave and a living sacrifice (Rom 12:1) unless he brought himself under control. "I do all things for the sake of the gospel, so that I may become a fellow partaker of it.... Therefore I run in such a way, as not without aim; I box in such a way, as not

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 2 beating the air; but I discipline my body and make it my slave, so that, after I have preached to others, I myself will not be disqualified" (1 Cor 9:23, 26-27; read 9:16-27).

ROMANS 1:2 which He promised beforehand through His prophets in the holy Scriptures, 1. promised beforehand [one word, G4279, proepaggello_]. Found only here and 2 Cor 9:5. The emphasis here is on the priority of the promise. Paul's focus is on something promised in the distant past, but only recently has been fulfilled (cf. 1 Cor 15:3-4). The OT contains the gospel promise. The NT (including this letter) contains the gospel fulfillment. Paul is declaring that his assignment to the gospel is both to show a continuation with the past and a declaration of its fulfillment. Of course, it does not mean that the promise was ineffective while it waited for this fulfillment. Paul will deal with this situation in chapter 3. 2. His prophets. In this context, all in the OT who wrote about Christ (the gospel promise) are considered prophets, e.g., David (:30; Mt 22:43), Moses (Luke 24:27; cf. :21-22). 3. holy Scriptures. "Holy" is an important modifier here. Scripture is especially "holy" [set apart] when it embodies the gospel promise. It is this special sacredness that separates Holy scripture from all other writings about God, the gospel, etc. No other written work (theology, etc.) has the authority of Scripture. Paul does three additional things here. He declares that the gospel promise is expressed through God's special relationship with Israel. Israel holds a unique place in salvation history. He also implies that the message of the OT is without sacred substance unless it is seen in light of the gospel (cf. 2 Cor 3:14-16). Without the gospel promise, it ceases to be holy history; it is only history. Lastly, Paul wants us to see that the gospel was not "plan B" to adjust for the failures in the OT. The gospel goes all the way back to Adam (cf. Gen 3:15), but especially to Abraham (cf. Gen 12:1-3), and the promise did not fail because Israel failed. Indeed, the plan was in place long before the promise was made, even before the foundations of the world were laid (Eph 1:3-14)!

ROMANS 1:3 concerning His Son, who was born of a descendant of David according to the flesh, ROMANS 1:4 who was declared the Son of God with power by the resurrection from the dead, according to the Spirit of holiness, Jesus Christ our Lord, 1. We have now reached the center of this structure, i.e., the most important part. The gospel has been introduced (1:1-2). Now the meaning of the Gospel will be explored. The gospel has its source in God (1:2) but the content of the gospel is Jesus. However, the gospel is not just some facts about Jesus. The Gospel is the Person Jesus. Jesus is given His full title: Jesus Christ our Lord -- who is presented in three stages: Son, son [seed] of David, and Son of God. 2. Many scholars think that Paul has borrowed some very early creedal statement that was well known so that he might show "common ground" between himself and the Roman Christians. (Perhaps Paul did this in 2 Tim 2:8 also). However, even if this is true, most think that Paul modified it to suit his purposes. 3. Romans 1:3-4 has an antithetical character with a series of parallels and contrasts. Note the following pattern.

A. concerning His Son, B. who was born of a descendant [seed] of David C. according to the flesh, B' who was declared the Son of God with power by the resurrection from the dead, C' according to the Spirit of holiness, A' Jesus Christ our Lord,

- "Who was born" (B) is contrasted with "who was declared" (B'). - "According to the flesh" (C) is contrasted with "according to the Spirit of holiness" (C'). - "of the seed of David" (B) is contrasted with "by the resurrection from the dead" (B'). - However "His Son" is paired (not contrasted) with "Jesus Christ our Lord" to frame this central statement.

4. These phrases have been carefully selected, formed and combined by Paul. We must spend time with them to learn what he wants us to get from this very important introduction to the gospel.

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 3 Many questions arise such as "Are the intended contrasts between the physical and spiritual aspects of Christ or between the human and divine natures of Christ?" 5. Let's start by trying to see the "big" picture. It appears that Paul is distinguishing three phases of the ministry of the Son. These phases might be called functions. a. The Son. His divine identity and eternal pre-existence are in focus here. The Son was (and is) eternally One with the Father (the second Person of the Trinity) even before the creation, the Fall, etc. It shows His eternal relationship to the Father, but also indicates His function (Son to the Father). The descriptions that follow describe His actions, but do not in any way change this eternal relationship (cf. Rom 8:3, 32; 9:5; Gal 4:4; Phil 2:6; Col 1:19; 2:9). b. The descendant [seed] of David. The focus here is on the method used to fulfill the gospel promise. Jesus is the Christ [Messiah], the one anointed of God to bring about the plan of salvation. The method used was for the Son to enter the human race as a descendant of David (Mt 1:1; Lk 1:32; :22-23; 2 Tim 2:8; cf. Isa 11:1). c. The Son of God with power. "Power" reflects a new status or function after the resurrection. It is sometimes called the Exaltation as contrasted with the Humiliation (phase "b" above). By His resurrection He became a "life-giving Spirit" (1 Cor 15:45). 6. was born [genomenou from G1096, ginomai: made]. In contrast to the eternal existence of the Son, we now have a historical beginning. While the Son has not ceased to be the Son, there has been a transition. He has taken on another mode of existence. He is now both God and human. He becomes the Eternal Son incarnate. 7. of a descendant of David. Elsewhere the Son is described as born of woman (Gal 4:4), i.e., He entered the human race. More specifically He is a Hebrew (i.e., a descendant of Abraham, Matt 1:1). Here, however, the stress is upon His relationship to the OT messianic promises. The Messiah must be a descendant of David. Jesus is the Messiah promised to David (2 Sam 7:11- 14). 8. according to the flesh. This phrase, of course, refers to Jesus being fully human (cf. John 1:14; Rom 9:5; Eph 2:14; 1 Tim 3:16; Heb 5:7; 10:20; 1 Pet 3:18; 4:1; 1 Jn 4:1; 2 Jn 1:7). However, there is also an emphasis on the reality that He is more than that (since it will be contrasted with another "according to" in 1:4). 9. declared [horisthentos, from G3724, horizo_: determine, appoint, ordain]. Other uses of this term are found in Lk 22:22; Acts 2:23; 10:42; 11:29; 17:26, 31; Heb 4:7. In none of these instances does it mean declare . Bible translators avoid its normal meaning [appointed, constituted, etc.] because it sounds as if Jesus, at some point, became the Son of God. But it is hard to avoid the obvious; there is some type of historical beginning. (It is paralleled above with the beginning as "son of David" (v.3). But how can the Son (who is eternally God) be appointed Son of God? The answer is found in the remainder of the description: power and resurrection. 10. with power. The NIV ("declared with power to be the Son of God") misses the point here. It is not the declaration that is with power; it is the Son of God who is with power. But how can the eternal Son be appointed the "Son of God with power"? It doesn't make any sense when worded like that. Instead we should be asking a different question: How can the eternal Son, who has become human, be appointed Son of God with power? Now we can view the question in light of the stages and transitions. The "Word became flesh and dwelt among us" (John 1:14) phase was the stage of humiliation. Here we have the transition to the stage of exaltation ("with power"). See John 17:1-5 for a similar picture but where glory is used instead of power . 11. by the resurrection of the dead. Literally it say, "by a resurrection of dead persons" (cf. :23 where this same expression is used). Perhaps this statement refers only to the resurrection of Jesus from the dead. But it appears to mean more than that. Probably Paul is looking at the larger context of resurrection. The great message of the gospel is not just that Jesus arose from the dead; He made the resurrection possible for all! Elsewhere Paul has said it like this: "But now Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who are asleep. For since by a man {came} death, by a man also {came} the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ all will be made alive" (1 Cor 15:20-22). Also note Paul's emphasis on power in Eph 1:18-23. Read Eph 1:18 - 2:10 to see our inclusion in the resurrection. Peter was referring to this transition when he declared that by the resurrection Jesus is made both Lord and Christ (Acts 2:32-36).

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 4 12. resurrection of the dead (continued). The biblical writers use the term "Firstborn from the dead" to show Jesus as the first of many who will experience resurrection. See firstborn [G4416a, pro_totokos] in Rom 8:29; Col 1:15, 18; Heb 1:6, Rev 1:5. The expression first fruits [G536, aparche_] is also used in this regard (Rom 8:23; 1 Cor 15:10, 23; James 1:18). The term begotten [G1080, gennao_] is used in reference to the raising up of Jesus from the dead (Acts 13:33; Heb 1:5; 5:5; all quoting Psa 2:7). However when the reference is to the Eternal Son the term only begotten [G3439, monogene_s] is used (Jn 1:14, 18; 3:16, 18; Heb 11:17). 13. declared [appointed, determined, constituted, etc.] the Son of God with power. Let's try to go a little deeper here. (By so doing we may make some errors along with finding some truths. So beware!) Jesus was not the perfect sacrifice for our sins simply because He was the Eternal Son Incarnate. It was necessary that He partake of "flesh and blood" (Heb 2:14) and be "made like His brethren in all things" (2:17). But He had to do more than that. He must be faithful to Him who appointed Him (Heb 3:2). He must be "tempted in all things as we are, yet without sin" (Heb 4:16; cf. 2:18). He must "humble himself by becoming obedient to the point of death" (Phil 2:8). He must be made perfect through suffering. "Although He was a Son, He learned obedience from the things which He suffered. And having been made perfect, He became to all those who obey Him the source of eternal salvation, being designated [G4316, prosagoreuo_] by God as a high priest according to the order of Melchizedek" (Heb 5:8-10). Consider this (it may not be true!). When the Eternal Son became incarnate, the human Jesus had to be made perfect before He could be the propitiation for our sin. When He completed the assigned tasks (obedience, suffering, being tempted, dying, resurrected, etc.) Jesus became the Son of God in a more complete sense. One aspect of this "Son of God" is that He takes on the character of God ("looks like" God). Now it is possible for us to become children ("sons of") of God (taking on His character). 14. declared [continued]. As noted above this term [from G3724, horizo_] is better translated determine, appoint, ordain, etc. It is used that way elsewhere to indicate the new standing of Jesus. "And He ordered us to preach to the people, and solemnly to testify that this is the One who has been appointed [G3724] by God as Judge of the living and the dead. Of Him all the prophets bear witness that through His name everyone who believes in Him receives forgiveness of sins" (:42-43). "... because He has fixed a day in which He will judge the world in through a Man whom He has appointed [G3724], having furnished proof to all men by raising Him from the dead" (:31). 15. according to the Spirit (or spirit) of holiness. This expression occurs nowhere else in the NT. Many scholars see it simply as another way (a Semitism?) of saying Holy Spirit, and perhaps Paul used it because it was in the ancient credo statement he borrowed. However, Paul puzzles us with this same construction elsewhere: a spirit of adoption (Rom 8:5), a spirit of gentleness (Gal 6:1), a spirit of wisdom and of revelation (Eph 1:17), and a spirit of timidity (2 Tim 1:7). Another problem is that the expression "according to the spirit" [kata pneuma] is intended to contrast with "according to the flesh" [kata sarka] in 1:3. This makes it difficult (but not impossible) to see spirit of holiness as simply meaning the Holy Spirit. The other obvious consideration would be the contrast between the human nature of Jesus and His divine nature. But that cannot be true since "spirit" is not just contrasted with "flesh" it is tied to "by the resurrection from the dead" which follows it. An interpretation consistent with the idea of three phases (functions) of the gospel is best. The "son of David" phase focused on the flesh. The "Son of God" phase focuses on the spirit. However, this interpretation does not appear to go far enough; it does not need the added feature of holiness. But "a spirit of holiness" fits well if we consider the context as interpreted above. Jesus has been appointed Son of God because of His victory over sin (through obedience, etc.). He is Son of God because He "looks like" the Father. The description "tempted ... without sin" (Heb 4:16) characterized His entire life from birth to resurrection. The human Jesus was so holy that "it was impossible for Him to be held in its [death's] power" (cf. Acts 2:24). If we stop and ponder it, to characterize the life of Jesus as having "a spirit of holiness" encompasses all the other characteristics (e.g., obedience) that made His victory possible. Jesus is now able to pass this holiness on to us (we are called "saints"). This expression ("spirit of holiness") also looks ahead to "saints" (1:7) which literally means "the holy ones".

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 5 16. Jesus Christ, our Lord. His full title is given here to emphasize His work for us. Jesus has many titles. This one focuses on His role in the plan of Salvation. Paul is calling the readers to confession. This confession is essential to our salvation. a. Jesus [G2424, Ie_sous]. This Greek form of the Hebrew name Joshua means YHWH Saves . We must confess Him and trust Him as our Savior. b. Christ [G5547, Christos]. This Greek form of the Hebrew name Messiah, means the Anointed One . He is the One anointed (chosen and set apart) by God to carry out the plan of salvation. We must confess Him and affirm Him as the Christ. c. Lord [G2962, kurios]. There are two levels of meaning to His title as Lord. 1) He is Lord because He is the I AM of the OT (John 8:56-58). Lord [Kurios] is used in the Greek translation of the OT [, LXX] to translate the most holy name, YHWH. See its use in Phil 2:9-11; Rom 14;9-11, which echoes Isa 45:23. 2) He is Lord because He successfully completed the plan of salvation and is now exalted at the right hand of the Father having all authority in heaven and earth (Acts 2:32-36; Eph 1:20-23; Phil 2:9-11; 1 Pet 3:21-22). We must confess Him and obey Him as Lord. 17. Jesus Christ, our Lord (continued). This title is intended to pair with His Son (1:3) creating the frame for this impressive look at the work of the Son. It is time to review the three phases of this work (See #5 above). a. The Son. He is eternally One with the Father. b. The Son Incarnate. He becomes the historical Jesus, the descendant [seed] of David, in order to fulfill all the messianic promises. This phase is often called the Humiliation. The focus is on Flesh (becoming human). In this earthly ministry, He is the Servant who has come to suffer (Isa 53). c. The Son of God with power. He has completed the work of salvation, making resurrection possible for all. This phase is often called the Exaltation. The focus is on spirit (Life). In this heavenly ministry, He is the Lord who reigns with power forever.

ROMANS 1:5 through whom we have received grace and apostleship to bring about {the} obedience of faith among all the Gentiles for His name's sake, 1. Remember that this verse is paired with 1:2 where we find the gospel promise. Here we see the results of the gospel (or the fulfillment of the gospel), i.e., obedience of faith among the Gentiles. 2. through whom. Refers back to "Jesus Christ, our Lord" (1:4). Grace is mediated through the exalted Christ who is Lord of all, as pictured in the previous verse. Now we see why Paul used "Jesus Christ, our Lord" instead of "Lord Jesus Christ" which is more common. His lordship is the focus of the grace, apostleship, and obedience presented in this verse. The emphasis here is not on Christ as the reason for grace or even as a source of grace. Here Christ is viewed as the instrument or channel [Lord] of grace. And it only can come through Him: "For there is one God and one mediator also between God and men, the man Christ Jesus" (1 Tim 2:5) "by whom are all things" (1 Cor 8:6; cf. John 1:51). He is seen as the ongoing agent of grace as an expression of being the Son of God with power. This picture also forces us to see grace neither as simply a disposition or attitude nor as a divine degree that saves us, but as an ongoing necessity in our walk with God. 3. we have received. Commentators, using terms such as literary plural, editorial we, plural of category , or epistolary plural , see this as Paul referring to himself. However, we should consider that Paul is including others who minister to the Gentiles, especially the person or persons who brought the gospel to Rome. 4. grace and apostleship. It could mean "the grace of apostleship" (cf. 12:6; 15:15-16). Or it could refer to apostleship as a specific gift of grace (cf. 12:6; 1 Cor 3:10; 2 Cor 1:15; 8:6-7, 19; Gal 2:9; Eph 3:8; 4:7; 1 Cor 16:3; Rom 15:15; 2 Cor 8:1). Or it could refer to Paul's salvation (cf. 1 Cor 15:10; Gal 1:15; 1 Tim 1:13-16; 2 Tim 1:9; Titus 3:5-7). It is more probable that Paul is thinking of the grace that makes his apostleship effective. Paul has not been commissioned an apostle and then expected to perform the duties in his own power. It can only be done through grace. Grace is dynamic. Grace is not simply God's good intentions towards us. Nor is it only the grace that brought us into the family of God. We need the grace that comes from Jesus every moment of our lives. And we must remember that at no point in our journey do we merit God's favor. Grace is getting what we have not earned, what we do not deserve.

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 6 5. obedience of faith. Note that this phrase also concluded this epistle (16:26), making a type of frame. So it is important. But what does it mean? Many want to translate it as "the obedience that comes from faith" (NIV). But obedience neither proceeds nor follows faith. It is one of the components of faith. They are inseparable. There is no faith without obedience, and there is no obedience without faith. Faith is the Mind Affirming, the Heart Trusting, and the Will Obeying. Here obedience is stressed because the focus is on the Lordship of Jesus. 6. among all the Gentiles [G1484, ethnos: Gentiles, nations, pagans]. This word can be translated "nations" but it is more likely that Paul intends it to be "Gentiles" to indicate his special mission to those who are not Jews (cf. Rom 11:13; Acts 26:17-18; Gal 1:16; 2:7-9). Now we see why Paul has stressed obedience rather that other elements of faith. Paul has been accused of telling Jews and Gentiles to "forsake Moses" (:21). His teaching about grace has been misunderstood ((cf. 3:8; 6:1-2, 15). Paul wants to show a continuity between the Old Covenant and the New. Whatever is "decided" about our relationship with the Law, obedience must be a necessary part of faith. The covenant obligations of the New Covenant are a continuation and fulfillment of covenant obligations of the Old Covenant. 7. all. Paul will use this term more than seventy times in this one epistle, four times in this prologue (1:5, 7, 8, 16). A major purpose of this letter is to show the inclusive nature of the gospel; it is for everyone. 8. for His name's sake. Jesus has many names. Which name is in Paul's mind here? It is the one he has introduced to us above: Jesus Christ, our Lord. As we saw above, this title focuses on His role in the plan of Salvation. There are at least two levels here. First, it is for His glory. People coming to faith increases the glory of Christ. But, more specifically, Jesus is the one who fulfills God's covenant with humanity, and people coming to God glorifies the method God used. Secondly, "name" means that it is consistent with His character and mission. Paul is fulfilling the mission of Jesus in a manner consistent with the character and mission of Jesus.

ROMANS 1:6 among whom you also are the called of Jesus Christ; 1. among whom you also. This appears to show that most of the readers were Gentiles (cf. 1:13; 11:13; 15:15-19). 2. the called. This call is paired with Paul's call in 1:1. Paul want them to see that all who come to Jesus are called. Although his call included apostleship, all disciples of Jesus are the called . 3. called and chosen. Jesus makes a distinction between being called and being chosen: "For many are called, but few are chosen" (Mt 22:14). Paul, however, appears to use "called" to identify those who belong to Jesus. 4. of Jesus Christ. The meaning here is that we become the disciples of Jesus Christ through this call. However, it is the Father who calls us (cf. 8:30; 9:24; 11:29; 1 Cor 1:9; 2 Tim 1:9; Gal 1:6, 15; 5:8; 2 Thess 2:14; Jn 6:44, 65). The NIV interprets this expression as "called to belong to" [Jesus], which is a guess. However, there does seem to be an underlying idea of devoted service. The two calls for the reader (1:5, 6) matches well Paul's calls (1:1). We are to be Christ's slaves performing whatever service He assigns.

ROMANS 1:7a to all who are beloved of God in Rome, called as saints: 1. We are now almost to the end of the salutation. Remember the salutation typically had three parts: sender, recipient, greetings ("A to B, greetings"). Paul has spent 1:1-6 on the "sender" portion. The last two parts will be done with one verse. But this one verse is important. This first half of the verse is the "recipient" part. 2. beloved of God. Beloved [G27, agape_tos] is derived from agapao_ [G25, the verb] and agape_ (G26, the noun]. There are various forms of love. For example, there is the "falling in love" kind, which does not involve a choice; it just happens. The agape_ kind of love involves the choice to love. It is by a deliberate choice that God loves us. There are at least two levels to the kind of love from God. a. God loves everybody! Remember John 3:16. Paul is referring to this kind of love when he declared: "But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us" (Rom 5:8; cf. 5:10). b. Beloved of God. However, those walking in obedience are especially loved by God. This obedience is the central feature in the Father's description of Jesus: "This is My beloved Son,

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 7 in whom I am well-pleased" (Mt 3:17). Jesus makes this same point: "He who has My commandments and keeps them is the one who loves Me; and he who loves Me will be loved by My Father, and I will love him and will disclose Myself to him" (John 14:21). "If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word; and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our abode with him" (John 14:23b). We must remember that God wants to love everyone at this level. But we can only be loved deeply as we respond with love. When we return His love and share it with others , then we open ourselves to more love from Him. Remember also that we love because He first loved us (1 Jn 4:7-12). 3. called as saints. [G40, hagios: "holy ones"]. It comes from Hebrew and Greek roots meaning "holy" or "to be set apart" thus it pairs well with 1:1 where Paul talks about being set apart. There are three aspects to being saints. a. Specially chosen [covenant]. The term saints is a special OT word for a very elite group (see, e.g., Dan 7:18, 21, 22, 25, 27; cf. Ps 16:3; 34:9; 83:3; Isa 4:3; Dan 8:24; Lev 19:2; 20:7, 26; Num 15:40; Deut 7:6; 14:2; 26:19). Jews who were faithful to the covenant saw themselves as the holy ones who had been set apart to the Law. There is also the corporate sense: all Jews had been set apart from the nations (Deut 7:6; 1 Kgs 8:53; 1 Pet 2:9-10; cf. Rom. 15:25-26; Eph 2:11-22). (This corporate sense is included in "b" below.) Paul applies this very elite Jewish designation to Gentiles. They have become fellow citizens with the saints (Eph 2:19). The gospel makes everyone special. b. called saints [status]. This is probably the primary meaning behind Paul's statement here. It is the natural result of God's love and call. It represents a divine vocation given to all who are beloved of God. c. called to be saints [behavior]. It results from a response to the call to holiness, to sanctification (see chap. 6, especially 6:19, 22). Holy in heart and lifestyle is one of the two most characteristic features of a true believer. The other one is love. God is Holy Love. Children of God must be taking on these two characteristics. 4. Beloved saints. Think again about the beauty of the brief statement. God has poured out His love into our hearts (Rom 5:5) and set us apart for holy service [saints]. He expects a response of gratitude: a life lived out in holiness and love. How can we do this? In the power of the blessing of grace and peace with which Paul ends this section.

ROMANS 1:7b Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. 1. The third and final part of the salutation is the greeting. However, instead of a standard greeting, Paul gives a blessing. Paul changes the word "greetings" [chairein from G5463, chario_] to a related word "grace" [G5485, charis] and adds peace and occasionally adds mercy (1 Tim 1:2; 2 Tim 1:2; cf. 2 Jn 1:3). Why has Paul done this? He has deliberately chosen words that characterize the two covenants. Peace represents the Old Covenant and Grace the New. (It is doubtful that two better words could be found!) So again, Paul has emphasized the continuity between the two covenants. These two great words will not be explored in depth here, since grace is a major topic in chapter 3 and peace is a major topic in chapter 5. In addition, chapter 6 explores the life that results from these two great blessings. Note: ch.4 (faith), ch.7 (law) 2. Delivering blessings. Something fantastic is happening here! Paul is not simply writing some "feel good" words to the reader. He is actually an instrument in delivering true blessings. The historical background for such an action is found in what has come to be called the Aaronic Blessing found in the OT. YHWH instructs Moses: "Speak to Aaron and to his sons, saying, 'Thus you shall bless the sons of Israel. You shall say to them: YHWH bless you, and keep you; YHWH make His face shine on you, and be gracious to you; YHWH lift up His countenance on you, and give you peace.' So they shall invoke My name on the sons of Israel, and I {then} will bless them" (Numbers 6:23-27). Here in the NT the source of the blessing has become "God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ", but Paul is the instrument. How does this work? Does it still work today? We will explore the process in this study. 3. to you. There is both a corporate [congregational] and an individual [personal] application to this blessing. Read Eph 2:11-22. 4. grace [G5485, charis] to you. At this point we will only mention some levels. a. Grace represents that disposition of God, resulting from His love, whereby He has chosen to favor all undeserving humanity with His kindness, goodness, compassion, etc.

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 8 b. Grace is expressed in salvation history whereby God has worked events in history providing favor to those who enter into covenant with Him. c. Grace consists of those acts of God whereby we enter into personal relationship with Him. d. Grace is the environment or atmosphere in which His people live. Most of the grace we receive goes unnoticed; it is like the air we breathe. Breathing is essential to life but we normally do not think about breathing. To carry the simile one step further, by making poor choices regarding our Christian walk, we often live on polluted air -- barely surviving. We need to be wise in our choices, so that we may "grow in the grace" (2 Pet 3:18) -- the "fresh air" that is so readily available. This is the level behind Paul's blessing. 5. peace [G1515, eire_ne_] with the OT background [H7965, shalom] (Jdg 19:20; 1 Sam 25:5-6; Dan 10:19; James 2:16). It has the sense of well-being, wholeness, prosperity (Deut 23:6; Psa 72:3, 7; 147:14; Isa 48:18; 55:12; Zech 8:12). It is also very much a social experience of harmony in all relationships. When describing the relationship with God, it is founded in justification by faith (Rom 4:25 - 5:2) establishing a relationship of obedience. Peace must be seen in the context of alienation due to sin and the reconciliation available through Christ (Rom 5). It is a major theme of the Bible. It is the peace of God that keeps the heart and mind in Christ Jesus (Phil 4:7). 6. God our Father. This level of blessing comes only when we have entered into a special Father- child relationship and are living out that relationship in a proper way. 7. Lord Jesus Christ. These two blessings are only available within the context of a confessional life -- a life of depending on Him, devoted to Him, and exalting Him -- focused on the meaning and mission inherent in His full name.

B. INTRODUCTION (1:8-15). Typical of letters of that day, the salutation is followed by some type of religious expression giving thanks or petition for the reader. Usually it was a brief statement regarding prayer, either an actual prayer is given or the readers are informed of prayers being offered on their behalf. These prayers usually were expressions of thanksgiving or request to the gods for the good health and/or prosperity of the readers. Paul follows this general practice but in his own unique manner. Looking at all the NT letters of Paul, one can see that he generally used this section to introduce some important concern(s) which he will develop later in the letter. The prayer was often followed by some personal remarks about the writer and/or the readers along with indicators of their relationship. The focus of Paul's concern in this section was his desire to visit the Christians at Rome. Exaggerated language was almost expected in this section of a letter, and Paul follows this custom with such remarks as "throughout the whole world", "unceasingly", "always". In this section, Paul shares three reasons why he desires to visit Rome: (1) to share some spiritual gift [1:11], (2) to have a harvest [1:13], (3) to preach the gospel [1:15].

In this section, Paul focuses on ministry, including their mutual ministry, while emphasizing his ministry of the gospel and his desire to engage in this ministry in Rome. Here is a possible structure for this section.

A. Your faith is proclaimed throughout the world (1:8) B. His ministry of the Gospel (1:9) C. His prayer to succeed in coming to Rome (1:10) D. Mutual ministry (1:11-12) C' His plan to come to Rome (1:13a) B' His ministry of the gospel (1:13b-15) A' Salvation to everyone who believes, both Jew and Greek (1:16)

ROMANS 1:8 First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for you all, because your faith is being proclaimed throughout the whole world. 1. First. There is no "second", but he probably means "first, before I get started, I want to say this". Paul did not found this church. Who did? We are not told. Perhaps it was the result of the events in Acts 2 (note 2:10). These people returned home to Rome and started the church.

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 9 2. thank [G2168, eucharisteo_]. It is interesting to note that "gratitude" has its origin in "grace" [G5485, charis] both in practice and in the root of the words. Gratitude is the natural response to grace. Of all Paul's NT letters only Galatians is missing an expression of thanksgiving. 3. thank my God. Paul does not praise them directly. He thanks God for them. "My God" does not mean that Paul's God is different from their God, but it does display the very personal nature of his relationship with God. 4. through Jesus Christ. Here we see again Christ as mediator (cf. Eph 5:20; Col 3:17; Heb 13:15; 1 Pet 2:5). Before we saw that He mediated grace to us. Now He carries our thanksgiving to the Father. It can also be referring to the truth that access to the Father was made possible by Christ. 5. your faith. Reference to their relationship to Jesus, i.e., faith in Jesus as Savior, Lord, etc. For Paul, faith is the basic Christian virtue (cf. Eph 1:15-16; Col 1:3-4; 1 Thess 1:3). 6. throughout the whole world. Hyperbolic language is used intentionally to indicate the significance of what is happening, not to expect us to believe that everyone in the world was affected.

ROMANS 1:9 For God, whom I serve in my spirit in the {preaching of the} gospel of His Son, is my witness {as to} how unceasingly I make mention of you, ROMANS 1:10 always in my prayers making request, if perhaps now at last by the will of God I may succeed in coming to you. 1. God is my witness. Sometimes called a witness formula, being a type of oath (cf. 2 Cor 1:23; 11:31; Gal 1:20; Phil 1:8; 1 Thess 2:5; also see Rom 9:1-2; 2 Cor 2:17). It shows that not all oaths are forbidden as might be concluded from Matt 5:33-37 and James 5:12. Paul takes an oath since it must be very hard for the readers to believe that he prays so often for them. 2. unceasingly (constantly, repeatedly). Of course, Paul is not saying that praying for them is all he does. He means that these prayers are frequent and also are ongoing without major breaks in between (cf. Eph 1:16; Phil 1:3-4; Col 1:3; 1 Thess 1:2; 2 Thess 1:3; Phlm 1:4). 3. serve [G3000, latreuo_]. We might have expected Paul to be thinking of service as the slave of Christ (1:1), but if so, he would have used douleuo_ [G1398, to serve as a slave]. The basic idea here is a service that is worshipful. Note the corresponding noun [latreia] is used in 12:1. However, he is not talking about the formal acts of congregational worship. He is referring to the ministry of the gospel. 4. in my spirit. Jesus told us to worship in spirit and in truth (John 4:23-24). Service must spring from our innermost being and be focused on His glory. NIV has "with my whole heart" which could be misleading to mean simply "wholeheartedly". It involves Spirit touching spirit and service flowing from this interaction as the natural response. 5. the gospel of His Son. The gospel is central to Paul's acts of service. As an aside, this passage is supportive of the choice to make the preaching of the gospel an integral part of congregational worship. 6. by the will of God. Paul makes no excuses for failing to visit Rome before. All is done in the will of God (cf. 12:2; 15:32; 1 Cor 1:1; 2 Cor 1:1; 8:5; Gal 1:4; Eph 1:1; 6:6; Col 1:1; 4:12; 1 thess 4:3; 5:18). 7. Some great lessons on prayer are to be found here. God has deliberately established a tension within Paul. The desire to see them is so strong that he prays "constantly" that he might be able to go. However, there is no clear direction from God that He should go. In addition, Paul sees God's hand (not Satan's) in preventing him from going up until now. He still thinks that it is God's will that he go to Rome. But, with no clear direction, he must leave it "in the will of God". However it is not done by ceasing to pray, but in the confidence that God will work it out in His timing. Paul must not stop praying about it, because that too is God's will. (It will happen only in answer to prayer!) It will be years before Paul actually reaches Rome. 8. succeed [G2137, euodoo_]. It included a picture of a way being opened for him, a prosperous journey.

ROMANS 1:11 For I long to see you so that I may impart some spiritual gift to you, that you may be established; ROMANS 1:12 that is, that I may be encouraged together with you {while} among you, each of us by the other's faith, both yours and mine.

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 10 1. Many scholars see 1:12 as Paul modifying 1:11, not wanting to present himself as someone who is better than they are. However, it is better to see it as an explanation of what he means in 1:11. We are established by being encouraged together by each other's faith, it is grace being ministered through the Body of Christ to the Body. 2. long to see you. The language here is normally used between persons bonded together is some way (relatives, friends). Since the readers are Christians, Paul treats them as family. This usage sets the tone and shows the context of what follows, i.e., mutual ministry. 3. impart [G3330, metadido_mi, from G3326 (meta: among, with) and G1325 (dido_mi: to give)]. Dido_mi is used in very important verses (e.g., John 3:16) and is also the root of a word for gift [G1431, do_rea]. This word group [G1431-1435] is the more common meaning of "gift" which differs from the word "gift" used in this verse (see below), but it is still used in important ways (John 4:10; Acts 2:38). "Sharing" (NIV) is an acceptable translation as long as it is not seen as a mutual receiving. "Impart" is probably better since it is more likely seen as something that is both given and retained (such as imparting truth ). In 1 Thess 2:8, Paul uses this Greek word for imparting the gospel and their own lives to the readers. 4. some. Paul's use of "some" probably indicates that he does not know the specific spiritual gift he will be imparting. He will simply minister as the Spirit directs him and people will receive grace as a result. Gifts will differ according to the needs of a particular recipient. 5. spiritual gift (charisma ... pneumatikon from G4152 [pneumatikos: spiritual] and G5486 [charisma: gift]). It is interesting that this particular construction does not appear anywhere else in the NT. The word "spiritual" is used sometimes where "gift" is assumed (1 Cor 12:1; 14:1, 12) or "gift" is used where "spiritual" is assumed (Rom 11:29; 12:6; 1 Cor 12:4, 9, 28, 30, 31; 1 Tim 4:14; 2 Tim 1:6; 1 Peter 4:10). Note: translators often supply the "missing" word! It is also important to note that both of these words are used with broader meanings. 6. gift [G5486, charisma]. Found ca. 17 times in the NT being derived from grace [G5485, charis]. Although not created by Paul, this Greek word was rarely used until Paul chose it and gave it its special meanings. Now charisma has become part of our society's vocabulary. It appears that (at times at least) Paul is using it as a shorthand for gift [G1431, do_rea] of God's grace [G5485, charis] (Rom 3:24, 5:15; Eph 3:7), so its basic meaning is grace gift(s). There are three general ways charisma is used by Paul. a. God's gift(s) of grace to us (salvation through Christ, eternal life, etc.). See Rom 5:15-16; 6:23 and possibly Rom 11:29. b. The endowment of specific gifts from the Holy Spirit to be used in ministering grace to others, especially grace to the body, individually and collectively (Rom 12:6; 1 Cor 1:7; 7:7; 12:4, 9, 28, 30, 31; 1 Tim 4:14; 2 Tim 1:6; cf. 1 Pet 4:10). c. The embodiment of grace transmitted from the ministry of others (including those endowed with spiritual gifts) within the body of Christ (Rom 1:11; 2 Cor 1:11). "... you also joining in helping us through your prayers, so that thanks may be given by many persons on our behalf for the favor [charisma] bestowed on us through {the prayers of} many" (2 Cor 1:11). I believe that this usage is what is meant by Paul in this verse. Therefore it is not Spiritual gift but spiritual gift meaning the atmosphere or environment of grace produced within the body of Christ in which the human spirit lives and breathes. Of course, the Holy Spirit is the Primary Source of this grace being transmitted, but it is transmitted through the Secondary Source of spirits (having been made alive) touching spirits. Study Ephesians 2:11-22; 4:1-16 for more. 7. established [G4741, ste_rizo_, lit. "for you to be established"]. Found ca. 14 times in NT and is in the passive voice which often means that God is the one who really makes it happen. There is a consistent picture here of the body of Christ as an instrument of God's grace participating in the establishment of the saints. a. Established/strengthened by God (Rom 16:25 [also b]; 1 Thess 3:13; 2 Thess 3:3; 1 Pet 5:10; 2 Pet 1:12 b. Established/strengthened by others or self (Lk 22:32; :23; Rom 1:11; 1 Thess 3:2; James 5:8; Rev 3:2) c. Established/strengthened by both (Rom 16:25; 2 Thess 2:17) d. Other usage (Lk 9:51; 16:26)

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 11 8. encouraged together [one word, G4837, sumparakalesthai]. Found only here. Here is an explanation of how the spiritual gift and the establishing works. Paul likes to use Greek words with this same prefix (sum- [sym-]), emphasizing our togetherness. 9. each of us by the other's ... both yours and mine. Paul emphasizes: (a) that each person has a contribution to make, (b) that there is a distinctiveness in the contribution of each, and (c) that we share a common base from which sharing is possible. 10. other's faith. Here is that common base. When you share elements of your faith (how it is working out in your life, your struggles, doubts, victories) with me, my spirit closely identifies with your testimony, and I am encouraged in my faith.

ROMANS 1:13 I do not want you to be unaware, brethren, that often I have planned to come to you (and have been prevented so far) so that I may obtain some fruit among you also, even as among the rest of the Gentiles. 1. Paul again states his desire to have a ministry among them. But this time, he emphasizes that his ministry is especially to all the Gentiles, which would include the Romans. 2. "I do not want you to be unaware [ignorant]" is a favorite expression of Paul (cf. Rom 11:25; 1 Cor 10:1; 12:1; 2 Cor 1:8; 1 Thess 4:13). It is one of his ways of stressing the importance of what he is saying as well as recognizing the distinct possibility that the readers may be misinformed. 3. prevented so far (cf. 15:22). Paul does not mention a satanic activity here (as he does in 1 Thess 2:18), so he may simply see it as God's plan. However, "so far" indicates that he expects it will happen some day in God's timing. For example, there was an imperial edict in AD 49 expelling all Jews from Rome (cf. Acts 18:2). He could not have visited Rome until this edict was rescinded (in AD 54 or sooner). 4. some fruit [G2590, karpos: fruit] among you also, even as among. Perhaps this is simply a general reference to successful ("fruitful") ministry since Paul indicates past experiences in his ministry with Gentiles. Does he have specific "fruit" in mind? The use of "some" here probably means that he is leaving the specific details up to God. Paul might be thinking of new converts or of building people up in the faith. Some have suggested that he was thinking that he might be able to help with the misunderstanding between Jews and Gentiles. What we do have here is the underlying conviction that he (Paul) has been given a special ministry to Gentiles. Compare Phil 1:22 and Col 1:6, 10 [G2592, karpophoreo_: bearing fruit]. 5. Gentiles. Probably indicates that the church was largely Gentile (cf. 11:13, 25-28; 15:15-16).

ROMANS 1:14 I am under obligation both to Greeks and to barbarians, both to the wise and to the foolish. ROMANS 1:15 So, for my part, I am eager to preach the gospel to you also who are in Rome. 1. Greeks/barbarians, wise/foolish. NIV chooses to modify "barbarians" [G915, barbarois] to "Non-Greeks" which makes one point but misses another. These classifications were used in the culture of that day to provide two easy ways of dividing society neatly into two groups (the "haves" and the "have-nots"). So, first of all, Paul is saying "everyone" is included. But he chooses to use these sets because they stress that the gospel is for everyone. Paul's gospel is not just for the elite, it is for the despised as well. Barbarois is an example of onomatopoeia. 2. under obligation [G3781, opheilete_s: a debtor]. God's mercy was extended even to Paul, the "foremost of all sinners" (1 Tim 1:15-16). This expression of God's grace put Paul forever in debt to Christ. He is under obligation to try to win everyone to Christ. But it is more than an obligation, it is a compulsion [G318, anagke_] (1 Cor 9:16-17). No one is too "despised" to be excluded. 3. eager. This term shows that Paul does not see his "obligation" and "compulsion" simply as a duty but rather as a privilege. 4. to preach the gospel [one word, G2097, euaggelizo_: to announce the good news] -- a key idea for this whole section. It now moves us to the theme of the letter (1:16-17). Compare gospel [G2098, euaggelion: good news] at 1:1, 9, 16.

C. THEME (1:16-17). These two verses contain four subordinate clauses, each one clarifying a prior statement.

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 12 1. For I am not ashamed of the gospel (1:16a) -- why he is eager to preach (1:15) 2. for it is the power of God for salvation ... (1:16b) -- why he is not ashamed 3. For in it {the} righteousness of God is revealed ... (1:17a) -- why the gospel is the power ... 4. as it is written ... (1:17b) -- why it is true (scriptural confirmation regarding the roles of righteousness and faith).

Actually the Theme reaches back and extends forward (Note the "for" in 1:16 and 1:18). Since it is tied so closely with the prior passage and the one following, should it be separated out as a special section? In addition, 1:16 is a transitional verse, completing the structure of the Introduction (1:8-16) as well as reaching forward. However, looking at the larger picture, 1:1-15 and 15:14 - 16:27 (the "letter" portions) frame the theological treatise within, and Paul begins his explanation of the gospel at 1:18. Therefore it is logical to see 1:16-17 as a general statement of the overall theme of the book.

ROMANS 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. 1. For. This word (left out in the NIV) shows us that Paul is looking back to prior verses and giving further explanation. He now is giving reasons. Why does he want to preach the gospel in Rome? Why is he writing this treatise that follows? Note "for" appears again in v.16 as well as in v.17 and again in v.18. 2. I am not ashamed. Why does Paul use this expression? a. Many consider that Paul is using a figure of speech (litotes: an understatement where the positive is stated in negative form). Therefore they consider it correct to translate it: "I glory in the gospel" or "I have complete confidence" (TEV). See elsewhere where Paul actually exults in it (Rom 5:2, 3, 11; Gal 6:14). b. But to translate it simply as a positive misses the reason Paul stated it in negative form. There will always be many who hold in contempt a message of "Christ crucified" (1 Cor 1:17-31). There is a reproach to be carried by those who rely on the blood of Jesus (Heb 13:12-13). Until the gospel truly becomes active in a person's life, it is seen as full of difficulties, including absurdities and fallacies, even by people who are trying to be fair. These truths can only be spiritually discerned (1 Cor 2). In addition, the truth of the gospel is central to success in spiritual warfare (Eph 6:10-17). People will be sorely tempted to be ashamed of Jesus (Mk 8:38; Lk 9:26). There are at least three words in the NT that are used to illustrate these ideas, and all three are found in Rom 9:33 and 1 Pet 2:6-8. - Offense [G4625, skandalon] Rom 9:33; 11:9; 14:3; 1 Cor 1:23; Gal 5:11; 1 Pet 2:8; 1 Jn 2:10 (cf. Mt 16:23; 18:7 [3x]). - Stumbling [G4348, proskomma] Rom 9:32, 33; 1 Pet 2:8. - Disappoint [G2617b, kataischuno_: lit. put to shame] Rom 5:5; 9:33; 1 Pet 2:6. c. ashamed [G1870, epaischunomai]. Found 11 times in NT (Mk 8:38, 38; Lk 9:26, 26; Rom 1:16; 6:21; 2 Tim 1:8, 12, 16; Heb 2:11; 11:16. These verses show us that we should not be thinking just of a "psychological" shame but a "confessional" shame. Note this shame goes both ways: if we are ashamed of Jesus, He is ashamed of us. Paul is convinced that the gospel is the only effectual power available to us. So he puts his full reliance in it. Therefore the TEV translation "I have complete confidence" catches one aspect of it (while missing other aspects). 3. the gospel. Although Paul has been writing about himself and his readers, the gospel has dominated this letter up to this point. Note again, for example, that a description of the gospel (1:3-4) is central to the structure of the salutation (1:1-7). "Gospel" is found in 1:1, 9, 14. 4. power [G1411, dunamis]. Words like dynamite and dynamic are derived from this Greek word. However, the mistake we often make is to picture power in some of the more obvious ways, such as in explosions that destroy our enemies. Paul has something very different in mind. 5. Power of God. A favorite idea for Paul (Rom 1:20; 9:17; 1 Cor 1:18, 24; 2:5; 6:14; 2 Cor 4:7; 6:7; 13:4). Paul is writing to people who live at the center of political power (Rome). Even if they do not fear it, they cannot help but feel its presence. It is the epitome of worldly power. Paul reminds them (and us) that there is a power available for us that is greater than any worldly power. It is not only greater, it is of a different quality. We really know very little about it. But, somehow, this power of God is mediated to us through the gospel. So Paul expresses

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 13 confidence, not in himself, but in the gospel. And when he speaks of the gospel, he is not just thinking of words or ideas, but of a Person. So the Gospel is a message, a power, a Person, and whatever else God has included in this marvelous gift. Who is this Person? He is the One "who was declared the Son of God with power by the resurrection from the dead" (Rom 1:4). See the above notes on this verse. So, the cross and the empty tomb are central to the gospel message.

We miss the whole point, however, if we picture the power of God competing with the powers of this world (a mistake made over and over again in the corporate life of the church and the individual life of the believer). A head-to-head power struggle between God and the world would be no struggle at all. God would win in an instant! So, the power of God cannot even be compared with the power of the world. His ways are not our ways (Isa 55:8-9). God does not often confront the world with its form of power. Instead, He confronts the world with a paradox. His "weapons" are often shameful -- not shameful in the sense that God is doing something wrong, but that we are ashamed to use these weapons. We would rather defeat the world with weapons similar to the world's weapons. These "shameful" methods chosen by God prompted Paul to declare that he is not ashamed, because shame would be the natural inclination. Instead, he deliberately chose the "shameful weapons" of God because they prove to be the most effective. In fact, they are the only effective weapons! When we attempt to defeat the world with its weapons, we lose!

"For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war according to the flesh, for the weapons of our warfare are not of the flesh, but divinely powerful for the destruction of fortresses. {We are} destroying speculations and every lofty thing raised up against the knowledge of God, and {we are} taking every thought captive to the obedience of Christ, and we are ready to punish all disobedience, whenever your obedience is complete" (2 Cor 10:3-6). However, there are times when we cannot see any victory taking place. Paul reminds us that the problem is that we "are looking at things as they are outwardly..." (10:7).

Study :7-14 where Paul used "not ashamed" twice in the context of inviting the readers to join him "in suffering for the gospel according to the power of God" (1:8).

Note that the "full armor of God" (Eph 6:10-20) does not use the weapons of the world. In fact, the "weapons" described are intended for defense ("stand firm"), not for offense. The "gospel of peace" is one of these weapons! It is a very different kind of battle ("for our struggle is not against flesh and blood"). What are some of these weapons God provides? a. Riches through Poverty. "For you know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though He was rich, yet for your sake He became poor, so that you through His poverty might become rich" (2 Cor 8:9). b. Wisdom through Foolishness. "For the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God" (1 Cor 1:18; read 1:17 - 2:5). "... but we preach Christ crucified, to Jews a stumbling block and to Gentiles foolishness, but to those who are the called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God" (1 Cor 1:23-24). c. The foolish, weak, base, despised. "... but God has chosen the foolish things of the world to shame the wise, and God has chosen the weak things of the world to shame the things which are strong, and the base things of the world and the despised God has chosen, the things that are not, so that He may nullify the things that are, so that no man may boast before God" (1 Cor 1:27-29). d. Strength through Weakness. "And He has said to me, 'My grace is sufficient for you, for power is perfected in weakness.' Most gladly, therefore, I will rather boast about my weaknesses, so that the power of Christ may dwell in me. Therefore I am well content with weaknesses, with insults, with distresses, with persecutions, with difficulties, for Christ's sake; for when I am weak, then I am strong" (2 Cor 12:9-10). e. Life through death. 1) Christ's death makes life possible. The Son of God emptied Himself of all His godly powers and became one with us (read Phil 2:6-11). He chose the path of weakness and

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 14 death, so that we may have life. "For I determined to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ, and Him crucified" (1 Cor 2:2). "For indeed He was crucified because of weakness, yet He lives because of the power of God. For we also are weak in Him, yet we will live with Him because of the power of God {directed} toward you" (2 Cor 13:4). 2) My "death to self" makes it possible to receive His Life. "For through the Law I died to the Law, so that I might live to God. I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the {life} which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself up for me. I do not nullify the grace of God, for if righteousness {comes} through the Law, then Christ died needlessly" (Gal 2:19- 21). 3) Now physical death is simply the doorway to New Life. Read 1 Cor 15:50-57. Victory!

So you see, the world (no matter how much power it exerts) cannot have victory over such a person no matter what it does (Rom 8:31-39). If it kills us God gives us life. If it impoverishes us, God enriches. If it slanders us, God honors us. If it persecutes us, God strengthens us. God's power is used for our salvation, not to help us "win" by the world's standards. But God allows the world to think that it is winning, that we are defeated. It is a delicious secret we share with God! We are winning, even though we do not appear to be!

6. For (salvation) [Gk: eis, not gar]. This preposition can include both the ideas of "for" salvation and "into" salvation.

7. Salvation [G4991, so_te_ria]. The power of God is focused and demonstrated through the Gospel in order to bring about salvation (cf. Heb 4:12). The most basic meaning of this term is wholeness and soundness. Salvation has a broad range of meaning in both the OT and the NT, referring usually to God delivering people from various evils (slavery, sickness, death, war, poverty). Paul however, uses the word only for spiritual deliverance.

Negatively, salvation is seen as deliverance from sin and death, but especially from the wrath of God and from judgment (cf. 5:9). Positively, salvation is intended to restore humanity to the original creation (8:18-25). As such it includes the full range of God-human interactions, e.g., forgiveness, justification, regeneration, reconciliation, sanctification, and redemption. Its focus is eschatological (end-times). We must wait for salvation to be completed when we will be delivered from eschatological judgment and given full restoration on that last day (note the "shall be saved" in Rom 5:9-10). See also Rom 13:11; 1 Cor 3:15; 5:5; Phil 2:12-13; 1 Thess 5:8-11. This end-product focus of salvation not only includes deliverance and restoration but preservation as well. Conversion is only part of the beginning stages of this process. But even conversion should be seen as this "end-product" invading into the present in a limited, beginning way. Salvation represents a goal and a progressing towards that goal, sometimes in stages, other times in the victories and failures typical of a growth process. (See the present tense verbs in 1 Cor 1:18; 15:2; 2 Cor 2:15). Study also Rom 6:16; 10:10; 2 Cor 7:10; Phil 1:19; 2 Thess 2:13; 2 Tim 3:15.

To affirm that this "power of God for salvation" is available for us in this present life, see Rom 15:13; 1 Cor 1:18; 2:4-5; 6:14; 15:43; 2 Cor 4:7; 6:7; 12:9; 13:4; Phil 3:10; Col 1:11, 29; 1 Thess 1:5; 2 Thes 1:11.

8. To everyone who believes. Now we have the second half of the most radical news ever announced. The first half is that God, thorough His own unique expressions of power, saves. We do not, actually we could not, bring about our own salvation. Instead, He does it. Secondly, this salvation is available for everyone who believes! However, it is important to note both the inclusive and the conditional aspect of this statement. It is for everyone. Yes, but! Yes, it is available. But it is not attained without faith.

9. believes [G4100, pisteuo_]. In the English language we do not have a verb that corresponds to our word "faith" [noun], i.e., there is no such word as "faithing"! We use "believing" instead. In

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 15 Greek, however, the noun and the verb have a common root. The uses pistis [G4102, the noun for "faith"] and pisteuo_ [G4100, the verb for "believe"]. But it is more complicated than that, because these Greek words are also used for faithful and faithfulness.

The tense of the verb is important. It is in the present tense (continuous action), not the aorist (completed action). The one-point-in-time decision of faith to trust Jesus as Savior, etc. normally would use the aorist tense. The faith/believing that is the condition for salvation (see above) is seen here as an ongoing activity. So this is consistent with the way Paul views salvation (see above). Salvation is a future event which has partially invaded the present -- we are being saved. So it is with faith. It is not simply a one-point-in-time action, but it is the daily living out the life of affirming, trusting, committing, and obeying our Lord Jesus Christ. It should be seen as an orientation of life, a focusing of one's resources to the final attainment of salvation (an "attaining" faith). See Paul's picture in Phil 3:7-21. Other places where Paul has used the present tense verb for believe include Rom 3:22; 4:5, 11, 24; 9:33; 10:4, 10-11; 15:13; 1 Cor 1:21; 14:22; 2 Cor 4:13; Gal 3:22; Eph 1:19; Phil 1:29; 1 Thess 1:7; 2:10, 13. The true believer is committed to live in the present according to the promises of the future .

10. to the Jew first and also to the Greek. Paul will give more details regarding this statement later in the letter. So, we will wait for deeper meanings as we continue our study. However, a few observations should be made here. a. Jew - Greek. Paul has used Gentile-type distinctions [see above] about the "haves" and the "have-nots" (Greek vs. Barbarian, wise vs. foolish). Now he uses a standard Jewish-type distinction, i.e., "Greek" means anyone who is not a Jew. Paul uses "Jew/Greek" in this way often (Rom 2:9-10; 3:9, 29; 9:24; 10:12; 1 Cor 1:22-24; 10;32; 12:13; Gal 2:14-15; 3:28; Col 3:11). b. Greeks as enemies. Over the previous centuries, Greek culture had been seen as the enemy of Judaism, with its attempts to absorb all cultures into its manner of life. So "Greek" not only stands for all Gentiles, it has a negative connotation. To include Greeks in the plan of salvation is like saying it is now being offered to the enemy. There is a sense in which an idea is being reversed. Consider this thinking: "If we allow Gentiles to become Christians, then they will 'become' like us and we [Jews] will lose our distinctiveness." This type of thinking created a tension within the church. c. Equality. Whatever is concluded about the priority of Jews, it must not negate the great truth that all non-Jews are included in the plan of salvation. But the great truth of inclusiveness goes even deeper. There is an essential equality within the body of Christ. "For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus. For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's descendants, heirs according to promise" (Gal 3:26-29). Even within the verse under study (Rom 1:16) one scholar has stated, "The untranslatable Greek particle te implies a fundamental equality between Jews and Greeks" (Edwards). d. Priority in Equality. Paul makes it clear that there is a Jewish priority. Nobody should argue with that. But the puzzling question remains. What is the nature of that priority? 1) Historical Priority. All will agree that there is a historical priority. We cannot deny the existence of the OT and the covenants made there. Paul referred to it early on when he wrote about "the gospel promised" (1:2). He will stress this point again in 3:1-4. See also Acts 2:39. 2) Jesus was a Jew and He came to the Jews. Jesus made it clear that the focus of His ministry was to the "lost sheep of house of Israel" (Mt 15:24; cf. 10:6). He even made the enigmatic statement: "salvation is from the Jews" (Jn 4:22). John declared, "He came to His own, and those who were His own did not receive Him" (John 1:11). See Rom 9:4-5. 3) Paul. Even though Paul's specific ministry was to the Gentiles, he recognized some type of Jewish priority. He said, "It was necessary that the word of God be spoken to you first; since you repudiate it and judge yourselves unworthy of eternal life, behold, we are turning to the Gentiles. For so the Lord has commanded us, 'I have placed You as a light for the

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 16 Gentiles, that You may bring salvation to the end of the earth'" (Acts 13:46-47 cf. :23-29; Is 42:6; 49:6). 4) There appears to be a sense in which the plan of salvation started with the promises made to Abraham and it will not be complete until salvation comes to the nation Israel. He will honor His promises. See Rom 3:1-4; 9:4-5; 11:17-36. 5) Grace. It is also a matter of grace. It was God's intention that Israel would be a "kingdom of priests" to minister to all the world (Exod 19:4-6). Although Israel had never carried out this task, God by His grace, still offered them the chance. And even though the majority of the Jews rejected Jesus as their Messiah, nevertheless, it was Jews (Paul, Peter, John, James, etc.) who were faithful and delivered the gospel to the world (i.e., were the priests).

ROMANS 1:17 For in it {the} righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith; as it is written, "But the righteous {man} shall live by faith" (Hab 2:4). 1. Paul now introduces "righteousness" within the context of faith. He will keep these two important concepts closely tied together in this letter. Does it flow both ways? Is faith necessary to "have" righteousness or to "be" righteous? Is righteousness necessary to "have" faith? 2. For [gar] (missing in the NIV). Some people see this verse as the theme of the book. But this verse cannot stand alone as the theme. Actually, v.16 is the primary verse. This verse helps explain what is said in v.16 as is seen by the use of "for" here. 3. in it. The gospel. 4. righteousness. Righteousness and holiness are two of the most important words in the Bible. It is the differing interpretation of these two words that give rise to most of the theological differences among the various denominations of . The NIDOTT uses 26 pages to explain the OT words used for righteousness and 11 pages for the holiness words. The NIDNTT use 21 pages to explain the NT words used for righteousness and 16 pages for the holiness words. The family of words for righteousness are as follows. a. OT [Hebrew words]: In the Hebrew there is righteous [H6662, tsaddiq, found 205 times], righteous [H6663, tsadeq, tsadoq, 40x]; righteousness [H6664, tsadeq, 119x], [H6665, tsidqah, 1x], and [H6666, tsedaqah, 157x]. b. NT [Greek words]: righteous judgment [G1341, dikaiokrisia, 1x], righteous [G1342, dikaios, 79x], righteousness [G1343, dikaiosune_, 91x], justify [G1344, dikaioo_, 39x], justification [G1345, dikaio_ma, 10x], righteously [G1346, dikaio_s, 5x], justification [G1347, dikaio_sis, 2x].

The difficulty of briefly summarizing the meaning of such an important word is staggering. The problem is even more complex, since the word righteousness is so closely tied to other important words (in addition to holiness). For example, note the parallelism of four great words found in this one passage (Psa 36:5-6). The meaning of each word is impacted by the contribution of the other three (four when holiness is included).

Your lovingkindness [H2617a, hesed], O YHWH, extends to the heavens, Your faithfulness [H530, emunah] {reaches} to the skies. Your righteousness [H6666, tsedaqah] is like the mountains of God [El]; Your judgments [H4941, mishpat] are {like} a great deep. O YHWH, You preserve man and beast.

All of these great words are reasons why YHWH chose to "preserve man and beast" (i.e., His creation) in spite of the ungodliness of humankind (as seen in the previous verses, Psa 36:1-4). More detailed explanation of righteousness will be saved for later.

5. righteousness of God. There are three basic meanings to this phrase. We need not choose among these three options, since they all appear to apply here. a. Righteousness as an attribute of God. God always does what is right. Let's bring in some of the other great words now. God in His love has obligated Himself (lovingkindness) by making promises (covenants, etc.). God is righteous when He remains faithful to these promises, which include both salvation and judgment (wrath). But who decides what is

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 17 "right"? Surely not us and surely not even God, if we mean some arbitrary judgment. The "righteousness of God" means He always does what is consistent with His person, character, commitments, promises, etc. However, when righteousness is paired with holiness, then holiness is a more fundamental attribute of God, and righteousness becomes the activity which springs from . b. Righteousness as an activity of God. God not only does what is right, He makes things right. It seems obvious that "righteousness ... faith" in 1:17 is to be paired with "power ... salvation ... believes" in 1:16. So, although we must not deny the possibility that other facets of righteousness might bear on this phrase, Paul's primary focus here is on the righteousness of God that brings salvation. Righteousness and salvation become virtually synonymous in many places in the Bible (cf. Psa 51:14; 65:5; 71:2, 15; 98:2; Isa 45:8, 21; 46:13; 51:5-8; 62:1-2). But it is equally obvious that "righteousness of God is revealed" in 1:17 must be matched with "the wrath of God is revealed" in 1:18 (especially since "unrighteousness" is used two times in 1:18). c. Righteousness as divine provision. In ways we will attempt to explain later, when God saves people, He provides righteousness to them, changing their relationship with Him. The debate continues about the details. For example, does God declare people righteous or does He make people righteous? Or both?

6. is revealed [G601, apokalupto_]. We get our word "apocalyptic" from this Greek word. The stress of this phrase is that God is in charge. This revelation is not immediately available to everyone. God has made faith a necessary condition for receiving this revealed righteousness. The aorist tense (showing completed action) is not used here. The focus is not on receiving information about righteousness but the experiencing of it. But it does not refer simply to the crisis event of this experiencing (which would use the aorist tense) but in a series of events (which are also revelations) that bring about salvation. In addition it is an eschatological [end- time] righteousness which invades the present. Faith is a necessary condition to receiving this revealed righteousness. This "revealing" cannot be understood until "from faith to faith" is understood. However, before we look at that phrase, it is helpful to look at the OT quotation first.

7. "But the righteous {man} shall live by faith." This statement is taken from Hab 2:4. However, it is very important to realize that Paul did not take it directly from any known manuscript of this Habakkuk text. All the manuscripts have a personal pronoun (his faith, my faith, my righteousness one [cf. Heb 10:38]). It appears that Paul has deliberately left the pronoun out in order to make the passage more ambiguous. Why? So that the passage may be translated more than one way! He wants us to see the richness of this righteousness-faith(fulness) relationship. Here are the possible meanings. It appears that Paul wants us to accept all as being correct. a. The righteous {man} by his faith/faithfulness shall live. b. The righteous out of my [God's] faith/faithfulness shall live. c. My righteous one out of faith/faithfulness shall live (cf. Heb 10:38).

Paul applies the double meaning of the Greek pistis to the relationship of righteousness. It requires both faith and faithfulness. For example, God's faithfulness to His promises must be matched with faithfulness to our commitment to Him as Savior and Lord.

8. shall live (future tense). The future tense here is consistent with the eschatological (end time) flavor given above to the entire plan of salvation. It is a present experiencing of a future salvation.

9. from [Gk. ek] faith to [Gk. eis] faith. Some type of progression is implied here: beginning with faith ("from") and ending with faith ("to"). Following the pattern Paul establishes in his expanding of the quotation from Habakkuk, Paul expects us to see several meanings in this phrase. a. from God's faithfulness to our faith/faithfulness. Here "from" refers to the source. It is God's faithfulness to His promises (in working out a way of salvation) that makes our response of

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 18 faith possible. Looking at Paul's overall focus in his theme (1:16-17), this meaning should have the highest priority. b. from our initial faith to our ongoing faith. This meaning is seen in the NIV: faith from first to last. Here the emphasis is on faith alone (supporting the key statement of the Reformation: sola fide ) as the only human response necessary for salvation. c. from our faith to our faithfulness. Here the dual emphasis is apparent. The justifying faith that begins our journey with God must be followed with a faith that expresses itself in fidelity.

D. REVIEW AND OVERVIEW. What have we learned from 1:1-17? First of all, "The Gospel of God" (1:1; cf. 1:15, 16) is the theme of this book. Paul even makes it a theme of both covenants. The OT is the "Gospel Promised" and the NT is the "Gospel Fulfilled" (1:2, 5). The Lord Jesus Christ is the foundation of this gospel. In fact, He is so foundational to it that it can be called "The Gospel of His Son" (1:9). This Gospel is of [from] God and of [about] His Son. Note that "Son" is the central point (1:3-4) of the chiastic structure which gives the first description of the gospel (1:1-7).

We have also learned that this good news (the gospel) "is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes" (1:16). Therefore, Paul announces his intention to build a "salvation story" structure upon the foundation of the person and work of Jesus Christ our Lord. In developing this salvation story Paul must deal with a secondary theme: "to the Jew first and also to the Greek" (1:16). The secondary theme is in the background of much of this letter. At times it comes into the foreground, but it never replaces the overall theme (gospel). Of course, there are many secondary themes, but these will be introduced later. The gospel has a number of primary elements. Calling these elements "secondary themes" should not be seen as relegating them to "secondary importance" or to a "nice but not necessary" status. Thinking that is merely logical, sequential, or hierarchical loses some of the richness possible in more global thinking.

Using these thoughts, what would be a simple outlining and labeling of the major sections of Paul's development of thought in the "theological" portion of this book? Remembering that there are many ways a book can be outlined, the following is given as simply something to help us see the big picture.

I. OPENING (1:1-17). The "letter" portions (1:1-15 and 15:14 - 16:27) frames the theological treatise within. Paul begins his explanation of the gospel at 1:18. II. PROVIDING AND RECEIVING THE GOSPEL (1:18 - 5:21). A. The Need for the Gospel [Human Unrighteousness] (1:18 - 3:20) B. The Provision of the Gospel [Righteousness by Faith] (3:21 - 4:25) C. The Fundamental Effects of Receiving the Gospel [Peace, Hope, Life, etc.] (ch. 5). III. ENJOYING THE POSSIBILITIES OF THE GOSPEL [BENEFITS AND PRIVILEGES FROM THE GOSPEL] (ch. 6-8) A. The Gospel Frees from Sin (ch. 6) B. The Gospel Frees from Law (ch. 7) C. The Gospel Frees from Death, Through the Spirit (ch. 8) IV. ISRAEL AND THE GOSPEL (ch. 9-11) V. CONDUCT ALIGNED WITH THE GOSPEL [RESPONSIBILITIES FROM THE GOSPEL] (12:1 - 15:13). VI. CLOSING (15:14 - 16:27).

II. PROVIDING AND RECEIVING THE GOSPEL: ROMANS 1:18 - 5:21.

A. THE NEED FOR THE GOSPEL [Human Unrighteousness] (1:18 - 3:20). Paul has introduced twin concepts of righteousness and faith. But before he explains how these two come together to become "the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes" (1:16), he must first show the need for righteousness and faith. So Paul introduces another aspect of the righteousness of God: the wrath of God [judgment].

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 19 Paul uses the strategy of Amos (Amos 1:1 - 2:3) regarding the judgment of God. He starts at a point where his readers will be in full agreement with him: God's judgment on immoral humanity (1:18-32). However, Paul especially wants to show that, with respect to righteousness, there is no difference between Jew and Gentile. He "charged that both Jews and Greeks are all under sin" (3:9) and stated that "There is none righteous, not even one" (3:10; cf Psa 14:1-3). So, he will later move from judgment on "immoral people" in general to judgment on Israel. 1. IMMORAL PEOPLE (1:18-32). The wrath of God is not just end-time judgment. It is being revealed (in actions) right now. Paul blends together human responsibility and God's punishment for sin. He does this with the repetition of two statements. People's free choice resulted in "they exchanged..." [G236, allasso_ and G3337, metallasso_] (1:23, 25, 26) and God "gave them over" [G3860, paradido_mi] (1:24, 26, 28) shows God's punishment. "Gave over" has the idea of surrendering them to the enemy; it even could include the idea of betrayal. In other words, people thought that they could sin against God with impunity. For example, the first sin is probably convincing ourselves that since God gave us free choice, we should be able to do anything we like without paying unexpected consequences. (Sometimes we think we know the consequences and are willing to pay that price.) People are surprised and often see it as a "betrayal" that these consequences are mostly internal, affecting the Mind, Affections, and Will. In this passage Paul shows the effect of sin in all three areas. One way to view these consequences is to see them as a degradation by stages. Truth should be the primary element for guidance in our lives. Therefore the Mind should be in charge, guarding the Heart [Affections] and guiding the Will. In this passage we see the Affections (desire, lust) taking charge of both the Mind and the Will. The foundation statement is "They suppressed the truth in unrighteousness" (1:18). Sin begins with "exchanging the truth of God for a lie" (1:25).

Stage 1: They knew God, but did not honor Him as God or give thanks (1:21). Stage 2: They became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened (1:21). Stage 3: Professing to be wise, they became fools (1:22). The Mind has given up its legitimate function but still claims to be wise (knowing the truth). Stage 4: They value the creation rather than the Creator (1:23). The Affections are beginning to direct the Mind. Stage 5: God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts (1:24). a. They exchanged the truth of God for a lie (1:25). b. They worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator (1:25) The Affections come to the forefront when the Mind forfeits its proper role. Now the Affections are taking control from the Mind. Stage 6: God gave them over to degrading passions (1:26). a. Their natural functions are exchanged for unnatural (1:26). b. They commit indecent acts (1:27). The Affections now take charge of the Will. Stage 7: God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do the things that are not proper (1:28). a. They know the ordinance of God and the penalty of such things (1:32) b. They not only do such things they give hearty approval to those who practice them (1:32). The Mind and Will are not only controlled by the Affections, they are now in full agreement and offer no resistance. The Affections tell the Mind how and what to think and believe.

Before we deal with specific verses, there is one more general aspect that should be mentioned. Paul speaks from a Jewish perspective. In the background of these statements is the Creation and the focus is on the sin of Adam as the representative of the human race. This idea frames the whole section, since Jesus becomes the Second Adam in 5:12-21. Three important points can be drawn from the use of Creation and Adam as the context of Paul's argument. a. Idolatry and Immorality. Paul sees idolatry as the more fundamental sin. It is the basis for the immorality in the world. b. They are without excuse! His invisible attributes, eternal power, and divine nature have been clearly seen. It is evident within them for God made it evident to them (1:19-20). It is not that they did not have knowledge of God. It is that they refuse to acknowledge Him.

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 20 c. Corporate nature. As will be seen in even greater measure when we study the parallel passage (5:12-21), Paul emphasizes the corporate nature of both the sin and the judgment of God. The descriptions given in this passage (1:19-32) are not a listing of the sins of every individual. Instead it shows the effects of sin and the impact of the judgment of God on the human race in general. This is a proper description of the human race. Indeed, everyone should find themselves somewhere in the vice list given in 1:28-32. More on this later.

ROMANS 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 1. For [gar]. The explanation of the gospel continues. It pairs "wrath of God" with "righteousness of God" (1:17, see above). But how can "wrath of God" be good news (gospel)? The most obvious answer is that God cannot be good if He is not also just (maintaining justice, being righteous, etc.). But He is very good, since He will provide a way for people to escape His wrath. So our relationship with Him can be one of mercy and grace. We must accept the truth that, although wrath and mercy are two aspects of God's righteousness, these are not equal aspects of His nature. God is love, and this love makes His wrath a "strange" and "alien" task. "... to do His task, His unusual [H2114a, zur: strange] task, and to work His work, His extraordinary [H5237, nokri: alien] work" (Isa 28:21b). Wrath is not what He wants to do, it is what He must do. God is holy! However, this explanation is not complete, since its focus is on end-time wrath of God. 2. is revealed. This brings us back to the present. The wrath of God is not just revealed as something to comprehend; it is being revealed as an action. That is, God's wrath is an ever- present reality -- actions being demonstrated and seen. 3. from heaven. This additional remark is important, since it shows that the ongoing revelation of God's wrath is not simply allowing people to experience the "cause and effect" consequences of their sin. He is actively affecting these consequences. 4. all ungodliness [G763, asebeia]. The negative of sebo_mai, sebo_ [G4576, to worship]. It basically describes people who do not allow God to be God in their lives. They do not worship Him. 5. unrighteousness [G93, adikia]. The negative of dike_ [1349, right]. Compare the Greek words for "righteousness" given in 1:17 above. Its fundamental meaning is not being right (in relationships, etc.), i.e., immoral. 6. suppress the truth. As shown above, the foundational sin involves suppressing truth. As seen in James 1:12-18, desire in itself is not sin. Desire gives birth to sin by getting the Affections to see value in it and getting the Mind to accept the "thing" desired as more important than it really is, i.e., suppress the truth. 7. in unrighteousness. This desire, when raised to this new level of importance, will now violate what is right, and relationships will be damaged.

ROMANS 1:19 because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. ROMANS 1:20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. 1. because [G1360, dioti, from G3754, hoti] not "for" [gar]. Paul clearly intends to give the reasons for the wrath of God being activated (see "For" [gar] in 1:20). But this word probably is intended to tie God and "evident" together. 2. That which is known [G1110, gno_stos] about God. Although it is interesting to speculate about the content of "that which is known", it is better to realize that we neither understand how God operates nor the specific nature of this knowledge. 3. is evident [G5318, phaneros: visible] within them. God has made Himself known to everyone! This reality comes from deep within their consciousness. It is as real as their own existence! 4. For God made it evident to them [G5319, phaneroo_]. Now we see the dynamic nature of this action. God has not just left us clues to His existence in His creation (see verse 20); God is actively revealing Himself directly to each and every person!

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 21 5. clearly seen [G2529, kathorao_]. Found only here in the NT, but its root horao_ [G3708, to see] is found often. 6. being understood [G3539, noeo_: perceive, think]. The truth of God (not just the truth about God) becomes part of the way we think. However, it is vital that we grasp the truth that we are not left on our own to interpret the evidence provided by creation. God is the Interpreter! It is impossible for us not to "get" it. God is the only Teacher who can make certain every student understands. If we 't want to understand this truth, then it must be suppressed! 7. invisible [G517, aoratos: "not visible"] The negative of horatos [G3707, visible] (see "clearly seen" above). The "not visible" is "clearly visible" -- a deliberate oxymoron by Paul. We see what we cannot see. As I said above, we cannot understand how God does this. In fact, only He could do such a thing, and He has deep and profound reasons for the way He does it. For example, the way God is both hidden and revealed is fundamental (a) to free choice, (b) to faith, hope, and love as the most important qualities of relationship, as well as (c) being necessary to the rules of engagement in spiritual warfare. 8. so that they are without excuse [G379, anapologe_tos: inexcusable]. Only here and 2:1. A vital and concluding remark. The irony, of course, is that the very nature of this revelation (with its hidden, but revealed aspects) makes it very easy to come up with excuses. Note, for example, all the excuses and surprises at the return of Christ pictured in Matthew 25. 9. His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature. We could have spent time explaining these aspects of this basic revelation, but it is not necessary that we understand them. We need only understand that reflecting on creation gives us sufficient insight into God's nature to make us realize that we are accountable for our actions. This basic revelation does not provide us with the plan of salvation. That came about by God's greater and special revelation (Bible, Jesus, etc.). However, the greater revelation is available to those who respond properly to the basic revelation. God will be found by those who seek Him with their whole heart (Jer 29:13; Deut 4:29). Paul probably shows the limited aspect of this basic revelation by choosing unusual words here. He used aidios [G126, only here and Jude 1:6] instead of the usual aio_nios [G166] for "eternal", and he used theiote_s [G2305, only here] instead of the stronger word theote_s [G2320] for "divine nature" (cf. Col 2:9). 10. what has been made [G4161, poie_ma]. Found only here and Eph 2:10. The evidence for God is overwhelming for those willing to see "what has been made" (i.e., the universe without and within). The great diversity and complexity of the creation is truly awesome! Of course, as mentioned above, God allows for the possibility of other interpretations of the data for those wanting other explanations.

ROMANS 1:21 For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 1. knew [G1097, gino_sko_]. They knew God. Paul makes a major point here. This knowing of God is more than arriving at some cognitive level of understanding (knowing ABOUT God). It is knowing Him by experience. God made Himself known. They really knew Him once! 2. they did not honor Him as God. This is the first of two fundamental obligations all of creation has towards God. He is the Creator, we are the creatures. This obligation is expressed so well in the Psalms. Here are two examples. "The heavens are telling of the glory of God; and their expanse is declaring the work of His hands. Day to day pours forth speech, and night to night reveals knowledge" (Psalm 19:1-2). "O YHWH, our Lord [Adonai], how majestic is Your name in all the earth, who have displayed Your splendor above the heavens!" (Psalm 8:1). It is important that we see the connection with the previous verses regarding knowing God. The truth of God impacts the Mind. The Mind guides the Will to choose God as God and guards the Affection so that nothing is of greater value than He is. Being finite creatures, we are inclined to honor (as God) someone or something "bigger" than ourselves. If the Most High God does not occupy this position, then we will find a substitute. But He only is worthy of our full allegiance, worship, honor, etc. 3. Honor [G1392, doxazo_: glorify]. Glory [H3519b, kobad] and its derivatives [e.g., H3513, kabed: glorify] are found often in the OT and more than 20 times in Romans. It is a major theme of this book. One of the reasons translators use "honor" instead of "glorify" is the mistake sometimes made that pictures God without glory until we give it to Him. In reality, to glorify

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 22 God is to give praise for the One who possesses glory. In some way difficult to understand, and even more difficult to explain, God's glory (splendor, , beauty, "heaviness") is an expression of who He is. The glory of God is the awesome radiance of God that should cause us to fall on our face in worship. "Ascribe to YHWH the glory due His name; bring an offering, and come before Him; worship YHWH in holy array [or in the splendor of holiness]" (1 Chr 16:29). This is not sending God a Christmas card every year. It is allowing Him to make us holy, every aspect of our being set apart for worship and service to Him ("in the splendor of holiness"). 4. Give thanks. Here is the second fundamental obligation we have towards God. This obligation can only be expressed fully by those who have free will (angels, humans, etc.). Again, the Psalms "say it" so well. Read them to get help on how to meet these two fundamental obligations. Psalm 8 is great for the first one (honor) and Psalm 9 is good for the second one. "I will give thanks to YHWH with all my heart; I will tell of all Your wonders. I will be glad and exult in You; I will sing praise to Your name, O Most High" (Psa 9:1-2). "But YHWH abides forever; He has established His throne for judgment, and He will judge the world in righteousness; He will execute judgment for the peoples with equity. YHWH also will be a stronghold for the oppressed, a stronghold in times of trouble; and those who know Your name will put their trust in You, for You, O YHWH, have not forsaken those who seek You. Sing praises to YHWH, who dwells in ; declare among the peoples His deeds" (Psa 9:7-11). Check out 1 Chr 16:8-36. It is a great Psalm of Thanksgiving (16:29 is quoted above). "O give thanks to YHWH, for {He is} good; for His lovingkindness is everlasting. Then say, 'Save us, O God of our salvation, and gather us and deliver us from the nations, to give thanks to Your holy name, and glory in Your praise'" (1 Chr 16:34-35). 5. but [dioto] they became futile in their speculations a. futile [G3154, mataioo_] from mataios [vain, empty]. Only here, but mataiote_s [G3154] is found in Rom 8:20; Eph 4:17; 2 Pet 2:18 and mate_n [G3155] is found in Mt 15:9; Mk 7:7. Loss of truth brings emptiness to life. The person is losing touch with reality. Life is now vain, without meaning. b. speculations [G1261, dialogismos: thoughts, opinions, reasoning]. Almost always used in a negative sense. The person has emptiness but not loss of busyness! Without a clear focus on truth, the mind searches relentlessly for other options. 6. and their foolish heart was darkened. a. heart [G2588, kardia]. The biblical meaning of "heart" is very different from our modern usage. Today it refers to our affections, values, etc. But in the Bible it refers to the inner life (including affections, mind, will, spirit). b. foolish [G801, asunetos: without understanding]. The negative ["a-"] of suntetos [G4908, understanding]. Someone has translated this as un-understanding. This is not the usual word for foolish; it will be used in the next verse. Here the focus is on a person who is does not understand. c. darkened [G4654, skotizo_: darkened]. We have more than a cause and effect relationship being described. God darkens the foolish heart, but not by depriving us of something that belongs to us. It happens by the removal of His immediate presence. "God is Light and in Him there is no darkness" (1 Jn 1:5). When God withdraws into the background of our lives, we are left with shadows. Fundamental to the sin of Eve and Adam was the assumption that they could understand truth on their own. This error has become an almost "universal truth" for the arrogant human race. Remember that more than the mind is affected. Every aspect of the inner life of the person has been darkened (spirit, affections, etc.).

ROMANS 1:22 Professing to be wise, they became fools, ROMANS 1:23 and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and crawling creatures. 1. Professing to be wise. Remember that wisdom in the Bible does not refer primarily to intelligence. Wisdom is more related to the way knowledge is applied to life situations. Wise people are those who make good choices in life (e.g., maintain a proper balance between the immediate and long term). They know how to live well. The sad truth is that, as a result of the darkening, they really believe that they are wise. Even their attempts at an honest evaluation of themselves misses the mark.

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 23 2. they became fools. Paul now uses the more common word for fools, foolish [G3474, mo_ros, and G3471, mo_raino_]. Our word "moron" comes from these Greek words. In the biblical meaning, a fool is not only a person who makes poor choices in life, they also make wrong moral choices. We have an English word that is quite fitting here (sophomore). It combines these two Greek words. People have become sophomoric (lit. "wise fools"). 3. exchanged. Paul now introduces three statements using "they exchanged..." [G236, allasso_ and G3337, metallasso_] (1:23, 25, 26) and God "gave them over" [G3860, paradido_mi] (1:24, 26, 28). We must keep in mind that Paul is not describing choices made by everyone; this is a corporate look at humanity. He is giving us an example of poor choices made by the darkened heart. Since humans were created to glorify the Creator, they have an almost universal need to worship. Even those who resist this need for worship, often are worshiping something without realizing it. We appear to have a need to recognize a power greater than ourselves. These more subtle people find a power that they can honor without giving allegiance. They want to worship without "changing clothes" (refusing the demand for holiness, maintaining their own as they worship). Their god might be such things as humanism, tolerance, service, human dignity. 4. glory vs. image/form. This is the first of two sets of contrasting ideas given in this verse. a. glory. How is it possible that people would "trade" the intrinsic splendor, beauty, majesty, heaviness (!), consuming fire, etc. of God for anything else? Who, what could compare with Him! (See above for more on glory .) b. image [G1504, eiko_n], form [G3667, homoio_ma: likeness]. (We get our word icon from eiko_n .) Instead of one contrasting word, Paul uses two similar words for emphasis. The basic idea is to show how senseless it is to worship an image [copy] instead of the Original. But Paul goes further. He wants us to realize that we are worshiping a copy of a copy. Humans were made in the image of God. To worship the image/likeness of a human is to be far removed from worshiping God. But it gets even worse. They degrade into the worship of creatures not made in the image of God. Even here there are steps downward. From birds (up in the sky), to four-footed creatures (who walk around), to crawling creatures. "They made a calf in Horeb and worshiped a molten image. Thus they exchanged their glory for the image of an ox that eats grass" (Psa 106:19-20; cf. Jer 2:11; Isa 44:9-20). 5. Incorruptible [G862a, aphthartos], corruptible [G5349, phthartos] are the other contrasting pair of terms. We sometimes associate these terms with good and evil, but that is not the point here. The basic meaning of corruptible is failure to retain its original form. It includes the idea of things that perish. One of the most characteristic features of creation is change . Whereas the Creator is unchanging, the creation changes over time. James writes about "rotted" riches, moth- eaten garments, and even the "rusting" of gold and silver (James 5:2-3; cf. Mt 6:19-20). 6. OT Background. With references to images and to "birds and four-footed animals and crawling creatures", Paul is using Genesis 1-3 as a background for these remarks. Instead of worshiping God, humans chose to seek knowledge by eating the fruit of the tree, to build a tower of Babel (Gen 11), and to form and worship a golden calf (Ex 32; Dt 4:15-19). They chose to focus on the creation rather than the Creator. Idolatry. It is not necessary to actually make physical objects (idols) for worship. Anything that replaces God as the central focus of our lives is an idol. But the most fundamental sin of idolatry is the effort to have a god that can be managed. Sinful humanity [Adam] wants to be in charge of self and to control as much as possible of everyone and everything. The basic issue is sovereignty. All forms of idolatry are expressions of self- exaltation (worship).

ROMANS 1:24 Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them. 1. Therefore. As a result of the choice of the human race to suppress the truth, not to honor God or give thanks, etc. 2. God "gave them over" [G3860, paradido_mi] (1:24, 26, 28). This is the first of three parallel statements. See above for some of the meaning of this Greek word. The focus now is on the expression and results of God's wrath, not on the reason for it. What is seen here is more than God removing Himself (being passive); He now takes deliberate action. Since people did not want God to be Lord of their lives, He resigns direct control. But He never stops being God,

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 24 even when Eve and Adam took control of their lives. But this "giving over" goes beyond this. It was intended that we live in a faith/faithfulness relationship with God.

MIND HEART WILL

Domain Cognitive Affective Volitional

Basic Function Thinking Being Doing

Basic Focus: God Truth Good Right

Elements of Faith Affirming Trusting Obeying

Faith in Jesus Christ Jesus Lord "Anointed" "Savior" "Lord"

Faithfulness Glorify God Give Thanks Serve God (Rom 1:21) (Rom 1:21,25) (Rom 1:25) Truth Worship

Wrong Focus: Self Prestige Pleasure Power

Wrong Need: Self Success Sensual Security

God's expectation that we be faithful to Him did not obligate Him to explain to us all the consequences of unfaithfulness. Indeed we are incapable of understanding these consequences unless we either (a) experience them, or (b) come to the knowledge of them as a result of years of faithfulness. This is the exact situation for Eve and Adam in the Garden of Eden. There is a deep irony here. When we choose unfaithfulness, we experience the consequences, but we can no longer understand them. The "un-understanding heart" (1:21) has been darkened by God's removal of Himself from the forefront of human awareness to the background. We can only understand correctly when we are in direct connection with Truth (which requires the immediate presence of God in our lives). There is an even deeper irony. We can take control of our lives away from God (because He allows us to), but we cannot maintain control of our lives. We were created to be under authority. As much as we may wish it to be so, "I am the master of my fate, I am the captain of my soul" (from the poem Invictus by William Ernest Henley) cannot be true. God is actually giving control of our lives over to the enemy of our soul ("the serpent of old who is called the devil and Satan, who deceives the whole world" [Rev 12:9; 20:2]). The third irony is that the Deceiver deceives these unfaithful ones into believing that they are in control of their lives. Because of the corporate turning from God by the human race, God has given the direct rule to Satan (John 12:31; 14:30; 16:11; 2 Cor 4:4; Eph 2:2; 6:12; 1 Jn 4:4; 5:19). Satan has learned the importance of remaining hidden from us as much as possible. He would prefer that we don't even believe that he exists -- too much visibility and he will chase us back to God! For references of being "handed over" to Satan, see 1 Cor 5:5; 1 Tim 1:20; :42. Here is the great human tragedy! We have been handed over to a power totally alien to God: a power that frustrates the reception of the good God intends for us, and a power of deception so great that the very revelation of God is confused. So God has deliberately obscured the truth from those who do not want it. The Affections begin to take leadership from the Mind. These people have not totally lost moral direction for their lives (see 1:30), but it has been compromised, darkened, etc. As you ponder what God is doing here, please realize that nothing He has done is inconsistent with His love of us. He never stops loving us. And His ultimate purpose is that we return His love, not that He controls us. 3. lusts [G1939, epithumia: desire]. This word primarily refers to desires, and these desires need not be evil. The good sense is shown in Lk 22:15; Phil 1:23; 1 Thess 2:17. But desires that are not guarded by the Mind become focused on the wrong objects (cf. Rom 6:12; 7:7-8; 13:14; Gal

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 25 5:16, 24; Col 3:5; 1 Thes 4:5; Eph 2:3; 4:22). Desires becomes lusts when they are out of control -- taking on an importance that they should not have. 4. impurity [G167, akatharsia: uncleanness]. The negative of kathairo_ [G2508, to cleanse]. Found 10 times in the NT (Mt 23:27; Rom 1:24; 6:19; 2 Cor 12:21; Gal 5:19; Eph 4:19; 5:3; Col 3:5; 1 Thess 2:3; 4:7). A companion word [G169, akathartos: unclean] is found ca. 31 times. It originally was used in the Bible for ritual uncleanness but came to mean moral uncleanness. The heart becomes unclean. It's motives and values need to be cleansed. 5. hearts [G2588, kardia]. See on 1:21. 6. bodies [G4983, so_ma]. Soma is the word most commonly used [142x] for body in the usual sense of the word. Another word [G4561, sarx] appears as often [147x] but usually in a deeper theological sense. It is often translated flesh in the NASB. 7. dishonored [G818, atimazo_]. There is nothing inherently evil about the body, as seen by Paul's choice of soma, not sarx. The body becomes dishonored when it fails to fulfill its designated role in the creation, e.g., when it is used in an attempt to satisfy these increased desires (lusts) of the heart (inner person). The inner person (spirit, mind, affections, etc.) that has lost its focus in God will focus elsewhere. The body is usually a major part of this new focus. 8. Among themselves. Our bodies are the primary way that we relate to each other (seeing, listening, speaking, tasting, smelling, feeling, etc.). Some see Paul thinking of the "dishonoring" as something sexual. And he certainly is moving in that direction. But before we get there, we need to recognize a wider "dishonoring" in relationships. His major topic for this whole section (1:18 - 3:20) is righteousness. Unrighteousness is basically failing in relationships. Our bodies, the primary vehicle for relationship, fail to fulfill their proper role. Humans should be others- oriented (outward); instead they have become self-oriented (inward). See Phil 2:3.

ROMANS 1:25 For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen. 1. Structure. Before we go on, let's stop for a moment and look at the genius of Paul in regard to structure. This passage (1:18-32) clearly shows a linear, sequential progression of thought. Paul is the prosecutor in the courtroom presenting his case against the defendant. However, the passage also has a very Jewish way of organizing thoughts. This verse (1:25) is the center of a chiastic structure! (Note, for example, the benediction: "who is blessed forever. Amen.) The structure is framed by the concept of knowing : "known about God" (1:19), "know the ordinance of God" (1:32). Here is the possible pattern.

A. The MIND suppresses the truth of God (1:18-22). B. The WILL rejects God: exchanges incorruptible for corruptible (1:23). C. AFFECTIONS: God gives them over to lusts of heart to impurity (1:24). D. MIND exchanges truth for the Lie. WILL serves the creature rather than the Creator (1:25). Benediction. C' AFFECTIONS: God gives them over to degrading passions, etc. (1:26-27). B' The WILL rejects God: Did not see fit to acknowledge God (1:28a) A' God gives them over to a depraved MIND (1:28b-32).

2. Key points. This center summarizes the key points: exchanged, truth of God, worshiped and served, creature [creation], Creator. 3. exchanged [G3337, metallasso_]. Only here and 1:26 (allasso_ [G236] is used in 1:23). The meta- prefix is added for emphasis ("totally" exchanged). One of the points made here is that we cannot have both the Truth and the Lie; we can only exchange one for the other. 4. The truth of God. There is a three-fold meaning here: (a) truths about God, (b) truth that God is, and (c) God is Truth. All three meanings are included in what God has revealed to humanity. The fundamental idea is that God Himself reveals Himself. For example, He is both True and the Truth. 5. Truth [G225, ale_theia]. The negative of le_tho_ (to escape notice). Paul is probably thinking of the Hebrew word for truth [H571, emeth: firmness, faithfulness, truth], which has the double meaning (true, truth). This double meaning of truth is interwoven in this passage with the double

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 26 meaning of faith (faith/faithfulness). God is faithful (reliable, trustworthy) to us, even when we are unfaithful to Him. 6. The Truth and the Lie. "A lie" should be translated "the Lie" [to_i pseudei] since Paul wants to focus on one contrast: Creator and creation. In this context "the Lie" becomes the lie the serpent suggested to Eve, that if she would choose independence from God, she would become like God (Gen 3:5). The contrasting truth, then, is that the Creator is God and that only God can be God. (Of course, Satan, in his shrewdness told a half-truth, not a bold-face lie. We can be like God in a limited sense.) However, the paradox is that we have our greatest freedom when we chose Jesus as our Lord. To chose otherwise is to enter into a more dependent relationship. And the irony is that we have then chosen a dependence upon that which is not dependable! It is a dependence on things and a dependence on self. For a sobering statement about truth and deception, see 2 Thess 2:10-12. 7. Worshiped [G4573, sebazomai]. Found only here. A rare word. But the verb sebo_ [G4576] is found 10 times. Perhaps Paul chose this word rather than the more common one [G4352, proskuneo_] because a Greek title for the emperors was [G4575: "the worshiped one"]; the equivalent is [august, reverend]. The demand from the Roman emperors that they be worshiped becomes an excellent case study in this loss of focus on the Creator. It is not just that they were worshiping the wrong thing. The greater deception is to believe that people, on their own, can decide who is God and how He will be worshiped. The only alternative to God is a counterfeit. How utterly ridiculous it is that we can convince ourselves that we can "create the Creator" and represent God by any form we choose. Such people are not just liars, they are the Lie (C.S. Lewis). 8. Served [G3000, latreuo_: a hired servant, 22x]. Although this family of words have a limited use in the NT [G2999, latreia: service (5x); G3008, leitourgeo_: religious service (2x); G3009, leitourgia: service (6x); G3010, leitourgikos: serving (1x); G3011, leitourgos: servant (5x)] it is not the one most commonly used [G1247, diakoneo_: to serve (38x); G1248, diakonia: service (34x); G1249, diakonos: servant (29x)]. Paul has followed a consistent pattern. He continues to avoid the most common terms used in our relationship with God. (See "eternal" and "divine" in 1:20 along with "worship" and "serve" here.) Therefore when he applies these terms to misguided relationships he is implying that these are "less than" relationships. By the way, the word "service" here completes the triad in the chart above (Glorify God, Give Thanks, Serve God). 9. the creature rather than the Creator. When we stop and think about it, these are the only two choices: Creator or created. If we choose not to honor, worship, and serve the Creator, then we will honor, worship, and serve the created. These expressions will take many forms and be directed in a wide array of "objects" (idols, ideas, people, self, etc.).

We need to stop and get a perspective here. This wrong form of worship is part of the wrath of God being revealed (1:18). This wrath has all the appearances of being a "mild" displeasure. How can Paul make me view it as something very bad indeed? Many scholars have tried to help Paul here by describing the state of humanity in this situation as being less than human. In fact they speak of humans as becoming animals/beasts, and sometimes as even less than beasts. And, of course, awesome horrors can be cited in support of such a picture. But these are not the whole story. Our friends and neighbors who make no claims regarding worshiping the Creator are very much like us. Some of them have very high morals and exhibit desirable traits (compassion, etc.).

In fact, I would propose an idea that surely must be controversial: People "freed" from God become more creative. As a possible support of this idea, consider the remarks about creativity in the family of Cain, who "went out from the presence of YHWH" (Gen 4:16-22) and in the builders of the Tower of Babel (Gen 11:3-6). Such creativity may greatly benefit humanity. I see some principles at work here -- as a result from God being a loving Parent. a) God had made this universe for us to enjoy. If all we want is the created and not the Creator, then He will allow us to enjoy the created in this brief period we have (usually less than 120 years).

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 27 b) We are wonderfully made and God has given us great abilities. If we want to use these abilities to try to make it on our own (both individually and as a society), He will let us try. Of course, history has shown that, up to this point, we haven't made it. In fact, many people have become cynical about the possibility of success. c) Our Father wants us to grow up and take on greater responsibilities. But this requires self- discipline. Worship is an excellent example of this. Jesus said, "But an hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth; for such people the Father seeks to be His worshipers. God is spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth" (John 4:23-24). Many sincere worshipers of God enjoy so much the worshiping of God with their bodies (singing, clapping, feeling, hearing, etc.) that they never develop spiritual worship. After all, as we said above, God made our bodies as the chief means of interacting with others. But later, Paul will tell us that the body must be a living sacrifice, not conformed to this world (Rom 12:1-3). It is so much easier to keep our lives focused in the physical aspect that we seldom really "touch" God. He wants spirit to interact with Spirit. 10. who is blessed forever. Amen. Benedictions were an integral part of Jewish life (Gen 9:26; 14:20; 1 Sam 25:32; 2 Sam 18:28; 1 Kgs 1:48; 8:15; 2 Chr 2:12; Psa 41:13; Lk 1:68; 2 Cor 1:3; Eph 1:3; 1 Pet 1:3). Paul uses this benediction as a means to clarify his position. It is almost as if he had become "unclean" by mentioning worshiping the created. The One who is blessed forever is the only one worthy of worship and service. "Amen" ("Let it be so") is his pledge of allegiance to this truth.

ROMANS 1:26 For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, ROMANS 1:27 and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error. 1. Homosexuality. It is difficult to address this topic since it has become such an emotional issue in our society today. The impression I get is that very few people are open to honest discussion on this topic. Decisions have already been made. Although I must not avoid this topic, I am clearly not qualified to write extensively on it -- nor do I want to. 2. Keeping a proper perspective. Many in the Church today have blown this topic way out of proportion. It is rarely mentioned in the Bible. a. Two OT verses. The primary OT reference is found in only one verse (18:22) out of 30 verses in Lev 18 regarding sexual relationships that defile the land. It shows up once more (20:13) in the sister passage in Lev 20:10-21. These purity laws include such items as not committing adultery, not marrying two sisters, not having sexual intercourse when a woman is menstruating, etc. b. Sodom (Gen 19:5-7). The general perception is that Sodom was destroyed because of homosexuality. (The word sodomy is derived from the name of this city.) It is certainly true that Sodom became a reference point (a metaphor, a type) in the Bible for God's judgment on sin. But which sins? The sins of apostasy and licentious idolatry (Dt 23:17; 1 Kgs 14:24; 15:12; 22:46; 2 Kgs 23:7). The description of Sodom in Gen 13:13 makes no mention of sexual sins. Sodom provides a picture of end-time judgment (with no mention of homosexuality) in Lk 17:29 and Rom 9:29 (cf. Isa 1:9; 3:9; Lam 4:6; Ezek 16). However, Jude is an exception. That book associates Sodom with "gross immorality and going after strange flesh" (1:7). Consider 2 Pet 2:6-8 also where "sexual conduct of unprincipled men" is mentioned. c. The use of male cult prostitutes is condemned (Deut 23:17-18; 1 Kgs 14:24; 15:12; 2 Kgs 23:7). d. Jesus never mentions homosexuality. His only references to Sodom is when He says that it will be easier on Sodom than on His hearers when they do not accept God's messengers and ignore His miracles (Mt 10:15 = Lk 10:12; Lk 11:23-24). e. NT vice lists. Of the many "vice lists" in the NT, homosexuality [G733a, arsenokoite_s] appears in only two places in the NT (1 Cor 6:9-11 [missing in 5:10-11]; 1 Tim 1:8-11). For example, examine the important lists in Mk 7:20-23 [Mt 15:19]; Gal 5:19-21. It is not

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 28 mentioned. Why does Paul leave it off the vice list he gives in the verses immediately following (1:29-31)? 3. Heed the warning in :1. The warning in 2:1 is not just a warning to moral people against a judgmental attitude; it is a declaration that they are practicing the vices listed in the previous chapter. Paul does not, of course, mean that they are doing everything listed in chapter 1. But he does mean that they are guilty of some of these vices and that their attitudes and actions, such as their stubborn and unrepentant heart (2:5), are just as bad or worse. 4. A perplexing question. If, as we have claimed, homosexuality is of little interest to almost all of the NT, why does Paul use it here as a specific example? Paul certainly did not choose it because it was so awful that it brought God's wrath. On the contrary, it is being presented as an expression of that wrath. Paul is saying that it is not the reason for the wrath but the consequence of it. Clearly the expression "God gave them over..." supports this idea. It is clear to me that Paul would condemn the church today for its treatment of homosexuals (read 1 Cor 5:9-13). We will deal more with our perplexing question later. 5. Creation. Paul has been viewing these things from the perspective of creation. The choice of Eve and Adam has brought creation to futility. "For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it" (Rom 8:20, read 8:19-23). Futile [G3154, mataioo_] at 1:21 (see there) and futility [G3153, mataiote_s] at 8:20 refer to the emptiness and vanity creation experiences without the immediate presence of the Creator. Corruption (1:23; 8:21) is another word Paul uses to describe this situation. (Creation has not retained its original form or purpose.) What does humanity experience as a result of this corruption and futility? Many things. But let me mention an obvious result: sickness and disease. Jesus made it clear that the man was not born blind because of his own personal sin (John 9:1-4). Blindness, sickness, disease, etc. all come about from God "giving creation over" to corruption and futility. But not everyone is born blind. Not everyone is sick or is suffering from some disease. But humanity is corporately experiencing these results. The Bible gives us two excellent pictures of a temporary reversal of these effects. The first comes from the story of Israel. "YHWH will remove from you all sickness; and He will not put on you any of the harmful diseases of Egypt which you have known" (Deut 7:15; cf. 28:60; 29:22). "Your clothing did not wear out on you, nor did your foot swell these forty years" (Deut 8:4; cf. 29:5-6; Psa 103:3). Note the conditions for these blessings. "If you will give earnest heed to the voice of YHWH your God, and do what is right in His sight, and give ear to His commandments, and keep all His statutes, I will put none of the diseases on you which I have put on the Egyptians; for I, YHWH, am your healer" (Exod 15:26). The second example is the ministry of Jesus. He came "healing every kind of disease and every kind of sickness among the people" (Mt 4:23-24; cf. Mt 8:16). 6. Another misconception. Before we return to the actual text, I want to clear up one more misconception. People have said that Paul wrote from the perspective of an ancient society that was intolerant of homosexuality. However, the actual facts are that the Roman society of Paul's day was very tolerant of homosexual acts. Studies have shown that fully two-thirds of the people affirmed homosexuality as an acceptable lifestyle. And this was true of most primitive and ancient cultures. 7. For this reason. Paul is referring back to the previous verse where he repeats the fundamental cause for the effect that follows. Corporate Humanity has "suppressed the truth in unrighteousness" (1:18) and "exchanged the truth of God for the lie" (1:25). In so doing they have changed the focus of their lives from the Creator to the created. 8. God gave them over. This is the second of three times Paul uses this phrase (1:24, 26, 28). 9. degrading [G819, atimia: dishonor]. This word has the same root as the word translated "dishonored" in 1:24, supporting the idea that the passage has a chiastic structure and thus this verse (1:26) is to be paired with 1:24 (see there for comments). However it does not follow that this passage is merely a repeat of 1:24. Instead, as is usual in these structures, the paired section/verse extends beyond the initial section/verse. Perhaps this is why the NASB translators decided to use "degrading" instead. It is getting worse. 10. passions [G3806, pathos]. Found only three times in NT (Col 3:5; 1 Thess 4:5), but it is part of a family of words derived from pascho_ [G3958, to suffer] and suffering is most often the meaning of these terms in the NT. For example, Easter Week is something called Passion Week, meaning the week of Christ's suffering. Although this Greek word [pathos] has developed into a different

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 29 meaning, the idea of suffering is still in the background. Paul used desires [lusts] in 1:24, but chose to use "passions" here, since it has the sense of something deeper within us. Passions brings in a passive aspect; it is the way we are. The passions are impulses within us that we do not consciously produce. We are stuck with them. Since they can so easily get out of control, we must deal (i.e, suffer) with them. 11. natural [G5446, phusikos, 3x]. Found only here (1:26, 27) and 2 Peter 2:12. Phusiko_s [G5447: naturally] is found only in Jude 1:10. Paul's unique background of Jewish birth and Greek education serves him well here. Instead of simply thinking of a violation of the created order (Jewish), his choice of language here appeals to the Greek mind. To the Greek mind, "natural" means "to live in harmony with the natural order and its divine rationality" (Dunn). 12. unnatural [two words, para phusin: against nature, G3844, G5449]. Phusis [G5549: nature] is found 14 times in the NT (Rom 1:26 [unnatural], 2:14, 27; 11:21, 24, 24, 24; 1 Cor 11:14; Gal 2:15; 4:8; Eph 2:3; James 3:7, 7; 2 Pet 1:4). 13. women/woman, men. Actually Paul uses female [G2338, the_lus] and male [G733b, arse_n] instead. Both terms are rarely used in the NT. These terms are found together here (three times each) and in Mt 19:4; Mk 10:6; Gal 3:28. Female is found nowhere else; male is found also at Lk 2:23; Rev 12:5, 13. Why does Paul use these terms? Probably for several reasons. One is that female [the_lus] is from a root [the_-] meaning to suckle/nurse. Another reason, perhaps, is that homosexuality [G733a, arsenokoite_s] literally means "male bed" [G2845, koite_: bed which is from G27649, keimai: to be laid] ("male lying with male"). However, it is more likely that the main reason for this choice is that the "natural" roles (in harmony with nature) of men and women are quite complex and controversial (e.g., hunter/homemaker). Using the terms "male" and "female" emphasizes the most basic role: reproduction. Perhaps the most basic and consistent role played throughout all of nature (both plants and animals) is reproduction (the continuation of the species). 14. exchanged. Here is the third of three times Paul uses this phrase (1:23, 25, 26). They exchanged "the glory of the incorruptible" for "the form of the corruptible" (1:23) and the truth for the lie (1:15). Now they exchange the natural for that which is against nature. 15. function [G5540, chre_sis: use]. Found only here, from a primary word [G5534, chre_: necessary, fitting]. A good choice of a word to go along with the idea of "living in harmony with natural order and its divine rationality" (Dunn). Reproduction is the necessary and fitting role for females and males. But note that both times "function" is used as it applied to females, which offers some support to the position taken in the next point (#16). 16. Ladies first! Why does Paul choose women first? Some think it is for the crescendo effect (a building from a minor issue to a major one). One possible reason is that society was on his side. To criticize male homosexuality was to buck popular opinion, but lesbians were frowned upon. However I believe that he is addressing the more unnatural function. The key idea again is harmony with nature. The female has the more fundamental role in reproduction (carrying the child, nursing the new born, etc.). Interestingly, the text actually reads "for even their women exchanged" (the "even" is left out of some translations, but is in the NIV). This provides some support to this being the most unnatural, but the issue is probably not worthy of debate. 17. Males. Paul next addresses the male situation. a. in the same way. Now Paul "takes on the establishment" by equating these actions by both female and male as being against nature. b. abandoned the natural. Humanity has not only abandoned the Creator, they have lost the focus of the creation. The Bible clearly sees the heterosexual act in marriage as blessed of God (cf. 1 Cor 7:1-7; Heb 13:4; 1 Tim 4:3-5). It is central to the orderliness of the creation (Gen 1:26-28; 2:22-24). c. burned [G1572, ekkaio_]. Found only here. It is not the same word used for burn [G4448, puroo_] in 1 Cor 7:9, and this burning should not be equated with the natural intensity of sexual desire found in marriage. d. desire [G3715, orexis]. Found only here. A related word [G3713, orego_] is found three times. Why does Paul not use the word for desire [G1939, epithumia] he used in 1:24 ["lusts"]? There desire was mostly a response of the Affections. This Greek family of words adds the feature of striving . The Will now supports the Affections. The "passions" that so

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 30 desperately need to be under the control of the Mind and Will are not only given freedom, they are now given full support. e. committing indecent acts [G808, asche_mosune_]. Found only twice in the NT, but used in the Greek version of the OT [LXX] in the Leviticus chapters (18, 20) on sexual conduct (mentioned above). f. receiving ... due penalty. The background for this expression is legal justice. "The punishment fits the crime" is the basic idea. However the addition of "in their own persons" means that God is not punishing the person. The results of such actions are punishment enough. g. error [G4106, plane_: a wandering]. Perhaps "error" is not a strong enough translation of this Greek word, since in our culture we readily excuse errors as simply "being human" ("nobody's perfect"). Paul, however, means that they have wandered away from truth. Humanity thinks that it can reject God as God and still hold on to all the other ideas they hold as true. But in reality Truth is centered in God. Like the old cow who has pulled free from its tether, she simply wanders away and gets lost. A related word [G4108, planos] is used as a description of the antichrist (deceiver, 2 Jn 1:7). 18. The perplexing question. Let us now return to the perplexing question. If, as we have claimed, homosexuality is of little interest to almost all of the NT, why does Paul use it here as a specific example? It is used because it fits the biblical concept of "type" so well. It so clearly shows the futility (one of Paul's key ideas here) of a humanity that has lost its focus in God. Words like "confusion" and "alienation" come to mind. Remember Paul is using homosexuality as a type of the consequence of separation from God. There is another possible lesson from this "type" and that perhaps is that it is a picture of self-love. Regardless of whether we "get the picture" Paul is not presenting it as something to be condemned. Notice, for example, that Paul never uses the word "sin" in this entire section. One place where we might have expected "sin" Paul chose "error" instead. (Whether or not it is a sin must be dealt with in another context. Here it is a type of a frustrated life without God, a life turned in upon itself. Do not misunderstand me! I am not suggesting that it is not a sin. Paul just has a different focus here.) Paul will soon condemn a judgmental attitude (2:1). We should not involve ourselves in the debate over whether people are born with these tendencies or whether they deliberately chose this way of life. (Perhaps the answer is "both"!) "Knowledge makes arrogant, but love edifies" (1 Cor 8:1). It is not our place to be telling people outside the church how they are to live. Paul makes that perfectly clear in 1 Cor 5:9-13. Do you have compassion on the man born blind? Do you have compassion on the alcoholic? Do you have compassion on the murderers? Why should not your compassion extend to the homosexual? But you might say, "They are claiming that they are doing nothing wrong. They are not trying to change." Does that mean that you have compassion only for the alcoholics who are trying to change? The basic issues is not what is wrong with homosexuals but what is wrong with us. May God forgive our arrogance and deliver us from a judgmental attitude! May God fill our hearts with love for a hurting humanity! 19. Although I have written a considerable amount on these two verses, it has not been my intention to write a paper addressing all the issues surrounding homosexuality. I have deliberately not addressed some questions, because I believe Paul does not address them in this passage. We do not need a "set of rules" on how to treat homosexuals. We need a compassionate body of followers of Christ who will demonstrate God's love to a hurting world. However, I cannot leave this topic without some further observations. First of all, I did write a paper a few years ago when I saw the television news coverage on gay marriages in San Francisco. The awful things people (in the name of Christ) were shouting at these couples appalled me. My paper was a judgment on the church, not on gay people. A church that would shout such things is under the judgment of God. Such a church is full of hypocrisy. Such a church is so self-righteous that it would have taken up stones at the invitation of Jesus (John 8:1-11), being "without sin" (8:7)! In fact, many people who are loudly pointing out the "sins" of others are doing so to take attention from their own sin. It is dangerous to try to list sins in order of their importance. Actually the worst sin varies from person to person and from time to time. A poor attempt to define it might be that it has at least two characteristics: (1) right now, it is hurting my relationship with God and others, and (2) right now, God is trying to speak to me about it. However, having said all that, there is value in seeking out and recognizing the biblical emphasis on certain sins. Arrogance

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 31 [pride] is clearly at the top of the list. It is the sin that is most damaging to our relationship with God and others. Humility (the opposite of arrogance) is the most fundamental attitude in this relationship. Pride also heads the list of the seven deadly sins produced by the medieval church: pride, covetousness, lust, envy, gluttony, anger, and sloth. Compare the list Paul begins at 1:29. A few moments of reflection on these lists shows why there is very little difference between the lifestyle of "churchy" people and their neighbors. These are the sins that are almost universally ignored in our society (and church) with its focus on Prestige, Pleasure, Power and its "need" for Success, Sensual, Security (see the chart above, partly reproduced below). How can such a church find the time or the right to condemn the homosexuals with so many deadly sins within the body?

MIND HEART WILL

Faithfulness Glorify God Give Thanks Serve God (Rom 1:21) (Rom 1:21,25) (Rom 1:25) Truth Worship Service

Wrong Focus: Self Prestige Pleasure Power

Wrong Need: Self Success Sensual Security

ROMANS 1:28 And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper, 1. Looking at Paul's chiastic structure shows us that this final section (1:28-32) is paired with 1:18- 23.

A. The MIND suppresses the truth of God (1:18-22). B. The WILL rejects God: exchanges incorruptible for corruptible (1:23). B' The WILL rejects God: Did not see fit to acknowledge God (1:28a) A' God gives them over to a depraved MIND (1:28b-32).

So, the focus again is on the Mind suppressing the truth of God and the Will rejecting God. The statement "they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer" describes a deliberate choice of the Mind and action of the Will. 2. see fit [G1381a, edokimasan]. This verb is intended to be paired with the adjective adokimon [G96b, adokimos] in this verse [translated "depraved"], since they have the same Greek root [G1384, dokime_, tested, approved]. They have "tested" God and found Him lacking, and therefore they no longer "approve" of Him. 3. acknowledge [G, epigno_sis: full knowledge]. They refuse to acknowledge God fully. They have emphasized certain aspects of the character of God and ignored other aspects. It is now easy to reject this god they have created, since such a god is not worthy of worship, gratitude, or service. 4. God "gave them over" [G3860, paradido_mi]. This is the third of three times Paul uses this phrase (1:24, 26, 28). 5. depraved [G96b, adokimos: not standing the test]. Found 8 times in the NT: Rom 1:28; 1 Cor 9:27; 2 Cor 13:5, 6, 7; 2 Tim 3:8; Titus 1:16; Heb 6:8 (translated "depraved" only here). It probably would have been better to call it an "unfit" mind to match the above idea of the human finding God "unfit" to receive worship, etc. Any mind that finds God to be unfit for glory, etc. is a mind that is unfit to assess God's character. 6. mind [G3563, nous]. Paul stresses the truth that rejection of God begins in the mind and the greatest tragedy to humanity is what has happened to the mind. This mind needs to be renewed (Rom 12:2). 7. to do those things which are not proper. It is primarily the Mind that has made the decision to act in this way. The Affection may be ruling the person but only because the Mind is in total agreement. Notice for example, the seven deadly sins mentioned a short time ago. All these things the mind could choose to reject as improper behavior.

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 32 8. not proper. As has been his method throughout this passage, Paul used broader terms than typically found in his Jewish background. He is trying to address the Gentile mind, that sees those things as "not proper" when they do not make for harmony of life and society. However, the "why things are this way" is strictly Jewish/Christian thinking.

ROMANS 1:29 being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; {they are} gossips, ROMANS 1:30 slanderers, haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, ROMANS 1:31 without understanding, untrustworthy, unloving, unmerciful; 1. Keeping our perspective. Remember, Paul is not saying that every person is guilty of all these vices. Rather he is describing the human race without God. It is a condemnation of corporate humanity. And, actually, he expects most everyone to agree with him! He has been appealing to the Gentile mind and is listing items Gentiles view as vices. The modern mind would also find this list as characteristic of the modern age. However, they would like to balance such a list with many positive virtues. 2. Structure? Vice lists such as this one were common in the ancient world and in the NT (Matt 15:18-20 = Mark 7:20-23; Rom 1:29-31; 1 Cor 5:8-11; 6:9-11; 2 Cor 12:20-21; Gal 5:19-21; Eph 4:31; Col 3:5-9; 1 Tim 6:4-5; 2 Tim 3:1-9; Titus 3:3; 1 Pet 2:1; Rev 9:21). Has Paul simply given several vices that come to mind or is there a structure to this list? Scholars have not been able to agree on an overall structure. They do tend to agree that Paul wants to produce the effect that the human race is in serious plight without God. He does this, in part, with the length of the list (the longest in the NT). And it appears that he also does it by choosing words that make a "sound" effect when read aloud without a pause. Some have suggested that it should be read as a pnigos -- a long passage to be spoken in a single breath. 3. Patterns. There does appear to be some order among the items in the list. The first sign of order is the grouping of words into sets. a. The first set consists of four nouns set apart by the word "be filled with" [G4137, pleroo_] and each one ending with "ia": unrighteousness [G93, adikia], wickedness [G4189, pone_ria], greed [G4124, pleonexia], evil [G2549, kakia]. b. The second set consists of five nouns set apart by the word "full" [G3324, mestos]: envy [G5355, phthonos], murder [G5408, phonos], strife [G2054, eris], deceit [G1388, dolos], malice [G2550, kakoe_theia]. Note the word play with envy [phthonou] and murder [phonou]. These would have added to the "sound bite" effect in public reading. c. The third set consists of twelve items which may be grouped as follows: 1) gossips [G5588, psithuriste_s], slanderers [G2637, katalalos], haters of God [G2319, theostuge_s], insolent [G5197, hubriste_s], arrogant [G5244a, hupere_phanos], boastful [G213, alazo_n]. 2) inventors [G2182, epheurete_s, found only here] of evil, disobedient to parents. All the other vices are stated by a single Greek word. These two are the exception. This change of pace would be helpful in keeping the hearer's attention. 3) without understanding [G801, asunetos], untrustworthy [G802, asunthetos], unloving [G794, astorgos], unmerciful [G415a, anelee_mo_n]. Note that all begin with the negative prefix [a-] (which corresponds to the English prefix [un-] and suffix [-less]. The NIV and RSV seek to show this pattern by using this translation "senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless" (NIV) with "senseless" being changed to "foolish" in RSV. The problem with these translations is that, while trying to show a pattern in the Greek language, they forfeit, to some degree, the precise meaning of the Greek word. NASB could have "had it both ways" if they had created the word "un-understanding" to complete this pattern in its translation. This is the same Greek word translated "foolish" at 1:21 (see there). Note the word play with senseless [asynetous] and faithless [asynthetous]. These would have added to the "sound bite" effect in public reading. 4. Structure. After examining the list, there does appear to be some structure. a. Paul begins by emphasizing "filled" and "full" and ends by stressing "emptiness" (without using the word however). NASB should have listed the last four as "without understanding, without faithfulness, without natural affection, and without mercy. Or the

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 33 words "void of ..." could have been used. Humanity without God is full of all the wrong things and void of many vital things. b. The list begins with "unrighteousness" which takes us back to 1:18 and makes it the foundational vice from which all others follow. The next three also commend themselves as vices that are foundational to many other vices. c. Although there are many overlaps, it is possible to see that the focus of the second set regards actions towards others. While the last set focuses more on the attitudes and actions that are self-exalting and thus self-destructive in reality. 5. A brief look at individual vices. unrighteousness (NIV: wickedness) [G93, adikia]. Found ca. 25 times, but see G91-95 for ca. 44 more. It is used here as a general term to indicate a "fullness of failure" in all relationships. Things are just not right! wickedness (NIV: evil) [G4189, pone_ria]. Found ca. 7 times, but see G4190 for ca. 77 more. The picture here is not so much the effects of this evil, but in its source. It pictures all that is sinister and vile. This Greek word is used to describe Satan as "the evil one" (Mt 5:37; 6:13; 13:19, 38; John 17:15; 2 Thess 3:3; 1 Jn 2:13-14; 3:12; 5:18-19). greed [G4124, pleonexia]. Found ca. 10 times, but see G4122-4123 for ca. 9 more. Often translated as coveting. It is the overpowering drive to possess more and more. evil (NIV: depravity) [G2549, kakia]. Found ca. 11 times, but see G2550-2551, 2554-2561 for ca. 90 more. It refers more to the habit of the mind rather than specific actions. Evil has taken up residence within and taints all attempts to be good and do right. envy [G5355, phthonos]. Found ca. 9 times, but see G5354 for one more. Envy heads up the second set of vices and appears to set the tone for the rest of the set. It is related to "evil" in that it also is a settled disposition of the inner person. Envy can become an all-consuming passion! murder [G5408, phonos]. Found ca. 9 times, but see G5406-5407 for ca. 19 more. Murder (in the heart if not in actions) often springs from envy. strife [G2054, eris]. Found ca. 9 times, but see G5051 for ca. 1 more. Strife also can be an expression of envy. deceit [G1388, dolos]. Found ca. 11 times, but see G1386, 1387, 1389 for 3 more. Any method (lie) is acceptable in the attempt to outwit others. malice [G2550, kakoe_theia]. Found only here. See "evil" above for related words. It fits well as the other part of the frame for this set ("envy" is the matching vice). Both of these especially describe a mind-set that seeks to advance self by depriving (envy) or destroying (malice) others without any provocation. Some suggest that "malignity" better catches the meaning. gossips [G5588, psithuriste_s]. Found only here, but see G5587 for one more. slanderers [G2637, katalalos]. Found only here, but see G2635-2636 for ca. 7 more. Gossips and slanderers fit well together for the beginning of this new set of terms. The focus of this set in on self-exaltation. These two seek self-exaltation by bringing others down (e.g., destroying their reputation, weakening their position, etc.). haters of God [G2319, theostuge_s]. Found only here. Even God is included in the attempt at self-exaltation. He must be "destroyed" (disarmed, discredited) also. insolent [G5197, hubriste_s]. Found 2 times, but see G5195-5196 for ca. 8 more. arrogant [G5244a, hupere_phanos]. Found ca. 5 times, but see G5243, 5244b, 5252 for 4 more. boastful [G213, alazo_n]. Found 2 times, but see G212 for 3 more. Insolent, arrogant, and boastful all fit together as expressions of undue pride. Insolence is focused more in the humiliation of others, while boastful emphasizes self-achievement. inventors [G2182, epheurete_s, found only here] of evil [G2556, kakos]. Kakos is found ca. 49 times. These people "discover" new ways of being evil. They are actively "inventing" evil, making the world much worse. disobedient [G545, apeithes] to parents. Found ca. 7 times, but see G543-544 for ca. 14 more. without understanding (NIV: senseless) [G801, asunetos]. Found ca. 5 times. They neither seek advice nor seek alternative solutions. They reject all counsel that does not match their preconceived ideas. They are closed to change.

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 34 untrustworthy (NIV: faithless) [G802, asunthetos]. Found only here. This word literally means not keeping covenant -- people who do not keep their promises. They cannot be trusted with a task, since "do it my way" is their motto. unloving (NIV: heartless) [G794, astorgos]. Found 2 times. It refers to people who are lacking in family affection. unmerciful (NIV: ruthless) [G415a, anelee_mo_n]. Found only here, but G415b gives one more. It describes people who are lacking in compassion, sympathy, and empathy for others. All relationships have failed. So this one is a fitting end to a list that started with unrighteousness (a frame?).

ROMANS 1:32 and although they know the ordinance of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, they not only do the same, but also give hearty approval to those who practice them. 1. know. Paul concludes this section by emphasizing one of his major points. No matter how much the person is without understanding, there still remains enough knowledge of "the ordinance of God" that humanity is accountable to for its behavior. We are without excuse (1:20). 2. Point #2. What is it that they know? "Ordinance of God" does not refer to the OT Law. Rather its source is in some very basic knowledge of God that He has made known to everyone. For example, the vice list he has just cited is taken more for the prevailing culture than from Jewish Scriptures. One thing they know for sure: "People who practice such things are worthy of death"! "Worthy of death" hints at what will become clear later in the letter, i.e., spiritual death. 3. Point #3. Even knowing that what they do is wrong, they still practice these things. The verb is present tense -- a continuous action by individuals and by the human race ("are giving"). 4. Point #4. They are giving hearty approval to others who practice these things (present tense again). In other words, they actually encourage unrighteousness, knowing it is wrong. Although the examples are numerous (plots in books, movies, etc.), let me cite one that I find fascinating. I recall attending funerals of people who clearly did not live as God would have them. There is this collective sigh of relief in the audience when someone jokingly suggests that the "bad" wasn't really all that "bad" -- in fact it is what gave character, sparkle, charm, etc. to the person. Good people are so dull!

ORIENTATION. We need to look again at where we are in our outline.

II. PROVIDING AND RECEIVING THE GOSPEL (1:18 - 5:21). A. The Need for the Gospel [Human Unrighteousness] (1:18 - 3:20) 1. Immoral People [The Pagan World] (1:18-32). Focus: universality and corporate nature of human failure. 2. Moral People (2:1-11). Focus: the impartiality of God. 3. Law: Gentiles (2:12-16). Focus: without the Law. 4. Law: Jews (2:17-24). Focus: the Law. 5. Jews (2:25-29). Focus: circumcision.

At this point Paul moves on from his overview of immoral humanity to addressing more directly those people who consider themselves moral.

2. MORAL PEOPLE (2:1-11). So called "moral people" are questioned regarding their possible judgmental attitude and hypocrisy. The real focus in this passage is the impartiality of God (2:11). The kindness of God is available to all, but so is the judgment of God (2:3). The impartiality of God strikes both ways. He is ready to show His kindness, and He is ready to show His wrath "to the Jew first and also to the Greek" (2:10, cf.2:9).

ROMANS 2:1 Therefore you have no excuse, everyone of you who passes judgment, for in that which you judge another, you condemn yourself; for you who judge practice the same things. 1. Diatribe. Paul abruptly "turns" and addresses (attacks!) an imaginary person who has been agreeing with him in his evaluation of humanity (1:18-32). Now this "ally" will become an opponent. Paul "speaks" to this person in the second person singular in 2:1-5. This popular

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 35 of argumentation of that day was known as diatribe (a denunciation). Who is this person Paul has created for his purposes? He represents, first of all, all moral people, i.e., people who conduct themselves by a determined code of ethics. However, in the back of Paul's mind is the Jews who live by the Law and Covenant. He will eventually get to them. 2. Therefore [dio]. Paul has concluded a very important section with his presentation of human unrighteousness (1:18-32). This "therefore" shows us that what follows is built upon the foundation of these ideas. 3. no excuse. [G379, anapologe_tos: inexcusable]. Found only here and 1:20 (see there for remarks). There is little doubt that Paul wants to tie the inexcusable behavior of "moral people" with that of all humanity (presented in 1:18-32). This word (inexcusable) focuses specifically on suppressing the truth God has revealed to us. As we have already mentioned, Paul expected almost everyone to agree with him in his assessment of immoral humanity. But what attitude should be behind this assessment? Superiority? No! 4. passes judgment, judge another, you who judge [G2919, krino_: to judge]. Paul has been acting as a prosecutor in the courtroom. He has been seeking agreement from the "moral people" but not judgment. God alone is the Judge. It is not even a jury trial! God will both decide guilt and pass judgment. Perhaps an analogy from society will help here. Police officers may actually witness one person killing another. But they are not allowed to shoot the killer on the spot (except to keep that person from killing others). They are not the judge. Their job is neither to determine guilt nor punishment, but to make an arrest. It has almost always been this way. In ancient times people were brought before the town elders. All the circumstances behind the crime needed to be considered before a decision was made. Determining guilt and punishment can be very difficult. So it is with sin. Judgment must be left with the Father and with the Son for only they can know all the facts (John 5:19-30; cf. Isa 11:1-5). Many people want actions placed in one of two compartments (labeled either "sin" or "not sin"). Sin is far too complex for such a naive approach. We should have learned that from the Sermon on the Mount (Matt 5-7). Human judgment in contrast to divine judgment is a major theme in this section (2:1-3, 12, 16, 27; 3:4, 6-8). 5. condemn yourself [G2632, katakrino_]. It is derived from krino_ [G2919], to judge (see above). The concept of people who judge being condemned by their own judgment was taught by Jesus (Mt 7:1-5; Lk 6:37-38; cf. Rom 14:10, 13). 6. practice [G4238, prasso_]. Found ca. 38 times. It is used twice in 1:32 and once each in 2:1, 2, 3, 25; 7:15, 19; 9:11; 13:4. It seems clear that this "practice" is to be matched with that in 1:32. 7. same things. Is Paul saying that there is no difference between immoral people described in 1:18-32 and the "moral" people being addressed here? No and yes. He is not accusing them of gross idolatry and immorality. He is clearly not accusing them of being homosexual. However, Paul is asking "moral" people to look again at the "vice list" he gave in 1:29-31, especially such items as insolent, arrogant, and boastful. And the more we ponder the list, the more we see it applies to us. So if we use this list to condemn others (with a "black and white" approach to sin), then we are without excuse. But many will not be convinced at this point. Paul will have to go deeper. To do so, he uses repeating patterns to emphasize the contract between their relationship to others and God's relationship to others.

A. You: who passes judgment, who judge, who practice (2:1) B. Judgment of God on those who practice (2:2) A' You: who passes judgment, who judge, who practice (2:3a) B' The Judgment of God (2:3b) C. The Kindness of God (2:4) C' The Wrath of God (2:5a) B'' The Righteous Judgment of God (2:5b) A'' [God will] render to each person according to his deeds (2:6)

These patterns then flow into another pattern to complete this sub-section.

A. [God will] render to each person according to his deeds (2:6) B. Doing Good: Glory and honor and immortality (2:7)

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 36 C. Wrath and indignation (2:8) C' Tribulation and distress (2:9) B' Does Good: Glory and honor and peace (2:10) A' For there is no partiality with God (2:11)

ROMANS 2:2 And we know that the judgment of God rightly falls upon those who practice such things. 1. we know. In order to gain back his audience, Paul returns to a statement he believes they will accept -- a universal truth. 2. rightly. Two words ([G2596, kata], [G225, ale_theian]: according to truth. The use of "truth" here is very significant. It hints back to the suppression of truth (1:18) and exchanging truth for the lie (1:25). 3. practice such things. A repeating pattern. But now it has an added importance. The moral people are also suppressing the truth of God by favoring themselves over immoral people. They too will face the truth on judgment day. What is this foundational truth? See the discussion on 1:18-22. Basically it is that (a) God must be glorified in all things and (b) we must live grateful lives (c) we must serve God always. (See the chart above.)

ROMANS 2:3 But do you suppose this, O man, when you pass judgment on those who practice such things and do the same {yourself}, that you will escape the judgment of God? 1. do you suppose. It expect a negative answer ("How can you possibly think that ... you will escape?"). 2. practice, do. Paul is probably using "practice" to describe a way of life, whereas "do" refers to specific acts. In other words, even though the vice list describes the characteristics of immoral people, moral people also (occasionally at least) do some of these things. However, they may rationalize that, since these vices do not characterize their lives, they are excused from occasional lapses. But Paul is thinking more of the general indictment of 1:18-20 than of the vice list in 1:29-31. They have suppressed the truth of the revelation of God and are without excuse. 3. "A deadly duo". Paul does not directly question their logic. Instead, he combines their (perhaps occasional) doing such things (and excusing themselves) along with their judging others who practice such things as deserving the judgment of God. This partiality on their part is contrasted with the impartiality of God (cf. 2:2, 11). Jesus illustrated this attitude so perfectly in the Parable of the Pharisee and the Publican (Luke 18:9-14). 4. you will escape. This "you" is emphatic in the Greek. How are we to understand this statement? Paul appears to be saying that they have suppressed the truth even more than the immoral people. So actually they have less chance of escaping. They will be judged more harshly! It is interesting that Paul has yet to use the word "sin" (but he is getting close to it!). Not until he can fully discuss who is the greater sinner will he begin to use the word (2:12). He begins here with the hint that more knowledge of what is right also makes for greater sin. Compare the statement by Jesus regarding the greater sin (Jn 19:11).

ROMANS 2:4 Or do you think lightly of the riches of His kindness and tolerance and patience, not knowing that the kindness of God leads you to repentance? 1. think lightly. One word [G2706, kataphroneo_: belittle]. The verb is found 9 times (Mt 6:24; 18:10; Lk 16:13; 1 Cor 11:22; 1 Tim 4:12; 6:2; Heb 12:2; 2 Pet 2:10). "Because the sentence against an evil deed is not executed quickly, therefore the hearts of the sons of men among them are given fully to do evil" (Ecc 8:11). Since God has not destroyed the human race for its "evil deeds" we convince ourselves that we will escape the punishment. Some picture God as weak. Others see Him as inconsistent and unfair, even unrighteous. Still others view Him as a nice grandparent who ignores, forgets, or easily forgives our sin. In these ways they view His forbearance (cf. 3:25). Regardless of how God is viewed, most of humanity has a scornful attitude towards God's kindness. 2. riches. The picture here is one of great abundance and importance. We show great contempt for God (see "think lightly" above) when we ignore the magnitude of His richness towards us. "Riches" also reflects how costly it has been for God to show His kindness to us. It is costly in that it required the sacrifice of His Son to make possible our redemption. It is also costly in the

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 37 degree of pain endured by a righteous and holy God as He continues to experience our rejection, rebellion, unrighteousness, etc. "Behold then the kindness and severity of God; to those who fell, severity, but to you, God's kindness, if you continue in His kindness; otherwise you also will be cut off" (Rom 11:22). It takes great restraint for God to withhold His "severity" from us. 3. kindness [G5544 chre_stote_s]. This noun and related words are found ca. 18 times in the NT (six times in Romans). The NT clearly presents kindness as a characteristic of God and an important expression of His love, grace, and mercy (Rom 2:4; 11:22; Eph 2:7; Mt 11:30; Lk 6:35; 1 Pet 2:3; Titus 3:4-7). 4. tolerance [G463, anoche_: forbearance]. Found only here and 3:25. It is derived from anecho_ [G430: to bear with or hold back] showing an element of self-restraint. I prefer "forbearance" as the English translation of this Greek word, having a prejudice against the word "tolerance" since the word is so abused in today's culture. 5. patience [G3115, makrothumia]; from G3117 [makros: long] and G2372 [thumos: fierce wrath, indignation (see 2:8)]. Patience here has a similar meaning to forbearance. It could be translated "long-tempered" in contrast the short-temper of people, God does not pour out His fierce wrath immediately when we sin against Him. But that does not mean that it will never happen! 6. not knowing. Here is deliberate ignorance. It results from the suppression of truth (1:18), a darkened heart (1:21), and the exchanging the truth of God for the lie (1:25) along with the depraved mind (1:28). These "moral" people are actually refusing to acknowledge God, even though some of them "worship" Him! 7. repentance [G3341, metanoia (noun)] is found 22 times. The verb [G3340, metanoeo_] is found ca. 34 times. Now we know the basic reason for God's kindness (demonstrated as forbearance and patience) towards His rebellious children. It is to give us time to repent. "The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient [G3114] toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance" (2 Pet 3:9; cf. 3:15). Note the reference to God's patience [G3115] at 2 Pet 3:15. The Hebrew background is a word that means to turn back, return [H7725, shub] found widely throughout the OT. Paul's Jewish audience had a strong belief that God provided a way for His covenant people to be forgiven of their sins (Lev 4:20, 26, 31, 35; Psa 116; Isa 1:27; Jer 3:12-14, 22). It is probably why he uses the word here. However, Paul rarely uses it (only here and 2 Cor 7:9-10; 12:21; 2 Tim 2:25). It is never used in the Gospel of John and the Epistles of John. However, John the Baptist, Jesus, and the early disciples used it in significant ways. Paul probably is reacting to Jewish abuse of the concept of repentance (being corrupted with pride and arrogance) actually resulting in "stubbornness and unrepentant heart" (2:5). Paul prefers the language of faith in his discussion of righteousness. Some of the elements directly related to repentance are: a. Confession of sin (1 John 1:5 - 2:1; :21) b. Sorrowing over sin (2 Cor 7:10; Lk 18:13; Eph 2:1-10) c. Forsaking sin (Isa 55:6-9; Jn 5:14; 8:11; Gal 2:16-21).

MIND HEART WILL

Elements of Faith Affirming Trusting Obeying

Faith in Jesus Christ Jesus Lord "Anointed" "Savior" "Lord"

Confessing Jesus as The Truth The Life The Way

Repentance Confessing Sorrowing Forsaking (turning from) sin over sin sin

Repentance Poor in Spirit Mourn Meek (Matthew 5:3-5) (Humble) Broken-hearted Submission

ROMANS 2:5 But because of your stubbornness and unrepentant heart you are storing up wrath for yourself in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God,

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 38 1. Paul is still addressing his imaginary opponent (second person singular). However, it is clear that Jewish listeners must by now see that they are included, since Paul now draws heavily from OT rebukes which are focused on Israel. 2. stubbornness [G4643, skle_rote_s]. Found only here, but skle_rokadia [G4641, hardness of heart] is found 3 times (Mt 19:8; Mk 10:5; [16:14]) and ske_runo_ [G4645, to harden] is found 6 times (:9; Rom 9:18; Heb 3:8, 13, 15; 4:7). Compare "stiff-necked" [G4644, skle_rotrache_los] found only in Acts 7:51. Consider also the Hebrew term qashah [H7185, hard, stiff] used in Deut 10:16; 2 Kgs 17:14; 2 Chron 30:8; 36:13; Neh 9:39; Jer 7:26; 17:23; 19:15. 3. unrepentant [G279, ametanoe_tos, only here] heart [G2588, kadia, see 1:21]. Here is an obvious contrast to the previous verse, where repentance is the goal of God's kindness towards us. The "heart" (the inner person) is used so that Paul is not thinking of some outward expression, but deep-seated attitudes and motives within the person. There is an important contrast between the "immoral" heart (1:18-32) and the heart described here. The "immoral" heart is described as "without understanding" and "darkened" (1:21). It is NOT described as stubborn [hard] or unrepentant. The darkened heart is the heart that rejects the basic revelation of God. The hard heart is one that rejects a greater revelation of God. Pharaoh is an excellent example of this, and Paul will use him later (9:17). His heart became more and more hardened as he continued to reject the increasing revelation of Israel's God, YHWH. It is obvious where Paul is heading. Israel has rejected a greater revelation of God, resulting in a stubborn and unrepentant heart. 4. Themes. The themes of wrath and judgment tie these sub-sections together. Here is a listing of some important Greek terms. G2917 [krima: a judgment]. Found ca. 28 times (6 in Romans): judgment (2:2, 3; 5:16; 11:33), condemnation (3:8; 13:2). G2919 [krino_: to judge, decide]. Found ca. 115 times in NT (ca. 17 in Romans): judge (2:1, 1, 16, 27; 3:6; 14:3, 4, 10, 13), judged (2:12; 3:4, 7), judgment (2:1, 3), condemn (14:22), regards (14:5, 5). G2920 [krisis: a judgment, decision]. Found ca. 47 times, but not in Romans. However, see G1341 below. G2632 [katakrino_: to give judgment]. Found ca 18 times (6 times in Romans): condemn (2:1; 8:3; 14:23); condemned (8:3; 14:23); condemns (8:34) G2631 [katakrima: penalty]. Found 3 times: condemnation (Rom 5:16, 18; 8:1). G2633 [katakrisis: condemnation]. Found 2 times (2 Cor 3:9; 7:3). G1341 [dikaiokrisia: righteous judgment]. Found only one time (2:5). From dikaios [G1342] and krisis [G2920]. G3709 [orge_: wrath, anger]. Found ca. 36 times (ca. 12 times in Romans): 1:18; 2: 5, 5, 8; 3:5; 4:15; 5:9; 9:22, 22; 12:19; 13:4, 5. G2372 [thumos: fierce wrath]. Found ca. 18 times (ca. 10 in Rev., only once in Romans): indignation (2:8). 5. storing up wrath. God's kindness has brought about a delay in the full wrath of God. Since people don't see it happening, they convince themselves that it will not happen. Actually, the picture is more subtle than that. There will be many people who think that they are "laying up treasures in heaven" (Mt 6:19-21) when, in fact, they are storing up more and more wrath. The addition of "for yourself" shows that it is our activities that make for an increase in our "wealth" of wrath, not some increase in the anger of God. 6. day of God's wrath. In 1:18-32, Paul focused on the wrath of God being demonstrated in the past and present by "God gave them over" (1:24, 26, 28). Here, however, the focus is on an end-time (eschatological) future judgment. It is pictured over and over again in the OT (see, e.g., Zeph 1:15; Joel 2:2; Amos 5:18). 7. revelation. Here again, we have a contrast with the previous section. At 1:17-21, the emphasis in on a present revealing by God. Now Paul writes of something hidden that will be revealed in the future (i.e., there will be a "day of revelation"). 8. righteous judgment of God. Paul chooses an unusual Greek word that combines (in one word) both the righteousness and the wrath of God (see above). God's righteousness includes His faithfulness to the covenants He has made. However, this faithfulness does not mean that covenant people are excused from judgment. On the contrary, their judgment will be the most

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 39 severe, because judgment is in proportion to light. Paul probably has in mind the blessings and curses in Deut 27-30 -- judgment on those who fail in their obligation to the covenant. The "immoral people" actually are given a partial protection because God allowed their heart to become without understanding. The more we ponder God's judgment, the more difficult it is to determine whether God is fair or not. In one sense, God has chosen to "play favorites" by choosing Israel for special treatment. Paul needs to stress that (even though we cannot fully understand it) God is impartial (2:6, 11). For example, the "special" favor of Israel is balanced with a "special" judgment! Their favorable status in blessing is also an unfavorable status in wrath!

ROMANS 2:6 who will render to each person according to his deeds: 1. With this quotation, taken generally from Psa 62:12 and Prov 24:12, Paul switches to third person plural. He will not return to second person singular until 2:17 (with an accusative style). 2. Central statement. A number of scholars see a chiasmus starting here and ending at 2:11, although they wonder why the center of the chiasmus is not the most important statement, which they see as at the beginning and end (2:6, 11). However, if we recognize the presence of two or three chiasmi with 2:6 as the major junction, then the practice of having a central statement being the the more important one continues. (See the chiastic structures proposed at 2:1 above.) Now a bigger pattern emerges. A statement regarding the partialty of the "imaginary opponent" in 2:1 is contrasted with a statement of the impartiality of God in 2:11. The whole structure is "filled" with the kindness and wrath of God. 3. render [G591, apodido_mi] from the same root as "impart" in 1:11. It can have the meaning of "give back", e.g., God giving back what has been "stored up" (treasures or wrath). Paul will use the word again at 13:7 ("Render to all what is due them"). The idea is also found in the familiar statement "For the wages of sin is death..." (6:23). 4. deeds [G2041, ergon: works]. The same Greek word is translated either "works" or "deeds" according to the choice of the translator. Here we have a problem of people's theology influencing the interpretation of the text. These people see 3:20, 27-28 as a dominating theme for this entire section ("by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified") and thus try to play down any statement that appears to contradict it. But in fact, this statement (2:6) dominates the entire sub-section (2:1-16) and strongly influences the rest of the chapter. It must not be ignored. And it must be interpreted according to its context, not according to one's theology. We will never truly understand what it means to be "justified by faith" until we allow this statement to have its full say. Really, this passage does not stand alone. There is strong support for it in both the OT and NT (Prov 24:12; Psa 62:12; 28:4; Job 34:10; Jer 17:10; 32:19; Hos 12:2; Mt 16:27; 21:28-32; 1 Cor 3:8; 2 Cor 5:10; 11:15; Col 3:25; 2 Tim 4:14; James 2:14-26; 1 Pet 1:17; Rev 2:23; 18:6; 20:12-13; 22:12). God does indeed judge by works. In fact, Paul emphasizes this truth by framing his epistle with "the obedience of faith" (1:5; 16:26). The concept of producing fruit also supports this truth (Amos 6:12; Mt 7:16; Jn 15:5-23; Gal 5:22; Heb 12:11; James 3:18). How this concept fits with "justification by faith" will be explored as we continue through Romans.

As mentioned above, 2:6-11 forms a chiasmus.

A. [God will] render to each person according to his deeds (2:6) B. Doing Good: Glory and honor and immortality (2:7) C. Wrath and indignation (2:8) C' Tribulation and distress (2:9) B' Does Good: Glory and honor and peace (2:10) A' For there is no partiality with God (2:11)

However, smaller chiastic patterns exist between 2:8 and 2:9 as well as between 2:7 and 2:10.

2:8. (A) to those who.... (B) wrath and indignation 2:9. (B') tribulation and distress ... (A') for every soul (2:8-9)

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 40 2:7. (A) to those who ... doing good (B) glory and honor and immortality 2:10 (B') glory and honor and peace (A') to everyone ... does good

These chiasmi make for a very tight unit. For this reason 2:7-10 will be taken together.

ROMANS 2:7 to those who by perseverance in doing good seek for glory and honor and immortality, eternal life; ROMANS 2:8 but to those who are selfishly ambitious and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, wrath and indignation. ROMANS 2:9 {There will be} tribulation and distress for every soul of man who does evil, of the Jew first and also of the Greek, ROMANS 2:10 but glory and honor and peace to everyone who does good, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. 1. to those. First of all this expression points back to the phrase "to each person" (2:6). "To those ... doing good" (2:7) is intended to contrast with "But to those ... selfishly ambitious ... do not obey" (2:8a) and with "those ... obeying [evil]" (2:8b). Paul wants to make it clear that there are two groups and two groups only. But the two groups are NOT Jews and Greeks! Jews and Greeks can be found in each group ("the Jew first and also of the Greek" [2:9, 10]). The two groups are defined by what they are doing (2:7; present tense, continuous action): (a) every soul of man who does evil (2:9), and (b) everyone who does good (2:10). This concept of two groups has support elsewhere in the OT (note especially the blessing and curses on Israel in Deut 27-30 - - an extremely important background for understanding Paul's teaching in Romans), and in the NT (note especially Matt 7:13-27, where Jesus presents several contrasting pairs). The book of Psalms is introduced by contrasting the righteous and the wicked (Psa 1). 2. It is important that we identify the three elements here. a. Motive [objective, orientation, goal]. Seek for glory and honor and immortality (2:7). b. Method [operation, obedience]. 1) seek (2:7), doing good (2:7), does good (2:10) 2) perseverance (2:7) c. Outcome. 1) eternal life (2:7) 2) glory and honor and peace (2:10) 3. seek [G2212, ze_teo_]. Actually it is in the present tense (ze_teousin, "seeking") -- those who ... are seeking and continue to seek. This seeking emphasizes a lifetime effort, not a one-time faith experience. 4. seek for glory and honor and immortality. We might expect Paul to follow Jesus here ("But seek first His kingdom and His righteousness..." [Mt 6:33]), but instead Paul continues to appeal to the Greek as well as the Jewish mindset. (Both glory and honor were central motivations in the Mediterranean world of that day.) Paul wants us, by the end of this book, to be able to place Christian interpretations on these words. For example, the description "selfishly ambitious" (2:8) makes it clear that the focus must not be solely on personal glory and honor. 5. glory [G1391, doxa]. For the Jew, "glory" first of all focuses on the glory of God and our obligation to acknowledge it (Psa 29:1-2; 19:1; 96:7-10). It is interesting to note that Psa 96:10 states that God will judge with equity [uprightness]. Secondly God desires to share His glory with us (Psa 8:5; John 17:1, 4-5, 22-23; cf. Job 40:10). But to the Greek mind it refers especially to the natural outcome of a good life. Paul typically uses "glory" as a future expectation for the believer (Rom 5:2; 8:18, 21, 30; 9:23; 1 Cor 2:7; 15:23; 2 Cor 4:17; Col 3:4). However, this glory is only possible in direct relationship with God. It is God who will transform us and conform us "to the image of God's Son" (Rom 8:29). Through Him we will be justified and glorified (8:30). One of the characteristics of the "darkened heart" is its refusal to "honor [G1392, doxazo_: glorify] Him as God" (1:21). 6. honor [G5092, time_]. As with "glory" God must have priority in honor, but the major focus here is on receiving honor from God (Heb 2:7; 1 Pet 1:7; 2 Pet 1:17; Rev 4:9, 11; 5:13). However, the motive here must not be to get honor, but to live a life that is worthy of honor (honorable). In other words, a life that is pleasing to God (2 Cor 5:9; Eph 5:10; Heb 13:21; 1 Jn 3:22). At the end of this mortal life, Paul expected a commendation of "well-done, good and

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 41 faithful slave" (Mt 25:21; cf 2 Tim 4:7-8). What could be worse than to leave the Judgment Seat of Christ in dishonor! A life wasted and Eternity lost! 7. immortality [G861, aphtharsia]. This Greek word is translated "immortality" only here and 2 Tim 1:10. It is more common to translate it as imperishable (1 Cor 15:42, 50, 53, 54) or incorruptible (Eph 6:24). Two words with this same root are aphthartos [G862a], found in Rom 1:23; 1 Cor 9:25; 15:52; 1 Tim 1:17; 1 Pet 1:4, 23; 3:4 and aphthoria [G862b], found in Titus 2:7. These words are the negative of phtheiro_ [G5351, destroy, corrupt]. We might have expected Paul to use athanasia [G110, immortality] here since it is the negative of death [G2288, thanatos] -- found only three times (1 Cor 15:53, 54; 1 Tim 6:16). But Paul is telling us to seek more than just living forever. This word [aphtharsia] is intended to take us back to 1:23 where "incorruptible" [G862a, aphthartos] is used. The basic meaning then is "retaining its original condition" or form. However, since this original condition has already been lost, the focus now is on regaining it. So here, Paul is telling us to seek for a return to our original condition (i.e., before sin brought death, etc. to humankind). These ideas are contained in Rom 8:23; 2 Cor 5:4. 8. doing [G2041, ergon], does [G2038b, ergazomai]. See "deeds" [works] in 2:6 above. It is the same Greek word. Ever since the Reformation ( sola fide , sola gratia ), there has been a zeal to throw out, explain away or simply ignore anything that even remotely resembles salvation by works. For example, "epistle of straw" was the name used to describe the Epistle of James, since he saw it as opposing the "faith only" ( sola fide ) he had discovered in the book of Romans. It has resulted in an unrealistic view of the Christian life. Most reformed scholars who write about salvation, justification, etc. tend to ignore most of chapter 2, spending their time in chapter 3. Chapter 2 must be seen as a balance to chapter 3, not as containing ideas that can be rejected (or explained away) once we get "the real story" in chapter 3! 9. doing good. Some people like to quote Jesus as saying no one is good (Luke 18:18-19 = Mt 19:16-17 = Mk 10:17-18). But that is just one important aspect of the concept of goodness. The Bible clearly teaches that people can be good and are expected to do good (Acts 9:36; 2 Cor 9:8; Eph 2:10; Col 1:10; 2 Thess 2:17; 1 Tim 2:10; 5:10; 2 Tim 2:21; Titus 1:16; 2:11-14; 3:1). If people fail to be faithful they have received the grace of God in vain (1 Cor 15:2; 2 Cor 6:1). 10. perseverance [G5281, hupomone_: endurance, perseverance, steadfastness]. Found ca. 32 times in the NT. The root word "endure" [G5278, hupomeno_ ] is found ca. 17 times. The addition of this word into the sentence further emphasized the need for long-term faithfulness. "But the one who endures to the end, he will be saved" (Mt 24:13; cf. Col 1:22-23; Heb 3:14). 11. eternal life. Eternal life is seen as the major outcome of the life of doing good. See Rom 5:21 and 6:21-23, where life and death are viewed as contrasting outcomes. This concept will be studied in more detail later in -6. Paul was probably thinking of the book of Daniel where "everlasting life" is contrasted with "to disgrace and everlasting contempt" (Dan 12:2-3). Elsewhere Paul contrasts "life" with "corruption" (Gal 6:8), which fits well with the concept of immortality [incorruption] studied above. However, we shall find that "eternal life" is a much greater outcome than "incorruption". 12. selfishly ambitious [G2052, eritheia]. One word, found ca. 7 times: Rom 2:8; Phil 1:17; 2:3; 2 Cor 12:20; Gal 5:20; James 3:14, 16. It refers to a life lived for self, not for God -- a selfish person. 13. do not obey the truth. Paul again stresses people's relationship to truth. This great section began with the statement that humankind "suppress the truth" (1:18) and continued with the observation that they "exchange truth for the lie" (1:25). See also "rightly" in 2:2. 14. obey [G3982, peitho_: to persuade]. "Obey" here is contrasted with "do not obey" [G544, apeitheo_]. Paul uses a milder form of "obey" here (e.g., "obey" in 6:12, 16-17, 10:16 is a stronger word [G5219 hupakouo_]). He is still working from the basis of the "natural" conduct expected of people (appealing to the Greek mind). 15. unrighteousness. Paul probably is using it as a general term, staying with his thought of two groups of people: righteous and unrighteous. If we are not obeying God, then we are obeying unrighteousness (see chapter 6). 16. wrath [G3709, orge_: wrath, anger], indignation [G2372, thumos: fierce wrath], tribulation, distress. These outcomes are contrasted with eternal life, glory, honor, peace. See above for more on wrath and indignation under 2:5. In the same way that "indignation" is a more intensified form of "wrath", "distress" is a more intense form of "tribulation".

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 42 17. every soul of man. The stress is on every single person (regardless of status). To make sure we get the point, Paul adds "of the Jew first and also of the Greek" (2:10). The use of "soul" here means more than reminding us that we have a soul. The word is often used as a synonym for "person" or "life" stressing the gift of life from God to every person. 18. does evil. Every single soul (both Jews and Greeks - everyone!) who does evil is under judgment. "Does evil" is clearly in contrast to "doing/does good" (2:7, 10). 19. to the Jew first and also to the Greek. As stated above this is intended to include everyone. It also is insisting that Jews and Greeks are to be found in both groups: does good, does evil. But there is another feature: to the Jew FIRST. The Jew is not exempt from judgment. In fact, judgment comes first to them. In this way God can show special favors (covenant) because it brings special judgment: more light, more possible guilt. 20. Objective, Obedience, Outcome. Let us return to our three elements. a. Motive [objective, orientation, goal]. Judgment is upon those people whose basic orientation is to serve themselves. Even "eternal life" is not a proper object for the life focused on God. Glory, honor, and incorruption (when fully understood) are proper goals. These goals give first priority to God and reflect a trust in God for the future -- a hope coming as a product of exulting in tribulation, perseverance, and a proven character (5:2-5). b. Method [operation, obedience]. Nowhere in this passage does Paul describe the proper method of operation by some form of perfect obedience. Instead, what is described is a life of continual seeking for proper objects and doing good as an ongoing, consistent (enduring) characteristic of life. However, the obedience of faith (1:5; 2:25-26; 6:15-23; 16:26) is not an attempt to earn the "outcome" or to "merit" it. Instead, it is the expression of a life in service to God (faithfulness). c. Outcome. Eternal life (with a future focus) is the outcome of such a life. In addition, glory and honor comes to such people. Note that "incorruption" is not listed as an outcome. Instead, it is replaced with "peace" which is one of the most important characteristics of a right relationship with God (cf. 5:1). It is necessary for reconciliation (cf. 5:1-11).

ROMANS 2:11 For there is no partiality with God. - Paul closes this passage by stating his major theme for the passage. The structure of the passage is such that this verse matches the statements in 2:1 (people are partial) and 2:6 (deeds are the basis of judgment).

Let us look again at our outline.

II. PROVIDING AND RECEIVING THE GOSPEL (1:18 - 5:21). A. The Need for the Gospel [Human Unrighteousness] (1:18 - 3:20) 1. Immoral People [The Pagan World] (1:18-32). Focus: universality and corporate nature of human failure. 2. Moral People (2:1-11). Focus: the impartiality of God. 3. Law: Gentiles (2:12-16). Focus: without the Law. 4. Law: Jews (2:17-24). Focus: the Law. 5. Jews (2:25-29). Focus: circumcision.

Paul has just finished the section regarding "moral people" where the focus has been on the impartiality of God (2:1-11). In a very real sense this focus continues to the end of the chapter and into the next. He has challenged the idea that we should divide the world into two groups: immoral (1:18-32) and moral (2:1-11). He also began the rejection of another grouping as significant with respect to judgment: Jews and Gentiles. Instead, he declared that, with respect to the day of judgment, the two groups are (1) those who do good, and (2) those who do evil. In the following section (2:11-16), Paul introduces two distinct groups (those "without the law" and those "within the law"). But we must not isolate this passage from the one above. As in the cases of the immoral/moral, Jew/Gentile distinctions, Paul shows that these groupings are not valid with respect to judgment. They merely become sub-groups under his two main headings. There are some differences between these two sub- groups, but these differences are insignificant (with respect to judgment). Here is an outline that might help to show Paul's approach.

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 43

A. Those who do evil: wrath and indignation 1. Jews: within the Law, circumcised a. sinned within the Law b. hearers of the Law only c. judged [condemned] through the law d. circumcision has become uncircumcision [removed from covenant] 2. Gentiles: without the Law, uncircumcised a. sinned without the law b. perish without the law c. conscience: law written in their hearts d. their hearts condemn them e. not within the covenant

B. Those who do good: eternal life 1. Jews: within the Law, circumcised a. doers of the Law will be justified b. do what the law requires c. their hearts defend them d. circumcision of the heart (covenant) e. Jew inwardly f. by the Spirit 2. Gentiles: without Law, uncircumcised a. doers of the Law will be justified b. not having the law c. conscience: law written in their hearts d. do, by nature, what the law requires e. their hearts defend them f. circumcision of the heart (within the covenant) g. Jew inwardly (within the covenant) h. by the Spirit

It is time that this passage be taken more seriously than has been done since the Reformation. But before someone charges me with teaching "justification by works" please believe that I vigorously support the following points. 1. "All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God" (3:23). No one can earn their way to heaven. It is impossible to obligate God to reward us with eternal life (3:20; 6:23). 2. If the Son (Jesus Christ) had not fulfilled the plan of God for the salvation of humankind, nobody could be justified, sanctified, or glorified (3:24-26; 8:2). Heaven would be empty (of humans). 3. Grace is the "expression of God" for any form of justification, salvation, sanctification, etc. If "doers of the law" are justified, then it is only by the grace of God, not through human merit (3:23-25). 4. If there is a sense in which we can be "justified by works", then the Holy Spirit is involved in the empowerment for these works (Rom 2:29; chapters 6 & 8; Gal 3:3).

One place where the Reformers were clearly in error was their characterization of Judaism as legalistic. They did not have all the documents that present-day scholars have. These scholars tell us that most rabbis (in Paul's day) recognized grace as the sole basis for entering the covenant ("getting in"). However, they also taught that obedience to the Law was essential to "staying in". Paul certainly agreed with this position as seen by "obedience of faith" being the "frame" for this book (1:5; 16:26). Obedience of faith (ongoing "faithfulness") is the junction where "faith" and "works" come together to enlarge our understanding of "justification".

So, if we take seriously Paul's statements that God "will render to each person according to his deeds" (2:6, the central statement in the passage 2:1-11), and that "doers of the law will be justified" (2:13, the

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 44 central statement in the passage 2:12-16), then we are faced with the big problem of reconciling these statements with "justification by faith" declarations such as those found in 3:19-31.

Of course, Romans 2 is not the only place where Paul declares that judgment will be according to deeds. For example, see Rom 8:1-13; 14:10-12; 1 Cor 3:10-15; 4:4-5; 5:5; 6:9-11; 2 Cor 5:6-10; Gal 5:16-25; 6:7-10. He also emphasizes our obligation to be "pleasing to God" (Rom 12:1; 14:16-20; 2 Cor 5:9; Eph 5:6-10; Phil 2:12-13; Col 1:9-12; 1 Thess 4:1-8; 2 Thess 1:5-12).

ROMANS 2:12 For all who have sinned without the Law will also perish without the Law, and all who have sinned under the Law will be judged by the Law; ROMANS 2:13 for {it is} not the hearers of the Law {who} are just before God, but the doers of the Law will be justified. 1. For [gar]. Paul continues his defense of the impartiality of God. 2. sinned [G264, harmartano_, verb]. Paul finally introduces the word "sin" into the discussion. He wanted to introduce "sin" at the same time that "law" is introduced. Up to this point he chose to work from a Gentile framework, showing that human failure resulted in not doing what should be done "by nature". Paul makes a strong point here. Sin is sin, and sin brings judgment. It doesn't matter whether you are Gentile (without the Law) or a Jew (within the Law). 3. without law [G460, anomo_s, one word]. This is the negative form of "law" [G3551, nomos]. The adverbial form occurs here twice, but only here in the NT. The substantive form [G458, anomia] refers to "lawlessness" or "transgression of the law" (Mt 7:23; 13:41; 23:28; 24:12 Rom 4:7; 6:19[bis]; 2 Cor 6:14; 2 Thess 2:3, 7; Titus 2:14; Heb 1:9; 10:17; 1 Jn 3:4[bis]). The adjective [G459, anomos] normally means "lawless" (Mk 15:28; Lk 22:37; Acts 2:23; 2 Thess 2:8; 1 Tim 1:9; 2 Pet 2:8). The exception is 1 Cor 9:21, where it means "not having the law" (four times). This matches the meaning here at 2:12, i.e., it does not refer to "lawless" people, but simply to people who do not know the law (the law given to Moses). 4. law [G3551, nomos]. Found ca. 196 times in the NT (75 of these are in Romans), plus "giving of the law" [G3548, nomothesia] at Rom 9:4. In almost all the uses of this word in chapter 2, Paul is referring to the Torah (the law given to Moses). It is sometimes called the Mosaic Law. Some rabbi counted 613 commandments (365 negative, 248 positive) in this Law. 5. perish [G622, apollumi: destroy utterly], judged [G2919, krino_]. It seems clear that Paul intends these words to be seen as matching, not contrasting. These people will be condemned on Judgment Day. 6. perish without the Law. Above, I said, "Sin is sin", but is it really that simple? In the next chapter, Paul will declare, "for through the Law {comes} the knowledge of sin" (3:20). Try this reasoning. Since the people "without the Law" (with its 613 commandments) have no knowledge of sin, how can they be considered sinners? Some Pharisees criticized the disciples of Jesus for not washing their hands before they ate (Mark 7:1-5, 18-23). These Pharisees saw this washing as a proper way to keep the Law. Should Gentiles come under judgment for not washing their hands? A more difficult question might be, "Were the disciples of Jesus sinning by not washing their hands?" In light of the narrative in Mark 7, we might be tempted to reply in the negative. But it is not that simple. Many (do I dare say "most") actions cannot be labeled "sin" in some absolute sense. It is relative. Now I have said a troubling thing! But look again at Mark 7. Jesus does not address the issue of whether or not the disciples had sinned. It is not the action alone that defines the sin; sin comes from within [heart]. See Mark 7:21-23. In its most basic meaning "to sin" [[G264, harmartano_] means to "miss the mark". But what is "the mark" that is missed? Not an easy question! At the very least it involves the total person (Mind, Heart [Affections],Will, etc.). Or to use a different set of words, sin is not just action, it is affirmation and attitude. It involves what we believe to be true [affirmation] and our priorities, values, motives, etc, [attitudes] that result from truth. Looking at sin in this way shows us that Gentiles can sin without knowing the Law of Moses. 7. judged by the Law. Before we get carried away and begin to excuse our sins with the notion that "sin is relative", we must take seriously the fact that God has revealed the Law as a way of describing the lifestyle of people under the covenant. "Cursed in he who does not confirm the words of the law by doing them" (Dt 27:26). And remember Jesus solemnly charges concerning the Law and His assertion of its validity "until heaven and earth pass away" (Mt 5:17-19). Later,

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 45 in chapter 7, Paul will make the astonishing statement: "for apart from the Law sin {is} dead" (7:8). He will continue with: "I was once alive apart from the Law; but when the commandment came, sin became alive and I died" (7:9). (But we must not get ahead of ourselves; chapter 7 is a very difficult chapter.) Nevertheless, it seems clear that the Jews, because they have the Law, are held accountable for their affirmations, attitudes, and actions with respect to it. 8. hearers of the Law. This expression is directly related to my word "affirmation" since Paul does not mean hearing without affirming ("in one ear and out the other"). He has in mind those Jews who are convinced that the Law is God's revealed will for them. But unless affirmation takes us all the way to actions, we have greatly deceived ourselves (cf. Mt 7:24-27; James 1:22-25). In a similar fashion, those "Professing Christians" who confess [affirm] Christ but do not trust, follow, obey, serve, etc. Him have greatly deceived themselves. 9. just [G1342, dikaios] before God. See the discussion of 1:17 for some initial comments on this family of words (justification, righteousness, etc.). However, even here, we need not try to work out all the meanings people have attached to these words. Why? Because the picture is very clear. Paul has pictured for us the final judgment. Here is a courtroom scene. The addition of the phrase "before God" makes the truth of this picture even obvious. The defendant has been declared "acquitted" or "forgiven" or "innocent" or "not guilty", etc. (There is no need, at this point, to discuss whether or not the defendant is actually righteous, has imputed or imparted righteousness, etc.). 10. justified [G1344, dikaioo_]. In light of the claims of some that the overall message of Romans is "justified by faith", it is ironic that the first time this important verb appears it is not "justified by faith" but "doers of the Law will be justified" (2:13). The picture is consistent as seen by the future tense ("will be"). It is the final judgment that is under discussion. This final judgment will involve looking at the entire life span of people, not simply a one-point-in-time ("once-for- all") confession of faith. The ramifications for such a position (if true) are enormous! For people who will honestly and sincerely examine what Paul is saying in Romans, the way some people look at "justification by faith" will not hold water. Paul is basically saying that the New Covenant is a continuation of the Old Covenant (obviously with some "new" additions). He is claiming that faith and faithfulness have been the requirements of living under the covenants all along (see chapter 4). If that is true, then passages such as Ezekiel 18:19-32; 33:10-20 apply to all covenants. In reality, obedience [faithfulness] is one of the most fundamental ideas of a covenant. "When a righteous man turns away from his righteousness, commits iniquity and dies because of it, for his iniquity which he has committed he will die. Again, when a wicked man turns away from his wickedness which he has committed and practices justice and righteousness, he will save his life. Because he considered and turned away from all his transgressions which he had committed, he shall surely live; he shall not die. But the house of Israel says, 'The way of YHWH is not right.' Are My ways not right, O house of Israel? Is it not your ways that are not right? Therefore I will judge you, O house of Israel, each according to his conduct," declares the Lord [Adonai] God [YHWH]. "Repent and turn away from all your transgressions, so that iniquity may not become a stumbling block to you. Cast away from you all your transgressions which you have committed and make yourselves a new heart and a new spirit! For why will you die, O house of Israel? For I have no pleasure in the death of anyone who dies," declares the Lord [Adonai] God [YHWH]. "Therefore, repent and live" (Ezekiel 18:26-32). I realize that some people respond with the statement that Jesus supplied the "faithfulness" that meets the conditions of the New Covenant. I suggest that they read Paul again, and not just Romans. And how can such a viewpoint be sustained in light of all the teaching of Jesus on discipleship and the teaching in the Epistle of James?

ROMANS 2:14 For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves, ROMANS 2:15 in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them, ROMANS 2:16 on the day when, according to my gospel, God will judge the secrets of men through Christ Jesus. 1. For [gar]. Paul now provides some additional support for his statements in 2:12-13 showing how God can be impartial and still bring judgment upon Gentiles (who are "without the Law").

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 46 2. do instinctively [G5449, phusis: nature]. Compare the related words "natural" [G5446, phusikos] and "unnatural" [G3844, G5449, para phusin] in 1:26-27. It turns out (which should be no surprise after reading chapter 1) that each individual Gentile does have law (providing a basis of judgment). And some Gentiles do this law "by nature" meaning that they see it as the proper way to live. See the usage of the key Gentile concept of "proper" in 1:28. Remember to the Greek mind, "natural" means "to live in harmony with the natural order and its divine rationality" (Dunn). Although humans may disagree (and do!) about which conduct is right, they agree (usually without even realizing it) that there is a right way (or several right ways). And that there are many "wrong" ways. And, in addition, there is basic agreement on many ethical issues (murder, stealing, etc.). Clearly there is a relative aspect to conduct. But the key issue appears to be: Are my affirmations, attitudes, and actions right or wrong? Am I living in agreement with law as I see it. 3. a law to themselves. Certainly Paul is not suggesting that we can make up laws that promote our self interests. He makes it clear by what follows that this "law to themselves" is more impartial than that! When people in power create laws that benefit themselves and deprive others, they have created a "law" serving themselves and is clearly unethical. 4. What is the nature of this law that guides Gentiles? a. work of the Law written in their hearts. 1) work of the Law. It is extremely important that we understand that this is not the "law written..." nor is it "works" (plural) of the law. It is not the actual Law that is written in the heart (which is a New Covenant concept). Paul calls it "work (singular) of the Law" meaning that it is the function [business] of the Law that is written there. The heart (inner person) was created as an instrument of the Law. It relates to Law by its very nature. We are moral beings. We have an awareness of right and wrong. 2) written in their hearts. It is a God thing! This concept is directly related to the idea presented in chapter 1 that we are without excuse "because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them" (1:19). Deep down ("written in their hearts"), people know that they are responsible to their Creator and that this Creator demands moral responses from them. This revelation of God and this law is truth from God and written by Him on our hearts. How He does this and why we each interpret it a little differently is beyond our complete understanding (as we claimed in chapter 1). b. conscience bearing witness. 1) conscience [G4893, suneide_sis]. Again Paul uses a Greek idea (the word "conscience" is not found in the OT). It meant "consciousness of right or wrong doing", but Paul expands it so that it is seen as an independent witness (see next section). Using the way I picture our basic make-up (Mind, Heart [Affections], Will], the conscience "speaks" for the Affective Domain where we find motives, values, priorities, attitudes. For example, the sense of "fairness", that is almost universal, comes from this area and is basic to determining what the conscience is saying. The conscience brings a moral "oughtness" to life. 2) bearing witness [one word, G4828, summartureo_: bear witness with]. The focus is that of an additional witness. The truths God has written on the heart [total inner person] really find expression through the Mind (see chapter 1). The conscience (Affections) witnesses with the Mind to the ethical demands placed upon us. c. thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them. But proper ethical responses for many situations are not easy; it requires ordering the priorities of ethical demands ("Which law have priority in this given situation?"). Although the emphasis here is perhaps more on the determination of a rationale for an action, it still points to the third domain of the person (the Will). It is determining what to DO - a course of action chosen by the Will. 5. on the day. The day of final judgment. 6. God will judge ... through Christ Jesus. Jesus will be the judge on Judgment Day. 7. according to my gospel. What does this mean and why does Paul see it necessary to add it here? (It is troubling for many scholars!) Paul is declaring that he has not left obedience out of his gospel (as he has been charged by some as doing!). I believe that this key addition at this point demands that we take chapter 2 seriously and not believe that chapter 3 cancels out its teaching.

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 47 8. the secrets of men. This passage brings out two things that will happen on Judgment Day. The three witnesses (law written on heart, conscience, thoughts) will witness either for or against us. Get this! On judgment day, we will not be able to deny these three witnesses from Mind, Heart, Will and they will speak for us (and will even convince us!). We will not have anything to say. God will examine the secrets (which we may have kept even from ourselves) and judge us by what He finds. The three witnesses will agree with God! 9. through Christ Jesus. But there is more to this addition than letting us know that Jesus will be the Judge. As we will find out later, to be judged totally on our merits means total loss. But Christ can apply the gift of His blood to any situation He so desires. He will place the faithfulness (obedience from the heart) of the person and His faithfulness together to make His decision. On this basis, justification by works is a possibility. However, Paul has not yet added all the ingredients that bring about our final justification. We must wait for further explanations.

LOOKING BACKWARDS AND FORWARD. Paul has made a strong case that some Gentiles will be acquitted at the Judgment. The reason is that they have a law written on their hearts, and if they pattern their lives according to this law, then the statement "doers of the Law will be justified" (2:13) applies to them. However, if Paul has forced his Jewish audience to concede that some Gentiles will be justified in this way, he has also made the Jewish position even stronger (or so it appears). They not only have what the Gentiles have, they have the very revelation of God. And this revelation has been given to people God has specifically chosen. Should not this favored status help them on Judgment Day? But, if so, how can God still be considered impartial (2:11)? Paul must now deal with these much more complicated issues.

The next sub-section (2:17-29) is framed by the name "Jew" (2:17, 28, 29) and is easily divided into two parts (2:17-24; 25-29). In a pattern similar to 2:1-11 with its two parts (2:1-6; 7-11), the central statement (2:24) is a quotation from the OT (cf. 2:6). The first section (2:17-24) is a continuation of the previous section in that the focus is still on the Law. However, there it was about the people without the Law (Gentiles); now it is about the people with the Law (Jews). The last portion (2:25-29) is focused on circumcision (the sign of the covenant with Abraham). Although the word "covenant" is not found in these verses, it forms the background and basis for Paul's argument. But what aspect of the covenant is significant to Paul at this point? The answer is found in the following passage: "First of all, that they were entrusted with the oracles of God" (3:2). What the typical Jew sees as extremely significant (circumcision and having the Law), Paul sees as unimportant in light of the day of judgment. What was important was that they were "entrusted" with the Law. They were not given the revelation of God primarily for themselves, but received it as a trust to be shared. They were to teach others (2:19-21). Immediately before the Law was given to Israel (Exodus 20:1ff), YHWH said, "... and you shall be to Me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation" (Exodus 19:6). If this explanation is correct, then the central OT quotation (2:24) becomes very significant. Instead of being priests to the Gentiles, "the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you" (Rom 2:24, quoting 52:5; cf. Ezek 36:22-28). Also, Paul is expecting some of his readers to catch the irony. The name "Jew" (taken from the tribal name "Judah") means "praise" and their lives should have resulted in the name of God being praised, not blasphemed. In addition, they should be conducting themselves in a way so that they would be receiving praise from God, not from others (2:29). They failed in faithfulness (i.e., "the obedience of faith").

The word "boast" (2:17, 23) frames the first section (2:17-24). In this paragraph, Paul returns to the diatribe style using the second person singular again in 2:17-20 followed by a strong accusative style (2:21-24). The grammatical construction begins as a conditional statement ("if/then" pattern) containing a premise ("if" clause) and an outcome or conclusion ("then" clause) or "protasis" and "apodosis" if you like the fancier terms. However, Paul varies the pattern. Instead of drawing the natural conclusion of the premise ("If you bear the name 'Jew' and ..."), he shows the failure of the expected outcome.

ROMANS 2:17 But if you bear the name "Jew" and rely upon the Law and boast in God, 1. Although there is some irony behind the premise statements in 2:17-20, I think (in disagreement with many commentators) that these statements are basically meant to be positive. Paul is

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 48 describing the special status of the Jew. One point he wants to make is that privilege brings responsibility. 2. Jew. At this point, Paul returns to speaking directly to the imaginary person he has created. However, now this person has become a Jew. The first use of this name in the Bible is found in 2 Kgs 16:6. When the nation Israel divided into two nations, the northern kingdom took the name "Israel" and the southern kingdom used the name "Judah" (named for the largest tribe in it). Following the exile (when the nation Israel virtually disappeared), the name "Jew" was used for all the people of the covenant. The people of this Judah "tribe" considered themselves the faithful tribe. In fact, the name "Jew" has become a synonym for the people of God [the covenant people]. 3. bear the name. Paul deliberately withholds calling the person a Jew directly. This hesitation is in anticipation of his statements in 2:28-29, where a Jew is defined. What Paul will be saying is that a person can bear the name of Jew (a descendant of Abraham and Judah -- the "faithful" tribe), but not live a life consistent with that title. 4. The typical Jew. Here Paul is addressing the "typical" Jew. He begins to list some Jewish distinctives, but will save more for later (3:1-2; chaps 9-11). At 2:21, he will distinguish a particular Jew who fails to live up to these distinctives. The distinctives listed here are: (a) rely upon the Law, (b) boast in God, (c) know {His} will, (d) approve the things that are essential, and (e) being instructed out of the Law. 5. rely [G1879, epanapauo_] upon the Law. "Epanapauo_ has the basic sense of 'rest upon' but with overtones of leaning upon, relying upon, finding one's foundation and support in, resting one's hopes upon, or even resting content with" (Dunn). Some see this statement as merely a repeat of the "hearer of the Law" argument used in 2:13 (where Law was viewed incorrectly as a safeguard at Judgment). I think that Paul has moved beyond that idea. Here he means that the Law is the foundation of a whole way of life that identifies a Jew from a Gentile. It is a matter of trust. They have faith that God has given them His revelation of how to live in covenant with Him. And, if they live this way, they will be justified on Judgment Day. In fact, Paul upheld this same viewpoint when he described himself "as to the righteousness [justification] which is in the Law, found blameless" (Phil 3:6). If Paul has an error in mind here (which is questionable), then it is a Jewish attitude that excluded the Gentile. 6. boast [G2744, kauchaomai] in God. Found also in 2:23. It should not be translated "brag" as in NIV. It is probably an echo of Jer 9:23-24 (which is actually quoted in 1 Cor 1:31; 2 Cor 10:17). They had reason to boast in God. He deserved it. Paul's emphasis here is not that Jews are boasting in themselves. (Too many scholars are looking ahead and reading back into this section the teaching that will come later.) They are boasting in the wonderful privilege of knowing God and of God choosing to enter into covenant with them. The Christian also exults in God (Rom 5:11; 1 Cor 3:21-23, 2 Cor 10:17, etc.). We miss the whole point here if we do not accept that God chose to be their God in some very special way. There are four fundamental statements that give the essence of the covenant: (a) "I am YHWH", (b) "I will be your God", (c) "you will be My people", and (d) "I will dwell with you" (Lev 26:11-13; Gen 17:7-8; Exod 6:7; 25:8; 29:45- 46; Lev 11:45; 26:11-13; Dt 29:12-15; Rev 21:7). YHWH is the God who Reveals, Relates, Redeems, and Resides. All of this is because He chooses to Reconcile.

ROMANS 2:18 and know {His} will and approve the things that are essential, being instructed out of the Law, 1. know {His} will (lit. know the will). It was common in Jewish tradition to say "the will" when referring to God's will (implying that there is really only one will that matters). Paul is not referring to knowing the will of God in specific practical details (e.g., knowing which job should I take, where I should live, whom I should marry, etc.). Instead the reference is to the Will of God as revealed in Scripture. 2. approve the things that are essential. It is difficult to pin down exactly what is intended here. a. approve [G1381a, dokimazo_]. This word can mean either "to test" [distinguish] or "to approve". b. essential [G1308, diaphero_]. This word can mean either "to differ" or "be worth more". (Compare its usage in Phil 1:10.)

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 49 So Paul could be saying "distinguish the things that differ from God's will", "aware of moral distinctions", "know right from wrong" (NEB), "approve what is excellent" (ESV), "approve of what is superior" (TNIV), "determine what is best" (NRSV), "approve the better things and have a sense of what is vital" (Amp) or "approve the things that are essential" (NASB). The overall meaning appears to be clear. The Jews, having the Law, have a standard by which they can test the quality of ideas they encounter in life. By seeing clearly the differences between what honors God and what doesn't, they can focus on what is important for life, and keep the "unimportant" in proper perspective. They can choose a better path for living. Compare Jesus' statement regarding the importance of justice, mercy and faithfulness (Matt 23:23). 3. being instructed out of the Law. Here we have the source of the previous statements. They know the will of God for their lives and are able to test/approve affirmations, attitudes, and actions to sort out differing values for doing God's will. How do they know these things? Because they are being instructed [taught] out of the Law. What is being pictured here is an intimate, ongoing learning experience that comes out of the Law. It is a corporate encountering of the Law. It is important to notice that the Shema (Deut 6:4), which most Jews recite every Sabbath, is set in a passage commanding that the Law be taught in every way possible (Deut 6:1- 15; cf. Lev 10:10-11; Deut 17:10-11; 24:8; 33:10; Neh 8:8-9). We get our word "catechism" from the Greek word used here [G2727, kate_cheo_: to teach by word of mouth].

ROMANS 2:19 and are confident that you yourself are a guide to the blind, a light to those who are in darkness, ROMANS 2:20 a corrector of the foolish, a teacher of the immature, having in the Law the embodiment of knowledge and of the truth, 1. Before we continue, let's stop and look at structure. Romans 2:17-20 is the premise statement ("if" clause) and is set up as a series of pairs built around statements regarding the Law. A. But if you bear the name "Jew" (A-1) and rely upon the Law (A-1') and boast in God, (A-2) and know {His} will (A-2') and approve the things that are essential [excellent], B. being instructed out of the Law (2:17-18),

A' and are confident that you yourself are (A'-1) a guide to the blind, (A'-1') a light to those who are in darkness, (A'-2) a corrector of the foolish, (A'-2') a teacher of the immature, B' having the embodiment (B'-1) of knowledge and (B'-1') of the truth, B'' in the Law (2:19-20). Note that "Law" is the last word in 2:18 and in 2:20 [following Paul's construction in the Greek original].

2. As seen by examining the structure, there is a change of focus at 2:20-21. Paul switches from the Jew's relationship with God to that of others. He moves from privilege to responsibility. 3. and are confident [G3982, peitho_: persuade] that you yourself. It would seem that Paul has deliberately chosen the word "confident" rather that "know" to stress that this is a conclusion being drawn (they have persuaded themselves) and not something directly given by God. The covenant teaches what they should be, but it does not insure that it is so. See 2 Cor 10:7 for a similar use of "confident" (cf. Phil 3:3-4 also). The use of "you yourself" supports this viewpoint. 4. a guide to the blind/a light to those who are in darkness. As seen above these claims form one of several pairs. Behind the pair of claims, Paul is thinking of some of the great Servant passages in Isaiah. He especially expects his readers to remember the entire last section of the book (Isaiah 40-66). This section presents Israel as God's servant (Isa 41:8-10; 44:1-5; 44:21, 26; 45:4). This

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 50 servant [Israel] was to bring light to the nations, but instead the servant is blind (42:18-19)! Due to the failure of Israel as servant, God promised to raise up His Servant (i.e., the Messiah). See especially the so-called "Servant Songs" (1st: Isa 42:1-9; 2nd: 49:1-13; 3rd: 50:4-11; 4th: 52:13 - 53:12; 5th: 61:1-11). In one sense, God is the source of both light and darkness (Isa 45:3-7).

"I am YHWH, I have called you in righteousness, I will also hold you by the hand and watch over you, and I will appoint you as a covenant to the people , as a light to the nations, to open blind eyes, to bring out prisoners from the dungeon and those who dwell in darkness from the prison" (Isa 42:6-7). "I will lead the blind by a way they do not know, in paths they do not know I will guide them. I will make darkness into light before them and rugged places into plains. These are the things I will do, and I will not leave them undone" (Isa 42:16). "And now says YHWH, who formed Me from the womb to be His Servant, to bring back to Him, so that Israel might be gathered to Him (for I am honored in the sight of YHWH, and My God is My strength), He says, 'It is too small a thing that You should be My Servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob and to restore the preserved ones of Israel; I will also make You a light of the nations so that My salvation may reach to the end of the earth'" (Isa 49:5-6). "Thus says YHWH, 'In a favorable time I have answered You, and in a day of salvation I have helped You; and I will keep You and give You for a covenant of the people , to restore the land, to make {them} inherit the desolate heritages'" (Isa 49:8). "He shall make glorious, by the way of the sea, on the other side of Jordan, Galilee of the Gentiles. The people who walk in darkness will see a great light; those who live in a dark land, the light will shine on them" (Isa 9:1b-2; read 9:1-8). In light of these passages, the charge by Jesus that some Pharisees were "blind guides of the blind" (Mt 15:14) becomes very significant.

As already mentioned God had intended that His servant Israel be a kingdom of priests to the nations. The idea is given again later in Isaiah (61:6). But they failed. Therefore the Messiah takes on the title of "Israel" [along with many other titles] (see Isa 49:3: "He said to Me, 'You are My Servant Israel, in Whom I will show My glory'"). The Messiah ["Israel", Jesus] is faithfully carrying out the task Israel [the Jews] should have done, i.e., bringing God's salvation to the Gentiles. In addition, after the faithful Servant [Jesus] has done His work of salvation, He will give this priesthood to His followers (Isa 60:3; 66:21) so that they might declare His glory among the nations (66:18-20). Note that the commissioning of Paul included these servant statements (Acts 26:15-18).

5. a corrector of the foolish, a teacher of the immature. A corrector [G3810, paideute_s] is a teacher or one who disciplines. It is found only here and in Heb 12:9. But paideia [G3809] is found 6 times and paideuo_ [G3811] is found ca. 13 times. This next pair naturally follows from the first set. Israel was to be the priest to the nations. It was the task of the priest to correct the foolish and to teach the children [the "immature"]. This was the commission given to Israel. But they did not carry out assigned roles of corrector and teacher of the Gentiles. Read the entire 23rd chapter of Matthew for the indictment of Jesus towards the scribes and Pharisees who have taken the "seat of Moses" (23:1). Look for the description of a true "servant" and the continual use of "blind" to describe these teachers. See especially the picture of failure in their mission to the Gentiles (23:15). Also consider John 8:12 and 9:5 where Jesus is the "Light of the World" and those who reject Him are blind (9:40-41). His followers are to be the "the light of the world" (Mt 5:14). 6. having in the Law the embodiment of knowledge and of the truth. a. embodiment. [G3446, morpho_sis: form]. This family of words [G3444-3446] is found only ca. 5 times in the NT and "form" is its usual meaning (G3446: Rom 2:20; 2 Tim 3:5; G3445: Gal 4:19; G3444: Mk 16:12; Phil 2:6, 7). It can take on two different (almost opposite!) meanings: (1) having the outward form of something but not the reality as in 2 Tim 3:5; (2) "embodiment" or containing the reality; or full expression of that reality. Notice these different features in the following passages. "... holding to a form [G3446] of godliness, although they have denied its power; avoid such men as these" (2 Tim 3:5). "[Christ Jesus] who, although He existed in the form [G3444, morphe_] of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied Himself, taking the form [G3444] of a bond-servant,

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 51 {and} being made in the likeness of men" (Phil 2:6-7). "My children, with whom I am again in labor until Christ is formed [G3445, morphoo_] in you" (Gal 4:19). b. of knowledge and of the truth. Paul is not referring to some particular knowledge or truth. Rather he is thinking of these terms in a fundamental sense, i.e., not some truth, but truth itself. "Together the words encompass the highest claims and aspirations of religion and philosophy in the ancient world" (Dunn). 7. Some interpretations. By choosing to use "embodiment" instead of other possible Greek words (e.g., G5481, charakte_r [Heb 1:3]; G5179b, tupos [Rom 6:17]; G5296 hupotupo_sis [2 Tim 1:13]), Paul is stressing the fact that knowledge and truth are there, but not always found. Jesus was both God and slave ("in the form of"), but neither reality was readily apparent to those who saw Him and listened to Him. Both the Scriptures and Jesus are revelations of God. "For the Law was given through Moses; grace and truth were realized through Jesus Christ. No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained {Him}" (John 1:17-18). God knows how to embody the Scriptures with "knowledge and truth" and still withhold these from us. He gives us the revelation of Himself, but He is still in charge of the revelation. See the statements by Jesus to this effect (Mt 11:25-30 = LK 10:21-24). Note that the "Good Samaritan" understood "truth" better than the two Jews in the parable that followed (Lk 10:25-37). This example illustrates the very thing Paul has been teaching. Paul has claimed all along that the Jews are not the sole recipients of truth, simply because they have the Law. All people have access to the revelation of God, to truth, and to law (Rom 1:18-19, 25, 28, 32; 2:8; cf. 15:14). However, this access is only possible when God is directly involved. Paul chooses not to discuss it here, but it is only by the Spirit of Truth (the Spirit of the Son) that truth comes to us. The Spirit must illuminate before inspiration becomes available. No one can say "Jesus is Lord" except by the Holy Spirit (1 Cor 12:3; cf. Rom 10:8-21).

ROMANS 2:21 you, therefore, who teach another, do you not teach yourself? You who preach that one shall not steal, do you steal? ROMANS 2:22 You who say that one should not commit adultery, do you commit adultery? You who abhor idols, do you rob temples? ROMANS 2:23 You who boast in the Law, through your breaking the Law, do you dishonor God? ROMANS 2:24 For "the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you" (Is 52:5), just as it is written. 1. Structure. The structure of this sub-section is easily discerned from this English translation. There are five sets of statements beginning with "You who..." or "the one who..." [opposes certain actions] and ending with "do you..." [then participate in these activities]. 2. This sub-section is related to the previous section (2:17-20) which was the premise statement ("if" clause). This passage (2:21-24) should be the outcome statement ("then" clause), but it is varied somewhat. It assumes that the expected outcome did not happen and suggests some reasons why not. 3. Background. Paul ends with a quotation from Isa 52:5, which suggests that we should still be thinking of the Servant and priests passages in Isaiah. If Israel had been a faithful servant, then the name of God and Israel's name would be honored (Isa 43:7; 44:5). Instead, because of their unfaithfulness, God sent them into exile, bringing dishonor on them and their God. Ezekiel 36:16-23 gives the story in a very clear fashion. Israel, who was to be a holy nation, has profaned His holy name among the nations. God will act through His Servant [the Messiah] and through servants of this Messiah to remove the shame and humiliation (Isa 61:7). The book of Ezekiel especially focuses on the theme of honoring God with the statement "know that I am YHWH" appearing at least 60 times. 4. boast in the Law. Using "boast in the Law" as an ending statement says several things. First, it shows that this entire passage from 2:17 to 2:24 is about the Law given to Moses for Israel. However, in 2:17 it is about relying upon the Law and boasting in God, while in 2:23 it is boasting in the Law and dishonoring God. So, no matter how we interpret 2:21-22 (which is difficult) it all comes out the same anyway. It is possible, by some mistaken methods, to rely on the Law and to boast in the Law and still bring dishonor to God and to themselves.

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 52 5. You who... do you (2:21-22)? I have backed into these verses since they are very difficult to interpret. However, since the outcome is obvious (see #4 above), it is not so important that we get this right. There are several possible interpretations. A few will be given here. a. Corporate. Even though Paul is still using second person singular, a good case could be made that Paul is picturing the whole nation as depicted in the OT. Charges of stealing, adultery, and idolatry against the covenant people [Israel] are common themes in the OT (Isa 3:14-15; Jer 7:8-11; Ezek 22:6-16; Mal 3:5). These themes continued to be common teaching points by Jewish teachers in Paul's day. Jesus certainly used this technique! Read Matthew 23, if you didn't read it when it was suggested earlier. b. Individual. It could be that Paul is picturing a single Jew who is a hypocrite (saying one thing and doing another). Will such a person be able to use the Law as a defense on Judgment Day? But if not, then the whole idea that mere possession of the Law results in a privileged status at Judgment is denied. In fact, failure to truly live the Law in such a way that God is honored appears to bring strong judgment. Privilege brings responsibility. More light increases requirements. c. Lack of insight. There is another possibility, following the approach taken by Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount. Jesus was addressing those Jews who really believed they were keeping the Law. However, they did not have the insight to realize that there are more subtle forms of stealing, adultery, and idolatry than the literal acts. For example, Jesus made it clear that men can commit adultery without the actual physical act (Mt 5:27-28). In fact, the entire antithesis section stresses these more subtle levels of sin (Mt 5:21-37). This interpretation fits well with what has been said about some of the prior verses. Unless we rely on God to illuminate His revelation, then we miss what He is telling us in the Law. But would the first readers of Paul's letter see these subtle levels in the Law? Some say "no" and deny this interpretation. However, the whole idea that there is a law written on the heart should prick the conscience of the person who only obeys the Law at one level. Again, the real sin is the refusal to listen to God as He illuminates His revelation for and to us. 6. do you rob temples? Don't ask! I don't know what this means. I could give the many answers found in commentaries, but I find them all unsatisfactory and not worth the effort. I have taken the first part ("You who abhor idols") as showing that idolatry is the sin being addressed (and most commentaries agree), but the details are difficult to choose.

ROMANS 2:25 For indeed circumcision is of value if you practice the Law; but if you are a transgressor of the Law, your circumcision has become uncircumcision. 1. For [gar]. "For" show that, although Paul introduces a new idea, this passage is directly connected to the whole discussion up to this point. He must deal with the shock some Jews will experience at the above claims. Is it really possible that the very people who bear the mark [sign] of belonging to God can be in danger of God's wrath at the final judgment? 2. circumcision. Paul makes a direct connection between circumcision and practice of the Law. It would be difficult to overstate the importance of this declaration. And in all honesty, we must carefully consider its parallelism with Christianity. Circumcision is the sign of the covenant God made with Abraham. As an act of grace, God chose to enter into covenant with Abraham (Gen 17). Faith is a key element in this covenant (but that will be addressed in chapter 4). Here Paul declares that this sign of the covenant (circumcision) is without value unless it is followed by practicing the Law. In fact, it becomes uncircumcision (loss of covenant!). Faith that is not followed by faithfulness is nullified. 3. of value [G5623, o_pheleo_: helps, profits, benefits]. Notice that Paul does not say that circumcision justifies, only that it has value (which he does not explain at this point). 4. practice [G4238, prasso_]. Found ca. 38 times. It is used twice in 1:32 and once each in 2:1, 2, 3, 25; 7:15, 19; 9:11; 13:4. If we do not allow that it is possible to "practice the law" then this powerful declaration by Paul loses much of its meaning. We must keep separate from this declaration, the equally important truth that it is impossible to keep the Law perfectly. Remember that Paul claimed that the life he lived before becoming a follower of Christ was "blameless" with respect to the Law (Phil 3:4-5). This Philippian passage also makes an important statement about circumcision (Phil 3:2-3).

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 53 5. Transgressor [G3848, parabate_s]. Of course, Paul included here the person who deliberately breaks the Law. But in consideration of the previous passage (2:12-24), He certainly is also thinking of the person who does not have a favorable response from the three witnesses (2:15). By rejecting, ignoring, or suppressing the three witnesses, some people convince themselves that they practice the Law, when actually they are transgressors of the Law. "Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but {what matters} is the keeping of the commandments of God" (1 Cor 7:19; cf. Gal 5:6). 6. your circumcision has become uncircumcision. circumcision [G4061, peritome_: circumcision (35x); G4059, peritemno_: circumcise (17x)], uncircumcision [G203, akrobustia (20x)]. Paul uses their own pattern of thinking against them. For them the equations are simple: circumcision = covenant member; uncircumcision = outside the covenant. But Paul insists that an element is missing: circumcision + faithfulness = covenant member; circumcision - faithfulness = uncircumcision (loss of covenant membership). Remember our chart. Paul says again that there are only two groups with respect to final judgment (those who do good, those who do evil). The emphases of the Jews in their groupings (Jews/Gentiles, Law/no Law, circumcised/uncircumcised) are all wrong.

ROMANS 2:26 So if the uncircumcised man keeps the requirements of the Law, will not his uncircumcision be regarded as circumcision? ROMANS 2:27 And he who is physically uncircumcised, if he keeps the Law, will he not judge you who though having the letter {of the Law} and circumcision are a transgressor of the Law? 1. Now Paul adds another equation: uncircumcision + faithfulness = circumcision (i.e., a member of the covenant). This position (Christians do not need to be circumcised to be members of the covenant) is one that brought considerable controversy into the relationship between Jews and Christians. It matches the conclusion of the Council (Acts 15:1-29; cf. Gal 2:1-9). Since circumcision is one of the "requirements of the law" (Gen 17:1-27; Ex. 12:42-49; Lev 12:1-3; Josh 5:1-9) how is this position possible? Paul is thinking of the New Covenant (see below on 2:28-29). 2. keeps. This translation [NASB] fails to bring out the distinction between "keeps" [G5442, phulasso_] in 2:26 and "keeps" [G5055, teleo_] in 2:27. The NIV shows a difference (by using "keep" and "obey"). There are two different Greek words which are normally used in the NT for "keep" (especially when the reference is to "keeping the commandments"): [G5083, te_reo_] and [G5442, phulasso_]. They both contain the idea of guarding and watching over with the idea of preserving. By extension, they both have the sense of keeping or observing. Both concepts are intended here. None of the "requirements of the law" must be lost both in understanding and in practice. When Paul chooses "teleo_" for "keeps the law" in 2:27, he clearly wants to extend the concept of keeping, not just repeat it. However "obey" [NIV] does not bring out the force of the Greek [teleo_], which is a very important word in the NT, meaning "bring to the end, accomplish, fulfill, complete" (here in the present tense, continuous, ongoing) -- a living out the fulfilling of the law. Paul wants his Jewish readers to move beyond ritual and custom to faith and faithfulness. There appears to be a progression from "practice" (2:25) to "keep" (2:26) to "fulfill" (2:27). 2. keeps the requirements of the Law. This phrase is intended to contrast with "having the letter {of the Law}" ("of the Law" is not in the original Greek). Letter [G1121, gramma] can have a neutral sense, but Paul uses it here and elsewhere in a negative sense. He is probably getting us ready for his great declaration: "by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified in His sight" (3:20). Paul wants us to realize that there are ways of keeping the letter of the Law that do not keep the requirements of the Law (both comply with and guard it from being lost). Neither does this "keeping the letter of the Law" fulfill [teleo_] the law (i.e., bring about its intended goal). "But now we have been released from the Law, having died to that by which we were bound, so that we serve in newness of the Spirit and not in oldness of the letter" (Rom 7:6). "... who also made us adequate as servants of a new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life. But if the ministry of death, in letters engraved on stones, came with glory, so that the sons of Israel could not look intently at the face of Moses because of the glory of his face, fading {as} it was, how will the ministry of the Spirit fail to be even more with glory?" (2 Cor 3:6-8; read the rest of the chapter).

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 54 3. regarded [G3049, logizomai]. Found ca. 40 times in the NT with Paul using it ca. 34 times. This word has broad applications as seen by the various ways it is translated in the NASB: regarded (Acts 19:27; Rom 2:26; 9:8; 1 Cor 4:1; 2 Cor 10:2; Phil 3:13; 1 Pet 5:12); credited (Rom 4:3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11, 22, 23, 24; 2 Cor 12:6); consider (Rom 6:11; 8:18, 36; 2 Cor 3:5; 10:7, 11; 11:5; Heb 11:19); reckoned (Gal 3:6; James 2:23); take into account (Jn 11:50; Rom 4:8; 1 Cor 13:5); suppose (Rom 2:3); maintain (Rom 3:28); thinks (Rom 14:14); reason (1 Cor 13:11), counting (2 Cor 5:19); numbered (Mk 15:28; Lk 22:37); dwell [ponder] (Phil 4:8); counted (2 Tim 4:16). Paul uses it at least 18 times in Romans, 11 times in chapter 4. It is found twice in this chapter (2:3, 26). So it is a very important word for Paul. In general, it refers to the conclusions drawn (or actions taken) after considering all the facts. Here Paul uses it in the sense of what God will decide on Judgment Day (it is in the future tense) after examining the life of the individual. 4. judge you. Paul is still using second person singular, addressing the imaginary person he created for debate. It is not likely that "judge" is used in the sense of being the actual judge at a trial. Instead, it refers to the contrast and comparison of two ways of life. It is one lifestyle witnessing against another lifestyle. Perhaps Paul is saying, "They live out the law in the sense of fulfilling its purpose, you do not. You have the shell of the reality, not the core of reality; the husk but not the fruit." Compare Matt 12:41-42 = Luke 11:31-32 (also Mt 19:28 = Lk 22:30; 1 Cor 6:2). 5. though [G1223, dia]. It is usually translated "through" with a normal instrumental meaning. If that is the way it should be taken then Paul is saying that, by using the Law and circumcision improperly, the person becomes a transgressor of the Law. If it should be translated "though", then the sentence means that the person is a transgressor in spite of having these elements. I think "through" is a better translation. Since they are using "letter" and circumcision in ways that do not fulfill the purposes of God; these distinctive marks of being a Jew have become transgressions. They are living the letter of the law (doing it by the book), but not living the reality of the law. Christians do the same when they use the Bible as an instruction manual, not as the expression of the very nature and will of God. Circumcision is the sign or symbol of the covenant, not the reality. Jesus said, "Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you tithe mint and dill and cummin, and have neglected the weightier provisions of the law: justice and mercy and faithfulness; but these are the things you should have done without neglecting the others. You blind guides, who strain out a gnat and swallow a camel!" (Mt 23:23-24) and "Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, because you travel around on sea and land to make one proselyte; and when he becomes one, you make him twice as much a son of hell as yourselves" (Mt 23:15). (See below for more explanation of this misuse.)

ROMANS 2:28 For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh. ROMANS 2:29 But he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that which is of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter; and his praise is not from men, but from God. 1. For [gar]. It shows that Paul is explaining his statements in the preceding verses (omitted in the NIV). 2. Jew/praise. Paul has taken the Law away from the Jew who fails to keep it. Then Paul took circumcision away from the Jew who fails to fulfill the purpose of the covenant with Abraham. Now, in conclusion, he takes away the name "Jew" from them! The name "Jew" (taken from the tribal name "Judah") means "praise" and their lives should have resulted in the name of God being praised, not blasphemed. So they forfeit the name. Note, however, here the idea of praise is directed towards the faithful. Paul is still picturing Judgment Day and saying that those who fulfill covenant will receive praise on that day. 3. Fulfillment. The idea of the law needing fulfillment was not foreign to Jewish thought of that day. There are several factors in play (following some insights from N.T. Wright). a. Return from exile. Although the Jews were allowed to return from exile and again live in the promised land, few of the great promised blessings associated with return were fulfilled. There was an expectation by devout Jews that God would still bring about this fulfillment. b. Coming of the Messiah. The irony is very strong. Jesus actually came at a time when the nation was fully expecting Him. In fact, most of them (especially the Pharisees) were convinced that the Messiah was coming soon. Perhaps, as N.T. Wright suggests, the scholars of that day found that hope in Daniel. Although the exile had ended within the seventy years

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 55 predicted, the prophesy of seventy years was changed into seventy "weeks of years" (Dan 9:24-27) meaning 490 years. Although there are several results from attempted calculation, one of these calculations sees the coming of the Messiah at the time of the arrival of Jesus. Expectation was high that God was about to fulfill His covenant with Israel. c. New Covenant. N.T. Wright reminds us that the exile itself was part of the covenant. The Jews were also anticipating a new covenant (Jer 31:31-34) which was a fulfillment (not a replacement) of the old covenants. Many Jews saw the OT not as an end in itself, but as an ongoing narrative with a great climax and fulfillment still to come. 4. New Covenant Signs. The OT predicts a new set of signs for the new covenant. Paul uses some of them here. "Behold, days are coming," declares YHWH, "when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah, not like the covenant which I made with their fathers in the day I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, My covenant which they broke, although I was a husband to them," declares YHWH. "But this is the covenant which I will make with the house of Israel after those days," declares YHWH, "I will put My law within them and on their heart I will write it; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people" (Jer 31:31-33). "Then I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you will be clean; I will cleanse you from all your filthiness and from all your idols. Moreover, I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you; and I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. I will put My Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes, and you will be careful to observe My ordinances" (Ezek 36:25-27). a. A Circumcised Heart. Circumcision of the flesh is a symbolic representation of the cleansing of the human race which God would do in order for reconciliation between God and humans to happen. The cleansing presence of the Holy Spirit in the heart of the believer becomes the sign of the New Covenant (Acts 15:5-11). "Moreover YHWH your God will circumcise your heart and the heart of your descendants, to love YHWH your God with all your heart and with all your soul, so that you may live" (Deut 30:6; cf. Deut 10:16; Jer 4:4; 9:25-26; Lev 26:41). b. Law written on the Heart. The empowering presence of the Holy Spirit in the heart of the believer will bring about the fulfillment of the Law. Obedience will be from the heart, not in the outward forms of religion. The abiding presence of the Holy Spirit makes the love commandments possible. He empowers obedience so that true faithfulness is possible (cf. 1 Cor 4:5; 2 Cor 4:2; 1 Pet 3:4). c. Inwardly: from symbol to reality. One scholar has identified six distinctive features of Judaism during the time of Jesus. These are Temple (including the whole sacrificial system), Land, possession of the Torah, the dietary laws (kosher), observing the Sabbath, and circumcision. It is easy to see why there arose such conflict between Judaism and Christianity. Christianity challenged the importance of all of these (Mark 7:1-23 [Torah and kosher]; 2:23 - 3:6 [Sabbath]; Gal 5:6 [circumcision]; John 2:13-22 [Temple]; 4:19-24 [Temple, Land]; Mt 5:17-48 [Torah]; Acts 7 [Land and Temple]). For example, note that challenging Sabbath keeping was one focus of the teaching of Jesus. Christianity replaced these symbols with a fulfilled reality. Circumcision is the sign of the covenant with Abraham (Gen 17:11). Sabbath-keeping is the sign of the covenant with Israel (Ex 31:13-17). (The Jews of that day exalted the kosher laws to that status also.) Both of these signs (symbols) are to be replaced with the reality. What has replaced Sabbath keeping in the New Covenant? The Sabbath symbolizes the resting from and results of creation (Gen 1:31; Ex. 20:11; 31:17). Keeping of the Sabbath was celebrating the blessings of creation. The resurrection of Jesus brought about a new creation (Rom 6:3-7; 2 Cor 5:17; Gal 6:12-16; Eph 2:10-22; 4:20-24; Col 3:10-11; Jn 3:3-8, 12; Rev 3:14). Therefore, Christians celebrate the resurrection of Jesus as well as being the new creation of God [their personal resurrection] by making Sunday (the day Jesus was resurrected) a special day for worship. 5. Praise not from men, but from God. Only God knows the heart. No outward observance of ritual can display what is in the heart. "But now that you have come to know God, or rather to be known by God, how is it that you turn back again to the weak and worthless elemental things, to which you desire to be enslaved all over again? You observe days and months and seasons and years. I fear for you, that perhaps I have labored over you in vain" (Gal 4:9-11). Over and over again, Christianity has made the same mistake, honoring the symbols and not the reality. For

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 56 many people baptism and communion have been exalted to a status of reality when these are only symbols, as is circumcision, etc. (1 Cor 7:19; Gal 5:6; 6:15; Phil 3:2-3). 6. The limitation of circumcision. At the time of its institution, circumcision was intended to be a sign of an exclusive relationship, making the descendants of Abraham very special in God's sight. But it was so exclusive that it was a sign that only males could carry. That should have given people some concerns. The New Covenant changes the "children of Abraham" from the physical descendants to the spiritual descendants so that the promise would become inclusive (open to all). The giving of the Spirit (New Covenant sign) was available to everyone (Acts 2:16-21; quoting Joel 2:28-32). "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham's descendants, heirs according to promise" (Gal 3:28-29; cf. "Israel of God" in 6:16). The name "Jew" has been given to faithful Gentiles.

Remember, on Judgment Day, the only two groups that matter are (a) those who do good and (b) those who do evil (Rom 2:6-11). God is impartial. In this chapter, Paul has tried to explain what it means "to do good" (e.g., fulfilling the Law, have a circumcised heart, etc.).

It is time to review our outline.

II. PROVIDING AND RECEIVING THE GOSPEL (1:18 - 5:21). A. The Need for the Gospel [Human Unrighteousness] (1:18 - 3:20) 1. Immoral People (1:18-32) [The Pagan World]. Focus: universality and corporate nature of human failure. 2. Moral People (2:1-11). Focus: the impartiality of God. 3. Gentiles (2:12-16). Focus: without the Law. 4. Jews (2:17-24). Focus: Law. 5. Jews (2:25-29). Focus: circumcision. 6. Faithlessness (3:1-8). Focus: the Faithfulness of God 7. Sin (3:9-20). Focus: all the world becomes accountable to God. B. The Provision of the Gospel [Righteousness by Faith] (3:21 - 4:25) C. The Fundamental Effects of Receiving the Gospel [Peace, Hope, Life, etc.] (ch. 5).

We have been working on "The Need for the Gospel" looking at human unrighteousness (1:18 - 3:20). We now begin chapter 3 with the final two sub-sections of this passage. This passage will end by concluding that all humanity is accountable to God. But before Paul does that, he pauses to remind us of the faithfulness of God in spite of human unfaithfulness.

Paul has made it abundantly clear that, with respect to the final judgment, there is no advantage to being a Jew. (In some respects it might even be a disadvantage!) So were the covenants with Abraham and with Israel simply a mistake? Must God now go to Plan B (Christianity)? (That is the viewpoint of many Christians.) However, Paul surprises us by saying that there remains an advantage. However, many Jews have missed the point all along. The Jews saw the covenants as giving them a special status (an advantage) on Judgment Day. But that turns out to be a selfish use of covenant. The advantage is the opportunity to be of special service to God in the history of salvation. Many "Christians" make the same mistake. They see terms such as elect, called, chosen, saints, etc. giving them an assurance of heaven. Instead these terms refer to privileges and responsibilities for faithful service. "But seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness" (Mt 6:33). "Pursue peace with all, and the sanctification without which no one will see the Lord" (Heb 12:14). Heaven is a by-product, not the goal of life.

This paragraph (3:1-8) is impossible to understand without the rest of the letter to Romans. Paul makes some large claims, but does not do much to explain them. We just have to wait. He will eventually address these issues in later chapters. But we also must have understood the message of chapter 1:18 - 2:29.

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 57 Structure for 3:1-8. Three great words assigned to God are truth/true, righteous, faithful. Contrasting words assigned to Israel are lie/liar, unrighteous, faithless. The outer frame which contains the initial premise statement (3:3) and a clear misuse of it (3:8), focuses on faithlessness and faithfulness. Inside that frame is another frame (3:4a, 3:7) which focuses on liar/lie and true/truth. The next inside frame pictures God judging (3:4b, 3:6). Within this frame is the discussion of the righteousness of God.

A. Israel is Faithless, God is Faithful (3:3) B. God found true - all are liars (3:4a) C. You are judged [lit. in your judging] (3:4b) D. our unrighteousness demonstrates D-1. the righteousness of God D-2. we say D' not unrighteous [God] D'-1 God who inflicts wrath [e.g., demonstrates His righteousness] D'-2 in human terms I say [3:5 sequenced according to the Greek] C' How will God judge the world (3:6) B' My lie - the truth of God (3:7) A' "Let us do evil that good may come" Their condemnation is just (3:8)

Now if it is true that chiastic structures are intended to help us see connections, then we have strong support for the idea that we are to connect the righteousness of God [dikaiosyne_ theou] with the faithfulness of God [pistis theou]. Of course, we are not to equate them, but see that they are parallel and interconnected expressions. What connects them in this passage (indeed in the whole book!) is the concept of covenant. Because God is true, God is faithful to His covenants. Because God is faithful to His covenants, He is righteous.

ROMANS 3:1 Then what advantage has the Jew? Or what is the benefit of circumcision? :2 Great in every respect. First of all, that they were entrusted with the oracles of God. 1. diatribe style. It would appear that Paul continues his dialogue with the imaginary person he created at 2:1. Here he hints at some answers for some objections to what he has been saying about the Jews. 2. Great in every respect. This response is quite a surprise in light of what Paul was writing in chapter 2. We and the imaginary person are expecting "none" as an answer. Instead, Paul uses "great" ("much" not "none" or "a little"). 3. First of all. It appears that Paul intended to give a list. Rather he only gives the first point and saves the rest for chapters 9-11 (esp. 9:4-5). Some people hold that Paul means "chiefly" here, but it is not likely. 4. entrusted [episteuthe_san, from G4100, pisteuo_]. It is the first of several uses in this passage of the pist- stem from which we get "faith", "belief", etc. Compare similar uses of this term in 1 Cor 9:7; Gal 2:7; 1 Th 2:4; 1 Tim 1:11; Titus 1:3; Jn 2:4. (Other pist- are G4102-4104, 569-571 [pistikos, pistis, pistos, pistoo_, apisteo_, apistia, apistos. 5. the oracles of God (ta logia tou theou) [G3051, logion]. Used in this setting "oracle" has a specialized meaning (divine utterances). Compare Acts 7:38; Heb 5:12. It is important that we catch this first century picture. People believed that certain people were entrusted with messages from the gods. They were not given these oracles for their own benefit; they received them for other people. So the concepts of "entrusted" and "oracle" fit together. It is the foundation for a major point Paul makes in chapter 2. Merely being the custodians of the revelation of God is of no advantage or benefit. Neither is there a Judgment Day advantage to responding to the cultic and ethical demands of the revelation. The advantage lies in being involved in the purpose or mission of the revelation. They failed with respect to God's revealed purpose. Remember the idea of "fulfilled" in 2:27. In Ezekiel 3:16-21, God appoints Ezekiel as a watchman over Israel ("whenever you hear a word from My mouth, warn them from Me", "But his blood I will require at your hands"). Ezekiel is being held responsible for the words given him.

ROMANS 3:3 What then? If some did not believe, their unbelief will not nullify the faithfulness of God, will it?

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 58 1. What then? [ti gar]. Today, we might say, "Now where are we?" or "Where do we go from there?" or "Where does that leave us?" 2. pist- stem. Three times in this one verse Paul uses the Greek pist- stem: (a) "did not believe" [e_piste_san from G569, apisteo_], (b) "unbelief" [apistian from G570, apistia], and "faithfulness" [pistin from G4102, pistis]. He also used the pist- stem in 3:2, found in the word "entrusted" [episteuthe_san, from G4100, pisteuo_]. Remember that this family of Greek words can be translated either "faith/unbelief" or "faithful/unfaithful" depending on the context. Most scholars agree that with respect to God, "faithful/faithfulness" is the only possible translation. But scholars are divided on understanding the context of the human response. NIV and NASB translators went with faith/unbelief while NRSV and ESV translators have chosen faithful/unfaithful. People's theology brings a bias to the passage. The NIV translators tend to shy away from anything that is inclined towards a "works" salvation. So they picture the Jews not believing the message of their own Scriptures. And I do not deny the truth of that aspect in the Jews' interaction with God. But the main focus here is on God's faithfulness to the covenant He made with Israel. Israel was unfaithful to the covenant. The failure of so much theology today is the dichotomy scholars (as well as "people in the pew") have made between faith and faithfulness. This separation cannot be supported. Faith without faithfulness is not faith. A major theme of the book of Romans is "obedience of faith" which frames the book (1:5; 16:26). "Unfaithful" is the best translation. The Jew were unfaithful to the covenant obligations. But this choice does not deny that unbelief is present in all unfaithfulness. However, the focus here is on disobedience, i.e., failure to meet covenant obligations. 3. nullify [G2673, katargeo_, "to render inoperative"]. Paul briefly considers an impossible idea. Can human unfaithfulness somehow make God unfaithful? He responds in 3:4 (see below) and elsewhere: "If we endure, we will also reign with Him; if we deny Him, He also will deny us; if we are faithless, He remains faithful, for He cannot deny Himself" (2 Tim 2:12-13). 4. the faithfulness of God. But what does this phrase mean in this context? It is centered in the covenants with Abraham and Israel. On the negative side, this faithfulness to the covenant means that God must carry out the punishment obligations built into the covenant. That is the focus of the "inflict wrath" statement in 3:5. "If we deny Him, He also will deny us" (2 Tim 2:12). However, the other side is more complicated. It would appear that God has tied His plan for the salvation of the world to the covenant with Abraham -- and, perhaps, to a lesser degree the covenant with Israel. If the covenant with Israel is now broken, how can God carry out His plan of salvation of the world? Many (perhaps "most") people will say at this point that the covenant really isn't broken, because God chooses to remain faithful to it. But that is too simplistic and misses the point. Paul's question must be taken seriously. The question is based on the existence of a possible dilemma. (a) If God is faithful to the covenant then He must acknowledge it has failed and must consider it voided. This includes inflicting the proper punishment (which involves removal of Israel from covenant membership). (b) To continue with covenant blessings would make God unfaithful! However, God cannot fulfill His plan of salvation of the world unless He does it through the seed (descendant) of Abraham (Gen 17:19; Rom 4:13, 16; 9:4; Lk 1:55; Gal 3:16). So He has boxed Himself into a corner. Whatever He does, He will be unfaithful (or so it would seem). Let me give a partial answer at this point -- with no explanation. God gets Himself out of the box (the dilemma) with the New Covenant (Jer 34:33) and Jesus. 5. An aside. People often wonder. If Jesus died so that salvation becomes available to all, why did He basically limit His ministry "to the lost sheep of the house of Israel" (Mt 15:24)? The answer involves God's plan that the children of Abraham be involved as much as possible in the fulfilling of the plan of salvation. The nations are to be blessed through them.

ROMANS 3:4 May it never be! Rather, let God be found true, though every man {be found} a liar, as it is written, "That You may be justified in Your words, and prevail when You are judged" (Ps 51:4). 1. May it never be! [me_ genoito, G3361, G1096] A negative oath found ca. 15 times in the NT. Paul uses it often in Romans (Rom 3:4, 6, 31; 6:2, 15; 7:7, 13; 9:14; 11:1, 11; 1 Cor 6:15; Gal 2:17; 3:21; cf. Gen 44:7, 17; Josh 22:29; 24:16; 1 Kgs 20:3; also 1 Sam 24:6; 26:11; 1 Kgs 21:2; 1 Chron 11:19; Job 34:10 [1 Sam 2:30]). Luke 20:16 is the only other place in the NT. It is a strong negative oath. The translators have chosen a variety of expressions to try to convey how

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 59 emphatically Paul rejects this notion: "God forbid!" (KJV), "Not at all! (NIV), "Of course not!" (Phillips), "Impossible", "By no means!" (ESV, NRSV), "May such a thing never occur" (Wuest), "May it never be!" (NASB). 2. Let God be found. Paul probably uses this expression to emphasize the truth that it is not always easy (in this life) to understand what God is doing. But at the final judgment, we will see that God has been true and faithful at every point. In fact, we should be able to reason it out (even though we cannot see the whole picture). It is impossible that God, being God, could be anything other than faithful and true! 3. true [G227, ale_the_s]. This word "true" is directly connected with truth [G225, ale_theia] already used by Paul in 1:18, 25; 2:2, 8, 20 (see there). Paul is probably thinking of the LXX [the Septuagint: Greek translation of the OT] where this Greek word is often used (cf. Psa 89) to translate the Hebrew word for faithfulness [H530, emunah]. The ideas are really interchangeable. If God is true, He is faithful. 3. though every man {be found} a liar. We probably have a quotation from Psalm 116. "I said in my alarm, 'All men are liars'" (Psa 116:11). However, Paul is not making a point here that all people deliberately tell lies (which is probably true, but it is not where Paul is going with this.) Paul's point, in this whole paragraph, is to remind us that there are certain fixed points. In this passage these fixed points are that God is true, faithful, and righteous. If we begin by examining circumstances and conclude that God is not true, faithful, or righteous, then we have told ourselves a lie. 4. justified [G1344, dikaioo_] in Your words. Paul uses a key word in this letter (cf. 2:13). Its use here supports the picture already drawn for this verse. God will be found true and be declared righteous [justified] on Judgment Day. 5. and prevail when You are judged [possibly "in Your judging"]. Paul is picturing people on Judgment Day, trying to show that they should not be declared guilty because God Himself is guilty. Their arguments will fail them. God will prevail (overcome, conquer) [G3528, nikao_]. This is basically a quotation from Psa 51. David is confessing his sin before God saying, "Against You, You only, I have sinned and done what is evil in Your sight, so that You are justified when You speak [or "in your words"] and blameless [lit. pure] when You judge" (Psa 51:4). It is a minor point, and perhaps shouldn't even be mentioned. It is possible that Paul chooses to use the LXX here because it varies slightly from the Hebrew manuscript. "When you are judged" (from LXX) can be picturing God on trial. But, regardless of the picture Paul has in mind, the outcome is the same. God is true and will be vindicated on Judgment Day. For example, remember the three witnesses within us that will witness against us in favor of God (2:14-16). When Job faced God, Job closed his mouth (Job 42:1-6). 6. Psalm 51. One last observation! Paul may have chosen to quote from Psa 51 since it is David's confession of sin and it pictures the New Covenant (new heart, cleansing, gift of Holy Spirit, etc.) Read this wonderful psalm! Even though David is guilty and confesses his sin and God is righteous in condemning him, David speaks out in faith, expecting to experience the grace, compassion, and lovingkindness of God. It is perhaps also significant that this psalm follows Psalm 50 which describes God's judgment on the wicked.

ROMANS 3:5 But if our unrighteousness demonstrates the righteousness of God, what shall we say? The God who inflicts wrath is not unrighteous, is He? (I am speaking in human terms.) ROMANS 3:6 May it never be! For otherwise, how will God judge the world? 1. Paul now anticipates an objection from his imaginary person. In Psalm 51 (cited by Paul above) God's response of grace, compassion, lovingkindness, etc. to human sin demonstrates His righteousness. If that is so, why should God judge sinners, since their sin increases His glory? If God can still be faithful and righteous is spite of human failure, why should He not excuse the sinner? God has lost nothing and has actually benefited by human failure (so the argument goes). 2. what shall we say? A common expression by Paul (4:1; 6:1; 7:7; 8:31; 9:14, 30). "What conclusion should we draw?" "Should we agree with the thoughts of the imaginary person?" 3. A legal dilemma. So the objection from the imaginary person has created a dilemma for God. If He inflicts wrath (as punishment for unrighteousness), will He not then be unrighteous? But we must remember the context of this entire discussion. It is the unfaithfulness of the covenant people in contrast to the faithfulness of God to the covenant purpose. A Jew might insist that if

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 60 their unfaithfulness has resulted in demonstrating that God is faithful to the covenant purpose, should He not be faithful to covenant individuals, i.e., justify them on judgment day? No. Just the opposite! God's faithfulness to the covenant means that He will dispense wrath, not grace, on those individuals who are unfaithful. 4. in human terms. Paul reminds us that such statements are simply "human wisdom"; something that might sound good to us, but is totally void of true wisdom. Paul is apologizing for suggesting that God is unrighteous, even for the sake of discussion! 5. May it never be! When any argument arrives at the place of questioning the righteousness of the Judge, it is empty of true wisdom and reason. The righteousness of God is a fixed point (see above). As a first priority, God will be faithful to His own character. He will always be righteous (Gen 18:25). God is righteous when He dispenses grace. He is also righteous when He dispenses wrath. His glory is increased whatever He does! Job struggled with this apparent dilemma. Job considered the possibility that God is unjust, since Job (mistakenly) saw God as as both prosecutor and judge in a lawsuit against him. That is unfair, isn't it? No. Because we are straining the metaphor of the law court. God will always be the impartial (remember this key word) judge. If we insist that there be a prosecutor, then it is the three witnesses described in 2:15. 6. God judge the world. Never forget. God will judge the world as a righteous Judge. He will inflict wrath on unrighteousness, which takes us back to the opening statement of the large section. "For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness..." (Rom 1:18).

ROMANS 3:7 But if through my lie the truth of God abounded to His glory, why am I also still being judged as a sinner? ROMANS 3:8 And why not {say} (as we are slanderously reported and as some claim that we say), "Let us do evil that good may come"? Their condemnation is just. 1. NIV. The NIV starts this verse (7) with "Someone might argue" which is not found in the orignal Greek, and it misses the point. Paul has deliberately changed his imaginary person to keep up with the narrowing focus of his discussion. He started out chapter 2 with an imaginary person who represents all moral people. Later this person became a Jew. By 3:7 the person has become Israel corporately. And in 3:8 the imaginary person represents those people who ridicule Paul's version of the gospel. 2. my lie. Paul uses first person singular here in this verse. But he is not referring to himself. Paul uses this device to identify himself with Israel in the corporate sense (he will use it again in this letter). All Israel becomes one person, which is a familiar way of speaking in the OT. And Paul chooses to include himself with Israel in this corporate sense, so that he too has lived this lie. What is the lie? Israel has "changed" the covenant [including law] so that it serves the nation Israel, not the purposes of God. 3. slanderously [G987, blasphe_meo_]. This is the same word that is translated "blasphemed" in 2:24. Paul probably uses it deliberately, since it is directly related to Israel's argument here. If Israel's lie has abounded to God's glory, how is it possible to charge Israel with blaspheming God (2:24)? 4. I also [kago_]. "Israel" is still trying to find a way to maintain its distinctiveness all the way through to Judgment Day. Israel made a practice of equating the word "sinner" with "Gentile" (cf. Gal 2:15; Lk 18:11). 5. why am I also still being judged. People have used the "human wisdom" found in the statement "The ends justify the means" throughout human history and will continue to use it until Judgment Day. It is just another way that we show we are partial to ourselves. "I know that God is just and he must deal with sinners, but 'my sin' is different and should be excused." We, being partial to ourselves, begin to think that we are in charge of God's grace. To encourage ourselves in our sin, we develop powerful pictures of the availability of God's grace. For example, some would picture God's grace as a spigot that we can go and turn on at our choosing. Others see themselves as standing "now and forever" in the infinite shower of His blessed grace. 6. Let us do evil. Paul takes the discussion to its logical conclusion. If Israel's sin brings glory, then let's all sin for the glory of God. This logical conclusion shows the failure in reasoning that does not see God's faithfulness, truthfulness and righteousness as fixed points. We can come up

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 61 with all kinds of fancy ideas about God's righteousness, but the simple reality is that His righteousness is a righteousness that impartially dispenses grace to those who choose to do good and wrath to those who choose to do evil. 7. Let us do evil that good may come. How can such a statement be in any way associated with the gospel Paul preaches? Very easily! Paul's gospel is a gospel of grace, a fact that he has basically hidden up to this point. I have tried to show how grace is one of the essential features that form the background for what Paul has been saying. However, it will soon move into the foreground and become a major idea in this letter. It certainly is true that God's love, grace, etc. stands out clearly in the dark setting of sin. 8. Their condemnation is just. Paul has brought Israel's argument to its logical conclusion and expects us to see how ridiculous it appears in the context of God's righteousness. He now states a "conclusion" of his position. Those who presume upon the faithfulness of God in order to avoid judgment deserve the condemnation they will receive. Paul recognizes that these issues need more explanation. He will do so later. For now, he will not be distracted from where he wants to go at this point. Later we will try to show how this important section connects with later passages in chapters 6-8. And, of course, several remaining questions regarding Israel will be addressed in chapters 9-11. Paul will now begin the process of showing us how God will fulfill the purpose of the covenant in spite of Israel's failure.

ROMANS 3:9 What then? Are we better than they? Not at all; for we have already charged that both Jews and Greeks are all under sin; 1. What then? Are we better than they? These seven words are an English translation of only three words in the Greek (ti oun proechometha). There are several problems here for the translators. a. The Greek word proechometha [from G4284, proecho_: to hold before] is found only here in the NT. It is first person plural of the present middle or passive indicative of proecho_. It came to mean "excel" as in a race. But does it mean "do we excel" or "are we being excelled [beaten]"? Scholars disagree. Some would translate it as "Are we worse off" while others choose just the opposite: "Are we better off"! The decision between these two legitimate choices must be made by examining the context. Almost all translations agree with the choice in the NASB (used above). b. Some scholars think that this should be translated as only one question (e.g., "In what way, then, are we better off?" or "What then do we put forward on our own behalf [or defense]?"). c. Who are the "we" in this passage? Some translations decide for us by inserting "we Jews" in the passage (RSV, NEB, ESV, Weymouth, Phillips, Williams). It certainly is true that Paul has the Jews in the forefront of his mind, but when he includes himself in the question, it is likely that he is also expanding to include all of humanity - which he clearly does at the end of this verse. d. Who are the "they" in this passage? But the Greek here (proechometha) does not require "they" to be in the translation at all. It simply means "do we excel" so that the meaning can be "do we qualify" or some such translation. Again, Paul certainly includes the problem of Jewish arrogance here ("we" are better than "they"), but he is also looking ahead at what he wants to say. He is really asking whether there are any people anywhere who have the qualifications to justify themselves at the Final Judgment. And he answers his own question: no one. 2. Not at all. It has been instructive to probe into Paul's thinking in this verse, but in the end it doesn't matter much how the prior questions are stated. The results are the same. There is no difference between Jew and Gentile with respect to the Final Judgment. He now adds "sin" in this universal leveling of all humanity. Jew and Gentile alike are under sin. 3. charged ... all under sin. There are some surprising elements here. Although we should be impressed with Paul's indictment of immoral people (1:18-32), moral people (2:1-16) and the Jews (2:17 - 3:8; included also 2:9-16), he seems to have made a big jump here with this statement. It would seem that he has deliberately avoided the word "sin" [G266, hamartia] up till now. The word does not appear anywhere in 1:18 - 3:8. Paul has used two related words, but only sparingly. He has used "sinned" [G264, hamartano_] only twice (2:12) and "sinner" [G268, hamarto_los] only once (3:7) so far. Only three times does he refer to "sin, sinner, etc." in the

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 62 entire passage (1:18 - 3:8). By contrast, he will now use "sin" [G266, hamartia] approximately 49 times in this book! What is the sequence of Paul's thoughts here? a. Paul has concluded that moral people and Jews have no special advantage at the Final Judgment. They are at the same level as immoral people. b. But any honest viewing of the vice list in 1:28-32 makes it clear that everyone has committed some of these vices. c. The most basic meaning of "sin" [G266, hamartia] is "missing the mark" which a review of the vice list makes it obvious that everyone has missed the mark, i.e., everyone has sinned according to this most basic definition. d. Since the Jews do not have any sort of covenant advantage (at the Final Judgment), they are at the same level as Gentile sinners. They saw all Gentiles as "sinners" since they did not have the law. Paul now insists that they see themselves in the same classification (i.e., sinners!). 4. under sin. Here is a real surprise. We are not just sinners, we are under sin. Elsewhere Paul states a conclusion based on this section as "... for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God" (Rom 3:23). It would have been no surprise if he had stated it here. In fact, it would have been an excellent concluding remark. Why didn't he use it? Paul is following a procedure he has done several times already. In the act of concluding one concept he introduces a new concept with little or no explanation. Perhaps he does this to keep us reading. We must wait for an explanation later (Rom 5-7). But Paul did not intend for us to simply say that we can ignore this concept and wait for the explanation. He wants us to get some sense of the power of sin, so he introduces it here. Paul pictures sin as a force that controls us. Later he will use the master-slave metaphor to illustrate this concept (5:21; 6:12-23; 7:14).

Before we continue (since it is taking us so long to get through this book!), let's consider who will be declared "not guilty" on judgment day. Will it be no one, since all are "under sin"? Does it mean that no one prior to the coming of Jesus has made it into heaven? Of course not! We know from NT reference that Abraham, Moses, Elijah, and others made it into heaven. The reason it looks so awful up to this point is that Paul has deliberately withheld the concept of "grace" in this discussion. So far, Paul has restricted his use of "grace" [G5485, charis] to his opening greeting (1:5, 7). Beginning at 3:24, he will use it approximately 20 times. It is God's grace that gets us into proper relationship with God. It is God's continuing grace plus our obedience that maintains the relationship. We must keep this perspective. We must not allow the coming passages to totally destroy all that Paul has said up to this point. Paul will say, "... because by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified in His sight" (3:20). As we study this next section, we will try to show that such a statement does not nullify a major thesis of 1:18 - 3:8 (there are two groups, those who persevere in doing good and those who do evil [2:6-11]). For example, this statement is still true: "... for {it is} not the hearers of the Law {who} are just before God, but the doers of the Law will be justified" (2:13).

ROMANS 3:10 as it is written, "There is none righteous, not even one (cf. Ecc 7:20); ROMANS 3:11 There is none who understands, There is none who seeks for God; ROMANS 3:12 All have turned aside, together they have become useless; There is none who does good, There is not even one" (Ps 14:1-3). ROMANS 3:13 "Their throat is an open grave, With their tongues they keep deceiving" (Ps 5:9), "The poison of asps is under their lips" (Ps 140:3); ROMANS 3:14 "Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness" (Ps 10:7); ROMANS 3:15 "Their feet are swift to shed blood, ROMANS 3:16 Destruction and misery are in their paths, ROMANS 3:17 And the path of peace they have not known" (Is 59:7-8). ROMANS 3:18 "There is no fear of God before their eyes" (Ps 36:1).

1. as it is written. In this collection of verses (scholars like to use the word "catena"), Paul draws from the following passages in support of his statement in 3:9 ("that both Jews and Greeks are all under sin"). Scholars tell us that Paul is reading from the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the OT, "LXX" is the shorthand reference).

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 63 ECC 7:20 Indeed, there is not a righteous man on earth who {continually} does good and who never sins.

PSA 14:1 The fool has said in his heart, "There is no God." They are corrupt, they have committed abominable deeds; There is no one who does good. PSA 14:2 YHWH has looked down from heaven upon the sons of men To see if there are any who understand, Who seek after God. PSA 14:3 They have all turned aside, together they have become corrupt; There is no one who does good, not even one.

PSA 5:8 O YHWH, lead me in Your righteousness because of my foes; Make Your way straight before me. PSA 5:9 There is nothing reliable in what they say; Their inward part is destruction {itself}. Their throat is an open grave; They flatter with their tongue. PSA 5:10 Hold them guilty, O God; By their own devices let them fall! In the multitude of their transgressions thrust them out, For they are rebellious against You. PSA 5:11 But let all who take refuge in You be glad, Let them ever sing for joy; And may You shelter them, That those who love Your name may exult in You. PSA 5:12 For it is You who blesses the righteous man, O YHWH, You surround him with favor as with a shield.

PSA 140:1 Rescue me, O YHWH, from evil men; Preserve me from violent men PSA 140:2 Who devise evil things in {their} hearts; They continually stir up wars. PSA 140:3 They sharpen their tongues as a serpent; Poison of a viper is under their lips. Selah. PSA 140:4 Keep me, O YHWH, from the hands of the wicked; Preserve me from violent men who have purposed to trip up my feet.

PSA 10:1 Why do You stand afar off, O YHWH? Why do You hide {Yourself} in times of trouble? PSA 10:2 In pride the wicked hotly pursue the afflicted; Let them be caught in the plots which they have devised. PSA 10:3 For the wicked boasts of his heart's desire, And the greedy man curses {and} spurns YHWH. PSA 10:4 The wicked, in the haughtiness of his countenance, does not seek {Him}. All his thoughts are, "There is no God." PSA 10:5 His ways prosper at all times; Your judgments are on high, out of his sight; As for all his adversaries, he snorts at them. PSA 10:6 He says to himself, "I will not be moved; Throughout all generations I will not be in adversity." PSA 10:7 His mouth is full of curses and deceit and oppression; Under his tongue is mischief and wickedness. PSA 10:8 He sits in the lurking places of the villages; In the hiding places he kills the innocent; His eyes stealthily watch for the unfortunate. PSA 10:9 He lurks in a hiding place as a lion in his lair; He lurks to catch the afflicted; He catches the afflicted when he draws him into his net. PSA 10:10 He crouches, he bows down, And the unfortunate fall by his mighty ones. PSA 10:11 He says to himself, "God has forgotten; He has hidden His face; He will never see it." PSA 10:12 Arise, O YHWH; O God, lift up Your hand. Do not forget the afflicted.

ISA 59:1 Behold, YHWH's hand is not so short That it cannot save; Nor is His ear so dull That it cannot hear. ISA 59:2 But your iniquities have made a separation between you and your God, And your sins have hidden {His} face from you so that He does not hear. ISA 59:3 For your hands are defiled with blood And your fingers with iniquity; Your lips have spoken falsehood, Your tongue mutters wickedness.

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 64 ISA 59:4 No one sues righteously and no one pleads honestly. They trust in confusion and speak lies; They conceive mischief and bring forth iniquity. ISA 59:5 They hatch adders' eggs and weave the spider's web; He who eats of their eggs dies, And {from} that which is crushed a snake breaks forth. ISA 59:6 Their webs will not become clothing, Nor will they cover themselves with their works; Their works are works of iniquity, And an act of violence is in their hands. ISA 59:7 Their feet run to evil, And they hasten to shed innocent blood; Their thoughts are thoughts of iniquity, Devastation and destruction are in their highways. ISA 59:8 They do not know the way of peace, And there is no justice in their tracks; They have made their paths crooked, Whoever treads on them does not know peace. ISA 59:9 Therefore justice is far from us, And righteousness does not overtake us; We hope for light, but behold, darkness, For brightness, but we walk in gloom.

PSA 36:1 Transgression speaks to the ungodly within his heart; There is no fear of God before his eyes. PSA 36:2 For it flatters him in his {own} eyes Concerning the discovery of his iniquity {and} the hatred {of it}. PSA 36:3 The words of his mouth are wickedness and deceit; He has ceased to be wise {and} to do good. PSA 36:4 He plans wickedness upon his bed; He sets himself on a path that is not good; He does not despise evil. PSA 36:5 Your lovingkindness, O YHWH, extends to the heavens, Your faithfulness {reaches} to the skies. PSA 36:6 Your righteousness is like the mountains of God [El]; Your judgments are {like} a great deep. O YHWH, You preserve man and beast. PSA 36:7 How precious is Your lovingkindness, O God! And the children of men take refuge in the shadow of Your wings. PSA 36:8 They drink their fill of the abundance of Your house; And You give them to drink of the river of Your delights. PSA 36:9 For with You is the fountain of life; In Your light we see light. PSA 36:10 O continue Your lovingkindness to those who know You, And Your righteousness to the upright in heart. PSA 36:11 Let not the foot of pride come upon me, And let not the hand of the wicked drive me away. PSA 36:12 There the doers of iniquity have fallen; They have been thrust down and cannot rise.

2. We will not take time to study these passages in great detail, but some observations are necessary. As usual, with Paul, he expects the reader to know the Scriptures, and he especially expects the reader to consider the setting of the verses he uses. a. Perhaps the most obvious observation that can be seen here is that Paul has, almost totally, drawn his verses from passages that contrast the upright with the wicked. However, he uses only the "wicked" part, i.e., the judgment upon the wicked. b. Paul is eager to make his point. But has he overstepped the boundaries of good scholarship (doing what is often called "proof-texting" the Scriptures)? It cannot be denied that Paul has ignored the many times the OT speaks of people being righteous and that it even specifically names some (Job 1:8). The OT clearly makes a distinction between the righteous and the wicked. This is especially true in the Psalms. The Psalms are full of passages that distinguish between the righteous and the wicked, with Psalm 1 setting this tone of all the rest (read it!). In fact, one of the psalms used here contains the expression "For God is with the righteous generation" (Psa 14:5; cf. 5:12). c. So why has Paul chosen these passages and then deliberately ignored the distinction made in them between the upright and the wicked? He expects us to see by now that, once we recognize that there is no special group status (such as moral people and Jews), then the condemnation of the wicked is applied to all humanity. This cannot be taken to mean that there are no righteous people in the OT, only that there is no protection at the Final Judgment for being in some "special" group.

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 65 d. It is God who makes the difference. Paul is correct in using the judgment on the wicked and applying it to all of humanity. Righteous people are not righteous because they have made themselves that way. They are righteous because God has chosen to enter into relationship with them. It is God's grace, (expressed as "lovingkindness" in Psa 36:5, 7, 10 above) that makes the difference. Without God's grace, even the most righteous people are no different than the wicked. For their part, the "upright in heart" (Psa 36:10) choose to take refuge in God (Psa 5:11; 36:7; 14:6). It is God's righteousness that leads them (Psa 5:8; cf. 5:12; 36:6, 10). Much more will be said about this later. e. Actually Paul is using these OT passages to correct an error in the thinking of some Jews. They saw everyone who was included in the covenant as righteous, and all these passages in the OT that referred to righteous people applied to them. In Romans 2, Paul has removed the distinction between Jew and non-Jew with respect to the judgment of God. The grace (lovingkindness, etc.) of God is applied to everyone, but only continues with certain individuals at the Final Judgment when they respond properly to Him. It does not protect everyone at the Final Judgment. And it certainly is not available to groups who set themselves apart because of some perceived special conditions (e.g., covenant). 3. there is none [no, not] (ouk [3756] estin [2076]). Found in 3:10, 10, 11, 11, 12, 12, 18. The universal nature of sin is stressed by use of these terms and the word "all" [G3956, pas] in these verses (3:9, 12, 19, 23) and "every" [G3956 again] at 3:19. The universal solution is also included (3:22). 4. Structure. There is something of an inclusio (a frame) here with 3:18 repeating the same phrase that begins 3:10 (ouk estin: there is none/no). a. Sin is universal (3:10-12). The first section contains five statements of the "there is none" theme. It is also repeated in the closing statement (3:18). It emphasized that sin is universal. Everyone is "under sin" until God chooses to do something about it. b. Sin is pervasive (3:13-17). The second section uses various parts of the body to stress the pervasiveness of sin, that is, sin affects every aspect of our lives. Theologians use the term "total depravity" not to mean that people are as sinful as they can be, but that sin colors every thought, value, motive, and action of our lives. There also appears to be a progression. Paul starts with the throat, then moves on to the tongue, the lips, and the mouth. The picture is that it is what is within us that affects our speech. (Jesus says basically the same thing in Mark 7:20.) This "sin within" also perverts our actions. Paul uses "feet" and "path" to illustrate this point. The terms "feet" and "path" picture a whole way of life. He continues with a reference to the eyes (3:18). c. Godlessness [ungodliness, impiety] is universal (3:18). "There is no fear of God before their eyes" (Rom 3:18; Ps 36:1). Paul closes his selection of verses by repeating the "there is none" theme (ouk estin). However, here he emphasizes humanity's relationship with God. "No fear of God" is directly related to the word "ungodliness" which Paul used to introduce this entire section (1:18). "Fear of God [YHWH]" is a major theme in the OT (Psa 111:10; Prov 1:7; 9:10; Job 28:28), and this term deserves a separate study [see my paper on "godliness" for some brief comments]. "Before their eyes" really brings the sin problem into focus. John Murray says, "The eyes are the organs of vision and the fear of God is appropriately expressed as before our eyes because the fear of God means that God is constantly in the centre of our thoughts and apprehensions, and life is characterized by the all-pervasive consciousness of dependence upon Him and responsibility to Him. The absence of this fear means that God is excluded not only from the centre of thoughts and calculations but from the whole horizon of our reckoning; God is not in all our thoughts. Figuratively, He is not before our eyes. And this is unqualified godlessness." d. Building a description of faithfulness. From time to time, Paul gives us some insight into what it means to be faithful (i.e., "the obedience of faith" [1:5]) to God. For example, the faithful glorify God (1:21). They give thanks (1:21). They serve the Creator rather than the creature (1:25). They persevere in doing good (2:7). Now Paul adds that the fear of God is before the eyes of the faithful (3:18). 5. Isaiah 59. Paul has carefully chosen OT passages that not only establish the universality and pervasiveness of both sin and ungodliness; the context of these verses points ahead to the solution. For example, Paul returns to the great Servant Passages of Isaiah (40-66) choosing ch.

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 66 59. this time. (This section of Isaiah has been a source all along for Paul. Recall his use of it in Rom 2:17-24.) Remember that this section of Isaiah showed that Israel has failed to be God's servant. Therefore God will raise up a faithful Servant (the Messiah). After a stinging indictment of Israel for their sins (Isa 59:1-14), God begins to describe His solution (Isa 59:15- 21).

ISA 59:15 Yes, truth is lacking; And he who turns aside from evil makes himself a prey. Now YHWH saw, and it was displeasing in His sight that there was no justice. ISA 59:16 And He saw that there was no man, and was astonished that there was no one to intercede; Then His own arm brought salvation to Him, and His righteousness upheld Him. ISA 59:17 He put on righteousness like a breastplate, And a helmet of salvation on His head; and He put on garments of vengeance for clothing And wrapped Himself with zeal as a mantle. ISA 59:18 According to {their} deeds, so He will repay, wrath to His adversaries, recompense to His enemies; to the coastlands He will make recompense. ISA 59:19 So they will fear the name of YHWH from the west And His glory from the rising of the sun, for He will come like a rushing stream Which the wind of YHWH drives. ISA 59:20 "A Redeemer will come to Zion, and to those who turn from transgression in Jacob," declares YHWH. ISA 59:21 "As for Me, this is My covenant with them," says YHWH: "My Spirit which is upon you, and My words which I have put in your mouth shall not depart from your mouth, nor from the mouth of your offspring, nor from the mouth of your offspring's offspring," says YHWH, "from now and forever."

God will send Himself to be the Servant who will establish a new covenant! And it turns out that this Servant will be the very Son of God (Jesus). Notice that God will solve the problem of "the mouth" here (Isa 59:21). And all will learn to fear the name of YHWH (Isa 59:19). An interesting observation: Gentile converts were called God-fearers [G2318, theosebe_s; G4576, sebo_] (Acts 13:43; 17:4, 17). There will also be judgment; He will repay people according to their deeds (Isa 59:18; cf. Rom 2:8-11 which begins with a quotation from Isa 62:12). Paul will again quote from Psa 59:20 in Rom 11:26-27.

ROMANS 3:19 Now we know that whatever the Law says, it speaks to those who are under the Law, so that every mouth may be closed and all the world may become accountable to God; ROMANS 3:20 because by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified in His sight; for through the Law {comes} the knowledge of sin. 1. Structure. A common mistake here is to see 3:20 as the conclusion of this section. It (3:20) is clearly the climax, but not the conclusion. The NIV makes this mistake, using "therefore" instead of "because" [G1360, dioti] and "rather" instead of "for" [G1063, gar]. The conclusion is actually found in 3:19b, with 3:20 given as supporting statements. Paul chose to reverse the logical sequence of thought in order to make 3:20 a climax and to use it as a lead into 3:21. The logical sequence would be as follows. a. Through the Law {comes} the knowledge of sin. b. By the works of the Law no flesh will be justified in His sight. c. Now we know that whatever the Law says, it speaks to those who are under the Law, d. Conclusion. So that every mouth may be closed and all the world may become accountable to God. 2. we know. Here again (as in 2:2), Paul expects acceptance of the statement that follows. "Whatever" [G3745, hosos] here means "everything" the Law says. 3. under the law [en to_ nomo_]. It more literally means "in the law" [i.e., in the realm of law]. The Greek here corresponds to prior usage: "all who have sinned under the law [en nomo_] will be judged by the Law" (2:12). For the purpose of clarity, it is better to save "under law" for use when law is contrasted with grace. For example, "For sin shall not be master over you, for you are not under law [upo nomon] but under grace" (Rom 6:14). The meaning here is that the Law only speaks to those living in its realm of influence. Law is often used to indicate the Pentateuch (first five books of the Bible), but the references Paul uses above in 3:10-18 are not taken from these books. So Paul is probably referring to the entire OT. However, when we see where Paul

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 67 is going with this (note "all" and "every" in 3:19b), it is obvious that he includes Gentiles in this "law statement" also. How is this possible? Paul has already built the case that those without law (Gentiles) have the purpose of the law written on their hearts (2:15). He has also declared that they have been given the truth of God (1:18-21, 25) and are guilty of suppressing (1:18) and exchanging it for a lie (1:25). That the Gentiles are sinners and that they are without excuse (1:20) has already been established. This present statement seeks to include the people of the covenant (Jews) in this overall indictment. Everything Paul has been saying since 1:18 has been building to this climax. 4. so that [G2443, hina] every mouth is closed [G5420, phrasso_: to stop]. It was a common practice in that day for defendants to put their hand over their mouths to indicate that they had no more to say in response to charges. When they refused to stop arguing for acquittal, the judge could order that their mouths be stopped. I have tried to show that in the Final Judgment, we will have nothing to say in our defense. Anything we might call forth in our defense will actually witness against us! 5. all the world (cf. "every mouth"). Paul makes a universal application. 6. accountable [G5267, hypodikos]. Not found elsewhere in NT or LXX. It is a a technical legal term which can mean simply "answerable", but here it more likely means "liable to prosecution", or "under indictment" (i.e., accountable in the negative sense). Paul has made a full circle. We are back to the beginning of this section: all are "without excuse" (1:20; 2:1). 7. the works of the Law. It appears that this expression is unique to Paul; it was not used by Jewish teachers of his day. Lots of theology is involved in this expression, so it's meaning is controversial. It is next to impossible to discuss it without bringing one's personal theological bias into the meaning. a. works [G2041, ergon]. A very common word translated deed (13 times), deeds (52), work (34), works (62), other (8). Found in Romans at 2:6, 7, 15; 3:20, 27, 28; 4:2, 6; 9:11, 32: 11:6; 13:3, 12; 14:20; 15:18. A related word "to work" [G2038b, ergazomai] is found at 2:10; 4:4, 5, 21; 13:10. However the expression "works of the Law" is found only at Rom 3:20, 28; Gal 2:16; 3:2, 5, 10. b. A possibly significant question is why didn't Paul use this expression when he wrote that "doers of the Law" would be justified (2:13)? Instead he chose to use a different Greek word [G4163, poie_te_s: "doers"]. He also spoke favorably of practicing [G4238, prasso_] the law (2:25). This was said in contrast to those who practice evil (1:32; 2:1, 2, 3; 7:19). However, Paul did use ergon [G2041] for "deeds" (2:6) and for "doing good" (2:7), and he used ergazomai [G2038b] for "does good" (2:10). All these activities are viewed by Paul in a positive light and, examining the context, one would expect these people to be declared justified (2:13). c. Before we attempt to deal with the dilemma Paul has created, the second half of this statement should be examined. 8. no flesh will be justified in His sight. Paul draws upon an OT prayer as a background for this declaration: "Hear my prayer, O YHWH, give ear to my supplications! Answer me in Your faithfulness, in Your righteousness! And do not enter into judgment with Your servant, for in Your sight no man living is righteous" (Psa 143:1-2). a. Paul uses the future tense, so that his focus remains in the Final Judgment, with applications in the present. b. "Righteous" and "justified" are from the same Greek root, so there is no significant difference here. c. He replaces "no man living" with "no flesh" (a significant change). Flesh [G4561, sarx] is a crucial term for Paul who uses it at least 25 times in Romans. Its various meanings will be discussed later. Typically Paul contrasts Spirit and Flesh. Here it probably is picturing the weakness and corruption of humanity. One of the probable reasons he uses it here is that it looks ahead (e.g., 7:5, 14, 18) and it looks back. Remember Paul commented without favor on the circumcision of the flesh (2:28). d. In His sight. The idea here is that God evaluates what He sees, not just actions but also attitudes, etc. (cf. Gen 6:5). Based on what He sees, judgment is necessary. However, as in the days of Noah, there is a hint of other possible outcomes. Here is a possible clue to the

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 68 resolution of Paul's dilemma. It opens the door to viewing the elements of the dilemma at different levels. e. The context. With Paul, we normally will fail to get his message if we do not check out the context of the OT material he uses. Far from being a declaration of judgment, the psalm is a prayer that expects the mercy of God. In fact, the psalm uses two of Paul's key words in this chapter: God's faithfulness and righteousness! It asks God not to enter into judgment, all the time recognizing that, if God were to render judgment, then no living person can be justified. Here, clearly, is the basis for resolving the dilemma. It shows the possibility of two different approaches by God. 9. The dilemma. Paul has made two very fundamental statements. In chapter two he stated: "for {it is} not the hearers of the Law {who} are just before God, but the doers of the Law will be justified" (Rom 2:13). In this chapter, he declares: "because by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified in His sight" (3:20). When we are given two apparent conflicting statements, a possible resolution is to find the limiting parameters [domains] for each one. Is it possible to find a level where one statement is true and another level where the other statement is true? I think so. a. Does the Bible address issues at different levels? Of course it does. Two uses of "righteous" have already been mentioned. The use of the word "good" gives another excellent example. Jesus declared that there is no one good except God (Mark 10:18), yet He uses the word "good" to describe certain people (Mt 12:35; 25:21; Lk 6:45). Joseph of Arimathea is called "a good and righteous man" (Lk 23:50). b. In general, only the most arrogant people believe that they can live a life so perfectly so that they can demand a "not guilty" verdict at the final judgment. When Paul spoke of himself "as to the righteousness which is in the Law, found blameless" (Phil 3:6), he did not mean he was without fault. Over and over again the Law recognizes that people will sin. It has "built in" provisions for this problem (the whole sacrificial system and the laws of cleanliness). c. In the same way that Jesus can say that only God is good, the psalmist can say that no one is righteous. It is a matter of perspective. When viewed in the light of God's holiness, all have missed the mark and all are under judgment. It is impossible to earn our way to heaven by trying to keep the moral code of the Law perfectly. One misstep and we have lost our chance. "But if you show partiality, you are committing sin {and} are convicted by the law as transgressors. For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles in one {point}, he has become guilty of all" (James 2:9-10; cf. Gal 5:3). d. Likewise Paul can (almost in the same breath) first describe Jews (who are trying to keep the Law) as transgressors of the Law and then mention Gentiles who keep the requirements of the Law, and fulfill the purpose of the Law (2:25-27). When Paul is doing this, he is recognizing the existence of these two levels. e. As we have mentioned several times in the past, it is grace that makes the difference. And the real question becomes, how is it possible for a righteous God to dispense grace instead of judgment on people who have been declared transgressors? How can a holy God provide mercy and grace to a world under sin (Rom 3:9)? Paul has already shown that God must dispense wrath on unrighteousness in order to remain righteous (3:5). The answer is in the next section (Rom 3:21 - 4:25). 10. for through the Law {comes} the knowledge of sin. Knowledge [G1922, epigno_sis, not just G1108, gno_sis] implies real knowledge or full knowledge. This statement takes us back to 2:15, where Paul spoke of "the work" [singular] of the Law. He was referring to the actual function or purpose of the Law. Now at this point Paul disclosed one purpose of the Law (there are more!). Formerly he described this purpose as "written on the heart" (2:15). Therefore one major purpose of the law is that we become aware of our sinfulness. In fact, Paul will later say "that through the commandment sin would become utterly sinful" (7:13). Justification (being acquitted at the Final Judgment) cannot come through the Law. A major purpose of the Law is that we recognize that we are sinners, are under sin, and that we need grace.

HIGHLIGHTS OF 1:18 - 3:20. Let's pause to take a look at some of the key words and ideas from this section of Romans.

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 69 1. Revealed. Both the righteousness of God and the wrath of God are revealed to us (1:17, 18; cf. 3:21). This idea is foundational to all that Paul is saying in this section. Because God has revealed, then humanity can know (1:32; 2:2, 4, 18, 20; 3:19, 20) certain truths. However, the focus is not on the content of this revelation, but on the fact that we become responsible for what has been revealed to us. 2. Truth, True. God is always true to His character. In fact, He is the very embodiment of Truth (1:18, 25; 2:2; 3:4). People who do not want to accept this basic revelation of God (1:20-21) will suppress this truth (1:18). However, people could not suppress this truth if God did not allow them to do so (with a darkening of their foolish heart [1:21]). Nevertheless, we are still responsible for the revelation of this Truth. No matter how hard we might try to suppress this truth, enough is still evident with us, because God has made it evident (1:19). It can never be completely suppressed. We will stand before God on Judgment Day without excuse (1:20). 3. Faithful. Another key idea used to describe God and His actions centers on His faithfulness. The background for the way this idea is developed here is found in the covenants. God has made covenants, and He will be faithful to the provision established in these covenants. 4. Righteous. God is righteous. He always stands in right relationship with His creation. He always responds in the right way to the commitments He has made in the covenants. This righteousness requires God to demonstrate His wrath against "all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness" (1:18; cf. 3:5). It also requires that God fulfill the purposes of the covenant. But we are required to do our part. Am I fulfilling the purposes of the covenant (2:27)? Have I allowed God to circumcise my heart (2:29)? 5. Wrath. God's righteous response of wrath is at two levels. It is presently being revealed (1:18) with a key idea being that "God gave them over" (1:24, 26, 28). People do not want to glorify God, give thanks, worship and serve Him (1:21, 25). Since people do not want Him, God moves from the forefront of their lives into the background, so that they do not have an immediate awareness of Him. "There is no fear of God before their eyes" (3:18). The second level regarding God's wrath (the major emphasis of this passage) is that His wrath will be revealed in the Final Judgment (2:5-11). 6. Impartiality. An obvious outcome of the righteousness of God is that God is impartial. People are guilty of being partial (seeking to excuse themselves) with a result that they become the judge of God (2:1-6; 3:4). Some people decide that God is somehow going to make an exception for them. Other people, when they get a sense of the judgment of God, declare Him unfair, etc. 7. Accountable. Paul's conclusion is that all the world becomes accountable to God (3:19). Membership in any special group (e.g., people of the covenant) has no bearing on the verdict at the Final Judgment. 8. Justified according to deeds (2:13). Paul is in harmony with the rest of Scripture. On Judgment Day, we will be judged according to our deeds (2:5-16; cf. Psa 28:4-5; 62:12; Prov 24:12; Mt 16:27; Rom 14:12; 1 Cor 3:10-17; 2 Cor 5:10; Eph 6:5-9; Col 3:22-25; 2 Tim 4:14; Rev 2:23; 18:6; 20:12-13; 22:12). This truth must not be nullified by the "justification by faith" concept which is developed in the following section (3:21ff.). These two truths must compliment each other. 9. knowledge of sin (3:20). The knowledge of sin comes through the Law. This knowledge is more than simply knowing that we are sinners. (We do not need the Law [O.T. revelation] to tell us that; we have a law within that tells us we have missed the mark [2:14].) The Law, with its revelation of God's holiness and with the whole sacrificial system, gives us insight into the difficulties involved in forgiveness and justification. 10. All are under sin (2:9). By the works of the law no flesh will be justified in His sight (3:20). Here is the other side of the concept of justification. We can never earn or merit justification by our works, since everyone fails to some degree to live up to God's standard of righteousness. For example, everyone finds themselves, at times, somewhere in the vice list found in 1:28-32. In order for us to stand justified on Judgment Day, we need mercy and grace. How do we get it? How can a righteous God, who must demonstrate His wrath on ungodliness and unrighteousness, respond to us with mercy and grace? Answers are coming!

It is time to review our outline.

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 70 B. THE PROVISION OF THE GOSPEL [RIGHTEOUSNESS BY FAITH] (Romans 3:21 - 4:25)

We begin a new sub-section at Romans 3:21. As a way of seeing the placement of this new sub- section, here again are the three sub-sections to the second major section of Romans.

II. PROVIDING AND RECEIVING THE GOSPEL (1:18 - 5:21). A. The Need for the Gospel [Human Unrighteousness] (1:18 - 3:20) B. The Provision of the Gospel [Righteousness by Faith] (3:21 - 4:25) C. The Fundamental Effects of Receiving the Gospel [Peace, Hope, Life, etc.] (ch. 5)

Most scholars select 3:21-26 as the next paragraph for study. However, it appears that there is a chiastic structure here that includes 3:21-28. A. But now apart from the Law the righteousness of God has been manifested, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets (3:21), B. even {the} righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all those who believe (3:22a-b) C. for there is no distinction; for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God (3:22c-23), D. being justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus (3:24); E. whom God displayed publicly as a propitiation in His blood through faith. {This was} to demonstrate His righteousness, because in the forbearance of God He passed over the sins previously committed (3:25); D' for the demonstration, {I say}, of His righteousness at the present time, so that He would be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus (3:26). C' Where then is boasting? It is excluded. By what kind of law? Of works? No, but by a law of faith (3:27). B' For we maintain that a man is justified by faith (3:28a) A' apart from the works of the Law (3:28b).

Some Observations. 1. Note some of the connecting words/phrases/ideas. A - A' apart from the ... Law B - B' righteousness through faith ... believe, justified by faith C - C' no distinction, no boasting; works? NO! all have sinned. D - D' justified as a gift, just, justifier; in Christ Jesus E is the center noting the ideas focused on in this passage, e.g., displayed, propitiation in His blood, faith, demonstrate His righteousness, forbearance of God. 2. Righteousness. The Greek family of words relating to righteousness this passage. a. righteousness [G1343, dikaiosune_]. Used four time here, two of which are dikaiosune_ theou [righteousness of God]. The other two are "His righteousness". b. justify, justifier [G1344, dikaioo_]. Found three times (3:24, 26, 28). See also 2:13; 3:4, 20, 30; 4:2; 5:1, 9; 8:30, 30. c. just [G1342, dikaios]. Found once (3:26). 3. Faith, faithfulness, believe. Faith hasn't been mentioned since 1:17. But now it becomes a dominant theme in the epistle. a. faith [G4102, pistis]. It is found 8 times in 3:22-31 (3:22, 25, 26, 27, 28, 30, 30, 31). b. believe [G4100, pisteuo_]. Found once in this passage (3:22).

ROMANS 3:21 But now apart from the Law the righteousness of God has been manifested, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, 1. Paul has completed a major section (1:18-3:2) and is making the transition into the next section. His choice of words here makes it clear that we should remember his thematic statement (1:16- 17). "For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. For in it {the} righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith; as it is written, 'But the righteous man shall live by faith'" (Rom

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 71 1:16-17; cf. Hab 2:4). As we study our present passage, you should see several ties with this thematic statement, especially Paul's focus on the "righteousness of God" and "faith" as central ideas in God's salvation plan. 2. But now [nuni de]. Compare its use at Rom 7:6; 15:23, 25; 16:26; 1 Cor 15:20; Eph 2:13; Col 1:26; 2 Tim 1:10; Heb 9:26. This expression holds an emphatic position in the sentence. In one sense, these words are some of the greatest in the book. How horrible it would be if the story stopped at 3:20 with the verdict of "guilty" for all humanity. But it doesn't. There is a message of hope for us! The gospel really is the "good news" that provides the remedy for the "bad news" of 1:18 - 3:20. The transition is both logical and temporal. a. logical. The concepts to be introduced now are the logical next step in Paul's story of God's redemptive purposes. There needs to be a solution to the problem of humanity being under sin. Paul will now begin the explanation of that solution. b. temporal. But it also refer to what God has actually done in history. The work of Jesus Christ (death, resurrection, etc.) is the solution to the problem. And it has already been accomplished. Here is the transition from one epoch to another. 3. apart from the law. Many use this expression to show a total break with the idea of Law. But that is taking the easy way out. It is far more complicated than that. There is both a continuity and a discontinuity here. a. Continuity. The Law (representing the covenant with Israel) has not been a mistake -- with the gospel now given to correct it. The statement at the end of the verse stands as a corrective to this idea. The Law and the Prophets witness to the validity of the old covenants, but also to the need for the new covenant. But it shows that the Law is more than just a "stop-gap" measure while awaiting the full solution. It does not mean that the promise of 2:13 has been made null and void. It is complicated. The NT can speak of the old covenant as obsolete, etc. (Heb 8:13), but it also speaks of its ongoing validity and being fulfilled by the New Covenant (Mt 5:17-19). b. Discontinuity. The transition from one epoch to another requires a discontinuity. The old covenant cannot fulfill the plan of salvation. It cannot stand alone. It must be replaced with the new. God needed to do something. And He did. He sent His Son. And the rest is history. (Recall the way Paul blended the old and the new in 1:1-4.) This discontinuity does not nullify the Law (break the continuity). Paul will end this chapter with a great declaration: "Do we then nullify the Law through faith? May it never be! On the contrary, we establish the Law" (3:31). Nevertheless, this new manifestation of the righteousness of God is neither derived from the Law nor is it an outcome of the Law. On the contrary, the Law becomes truly valid only when it is established by the New Covenant. Note the corresponding element in the chiastic structure adds another dimension: "apart from the works of the Law" (3:28). Christ is the "end of the Law" (10:4). He does not destroy it; He fulfills it. And when we walk in the "obedience of faith" (1:5; 16:26), we fulfill [telousa, from G5055, teleo_] the purpose of the Law (2:27). 4. the righteousness of God [dikaiosune_ theou]. This expression should not be translated as "righteousness from God" [NIV]. Paul clearly wants us to remember 1:16-18 again. There he said that the "righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith" (1:17). So it is very likely that Paul is telling us that he will now give some explanation of the connection between the righteousness of God and faith/faithfulness. In the previous section (1:18 - 3:20), Paul showed us that this righteousness is presently being revealed as wrath and is yet to be revealed as wrath at the Final Judgment (3:5-6). However the expressions "but now" and "apart from the law" give us an expectation that there will be a new and different revealing of the righteousness of God. 5. has been manifested [pephanero_tai from G5319, phaneroo_]. Compare its use at 16:26, Col 1:26. Perfect tense is used here. The perfect tense describes an event completed in the past, with the effects continuing into the present. A new era has begun! There is a deliberate contrasting here with the corresponding passage in 1:17. First, the present tense is used at 1:17 showing continuous action. Second, and even more important, Paul uses a different Greek word. In 1:17, he used "is revealed" [G601, apokalupto_]. We get our word "apocalyptic" from this Greek word. Perhaps Paul used it at 1:17 so it would match with 1:18 where it is revealed as wrath. Apocalyptic literature of Paul's day was full of dramatic events and images, often stressing the judgment of God. So this Greek word for "revealing" worked well with the pictures

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 72 Paul wants us to see of God's judgment. The Law, among other things, was a revelation of God's judgment ("for through the Law comes the knowledge of sin" [3:20]). It is a proper revelation of the righteousness of God. "But now", God has "revealed" something of a very different nature. So Paul switches to a picture of the manifesting (making clear, etc) of God's righteousness. The OT witnesses to this unveiling, but it remained a mystery nevertheless. However, this mystery has now been unveiled so that it may be known. The Gospel is a mystery that has been made known. Elsewhere Paul exults in this great truth (Rom 16:25-26; 1 Cor 2:7-13; Eph 1:9-12; 3:3- 10; 6:19; Col 1:24-28; 2:2-3; 4:3) An aside: It does not follow that there are no longer any mysteries yet to be revealed (cf. Eph 5:32; 2 Thess 2:7; 1 Tim 3:16). 6. being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets. Note that Paul continues to use the courtroom as one of his chief images to illustrate the lessons to be learned here. He will also use the slave market and the altar to teach us (see below). The idea here has already been worked into the discussion above, so it will not be repeated. It shows the continuity in God's great plan for making everything right again. This continuity includes God's character and God's purpose, which have not changed as we move from one epoch to another, from one covenant to another, etc. For example, it was always God's purpose to redeem both Jew and Gentile. His earlier covenants were intended to show that salvation would come THROUGH Israel; salvation was not just FOR Israel.

ROMANS 3:22a-b even {the} righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all those who believe; 1. For now, we will look only at the first two portions of 3:22; the last portion ("for there is no distinction") belongs with 3:23 (see below). 2. righteousness of God. Again as in 3:21, this refers to God's righteousness and should not be translated "righteousness from God" [NIV]. The NIV translators are showing their theological bias here. Paul now begins to give some of the details of this new manifestation of God's righteousness. What is the historical event that has made it possible? What is the "human side" of this new event? 3. through faith in Jesus Christ [dia pistis Iesou Christou]. This normally would be translated "the faith/faithfulness of Jesus Christ" but translators have chosen to use "in" Jesus Christ. This translation is not necessarily an incorrect translation since Paul appears to use the same Greek construction elsewhere with this apparent meaning (faith in Christ). But what is the best translation here? Let me make myself clear here. When the Greek scholars disagree, then I cannot examine the Greek construction and decide the preferred translation. (I do not have their expertise!) What I must do is to try to determine the meaning in light of what Paul is trying to do. Perhaps Paul has deliberately introduced an ambiguity here. I am inclined to think so. Paul is known for adding "layers" to his thoughts and expecting us to "unpack" the layers. If my claim that a deliberate ambiguity was inserted in 1:17 ("from faith to faith") then it is most natural that our present passage would have the same ambiguity. It should be especially true since the present passage clearly expects us to be remembering 1:16-17. This line of reasoning brings out the following thoughts. a. If the "faith" used here refers to the human response, then the next portion of the verse ("for all who believe") is essentially redundant -- a charge I doubt that I would ever level against Paul. b. However, the two portions could be combined in such a way that they correspond to one of the ways we (in my opinion) should understand 1:17. If at one level (remember Paul's "layers") "from faith to faith" (1:17) refers to God's faithfulness and to the human response of both faith and faithfulness, then we have a perfect parallel here. A proper and even more natural translation of "dia pistis Iesou Christou" would be "through the faithfulness of Jesus Christ" which provides the first half (God's faithfulness to the covenant purposes). Then the "pantas tous pisteuontas" (literally "all the ones believing") provides the second half, i.e., the human response of faith and faithfulness. c. This interpretation has the added benefit that it reinforces the pairing of God's righteousness and faithfulness found at the beginning of this chapter. (Remember: God is righteous because He is faithful; God is faithful because He is true.) Here then is the "new" expression of the righteousness of God. However, the "old" is not discarded. Instead, It continues His (the

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 73 "old") ongoing faithfulness to the covenant purposes. One of the main features of the covenant purpose was that Israel would be the faithful servant to bring God's salvation to the nation. Now we see that Jesus becomes "Israel, the faithful servant" and fulfills Israel's role in God's covenant purposes. The combination of these two ideas (divine initiative and human response) is very popular with Paul. d. Additional support of this interpretation is given in 5:19 where "the obedience of the One [Christ]" in mentioned. Also a parallel with the faith/faithfulness of Abraham [ek pisteo_s Abraam] is found at 4:16. 4. to all who believe [pantas tous pisteuontas]. "Believe" is in the present tense and "all the ones believing" is a more literal translation. Corresponding to Paul's emphasis on the obedience of faith (1:4; 16:26), he is not thinking of the initial act of faith that begins our relationship with Christ but the ongoing lifelong aspects of that faith which includes faithfulness. Do you remember the three simple statements that provided a beginning to our understanding of faith? Faith is the Mind affirming, the Heart trusting, and the Will obeying.

ROMANS 3:22c for there is no distinction; ROMANS 3:23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 1. It is clear that Paul still has 1:16-17 in mind. For example, the phrase "to all who believe" [pantas tous pisteuontas] is virtually a repeat of "to everyone who believes" [panti to_ pisteuonti] (1:17). Therefore "for there is no distinction" (3:22) is to be paired with "to the Jew first and also to the Greek" (1:17). When we finally understand that there are no covenant privileges for the Jew on Judgment Day, then it is clear that the "all" ("all have sinned...") in the statement that follows really does apply to all. 2. for all have sinned. "For" [gar] shows us that this is a condition, not a conclusion. The conclusion (or premise) has already been stated in the prior conditional clause: no distinction. It is interesting that the verb is in the aorist tense ["for all sinned" is a better translation]. There are at least three ways to interpret the use of this tense, and all three pictures were probably in Paul's mind as he wrote this. a. The Fall. The sin of Eve and Adam was a sin that in some sense includes us all. Humanity has never been the same since the Fall. b. Corporate. As he often does, perhaps Paul is picturing the whole human race as a single person committing one sin. People tend to react negatively to such a picture, they want to be judged on their own merit. One big mistake with this individualic thinking is that it does not take the "are all under sin" (3:9) statement into account. Ever since the Fall, Sin (as an enslaving force) has kept humankind in bondage. Paul is only just now beginning to describe how it is possible to become free from this bondage (see "redemption" below). c. Individual. However, It has been a major emphasis that every individual is without excuse. Paul's repeated use of "all" and related terms makes it clear that he is not just grouping us together as "one person" but stresses that we have all sinned. It does not need to be with a present tense verb (continually sinning). It only takes sinning once to bring us under judgment. 3. fall short [G5302, hustereo_]. One word. The verb here may mean "to lack", "to want", "to be destitute of" (Mt 19:20; Lk 15:14; 1 Cor 1:7; 8:8; 12:24; Phil 4:12). 4. and fall short of the glory of God. Here we have a "consequence" resulting from "condition" and "conclusion" above. Now Paul chooses to use the present tense, in contrast to the aorist tense with the prior verb. We are pictured as continually falling short of the glory of God. a. God's glory. Adam and Eve were created to bear the image of God. The bearing of the image of God reflected the glory of God and brought further glory to Him. God created Israel for His glory (Isa 43:7; 1 Cor 11:7; see Rom 5:2). b. Present glory. Our earthly existence never fully measures up to the potential that humankind had before the Fall. Sin has entered the human race and now we continually fall short. This fact remains true even for the redeemed (3:24). However, it is not a "yes/no" situation. The redeemed do bring glory to God, even though they still fail in many ways. Because we have not been restored to full fellowship and reconciliation with God, we do not have the privilege of walking fully with Him in His glory. It is part of the "now, but not yet" situation that is found in all aspects of salvation.

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 74 c. Future glory. As a further consequence of sin, people lost the possibility of a future in which they would experience God's glory, and in some real sense to participate in it. "But now" because of Jesus, that future state becomes possible. d. Seek for glory. But Paul also wants us to think back to his use of this idea in 1:21, 23 and 2:7, 10. Of course, we are to glorify God (1:21, 23). That is a fundamental requirement of all humanity. However, those justified on Judgment Day, are described as seeking glory and receiving glory (2:7, 10). Note Rom 8:30 also: "these whom He justified, He also glorified" showing the connection between glory and justification (which appears in the next verse!).

ROMANS 3:24 being justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus; 1. We are now nearing the center (3:25) of this chiastic structure (3:21-28). In these few verses, Paul has given us several vital aspects of the gospel. The next three verses (3:24-26), being at the center of the chiasmus, are some of the most important verses in the Bible. In this brief explanation of the gospel, Paul will use metaphors from the law-court (justified [pardoned]), the slave-market (redemption [liberation]) and the altar (propitiation [atonement]). But even these wonderful metaphors do not give the complete picture of God's act of reconciliation. 2. being justified [dikaioumenoi from G1344, dikaioo_]. This verb is in the present tense, but the NIV ("are justified") and the NRSV ("are now justified") make it sound like the perfect or aorist tense. Here again we have a "consequence" resulting from a prior statement ("condition" or "premise"). The NIV and NRSV not only cloud the tense of the verb, they confuse the "consequence" concept. But "being justified" is a consequence of which statement? Although 3:23 clearly has a contribution here, this "consequence" probably refers back to "even {the} righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all those who believe" (3:22a-b). The contribution of 3:23 is to remind us (again!) that "the righteousness of God through Law" alone can only bring wrath (3:20). This new way of expressing His righteousness makes justification possible. It is not necessary to enter into debate about how much is included in the meaning of justification. At this point, it is enough to know that, for those who meet the "condition" they stand acquitted before God. They have been pardoned, but not on their own merit. a. OT Background. Paul's OT background continues to be Isaiah 40-66. Israel deserved and received a "two-fold" punishment (Isa 40:2). Instead of bringing glory to YHWH they had dishonored His name. But God's plan will restore His glory and bring salvation to Israel (Isa 42:12; 48:9-11). Indeed, His righteousness and salvation will extend to everyone ("Turn to me and be saved, all the ends of the earth" [Isa 45:22]), for "only in YHWH are righteousness and strength" [45:24] and "in YHWH all the offspring of Israel will be justified and will glory" (Isa 45:25; read 45:18-25; cf. 54:17). b. Present tense! Many scholars tend to ignore the present tense here (probably because it does not match well with their theology). But the present tense is extremely important for at least two reasons. 1) It would be natural to expect Paul to use the future tense here. Up to this point, Paul's focus has been the Final Judgment and the possibility of people being justified at that point. However, Paul is declaring that justification is something that can happen in the here and now. In one sense, the future declaration of being acquitted is something that can be a present experience. 2) However, the present tense also has the sense of continuous action. Some would try to get us to believe that we are acquitted now and forever. But the continuous aspect of the verb tense emphasizes not a once-for-all experience, but a lifetime of conditional relationship (which is clearly an aspect of covenant). 3) Note that Paul switches from present to future tense at 3:28, 30. See below for the significance of this change. c. Let me briefly mention the theological debate regarding justification. First of all we must remember that "justification" and "righteousness" come from the same Greek family of words, as we have mentioned more than once now. So when the Bible uses "justify" as a verb, it is some action regarding righteousness. But does it mean (1) to declare righteous (i.e., acquitted by God of all charges), (2) to treat as righteous (even though they are not), or (3) to make righteous?

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 75 1) to declare righteous (i.e., acquitted by God of all charges). Most everyone agrees that this much is true when God justifies a person. 2) to treat as righteous (even though they are not). Some believe that God, having acquitted people, now ignores the fact that they are still unrighteous. He does this by not "seeing" them and "seeing" Christ instead. 3) to make righteous. Many people reject the idea that God actually makes people righteous at this point. Some of these theologians like to contrast "conduct" and "character" as a way of illustrating their position. Unrighteousness as "conduct" is pardoned in justification. However, the transformation of character is a different process and is more related to sanctification than to justification. However, "to make righteous" does not have to mean the transformation of character. d. Two important aspects of justification are either ignored or marginalized. However, understanding these aspects is necessary to really understand justification. 1) Forgiveness. Although few would deny the close relationship between forgiveness and justification, some would separate them to maintain their theological position. There is almost universal agreement that when people are justified, they are also forgiven. While some think that it is possible to squeeze justification into a once-for-all experience, it is much more difficult to restrict the biblical passages about forgiveness to that same thinking. (Some however do just that!) One of the strongest passages showing the ongoing aspect of forgiveness is the parable by Jesus (Mt 18:21-35). The king in this parable forgave a slave a debt. However, when the slave did not extend forgiveness to another, the king rescinded his forgiveness. The teaching in 1 John 1 is also vital to our understanding here since it includes both forgiveness and fellowship (our next topic). 2) Fellowship. The relational aspects of justification must not be ignored. Since the most basic meaning of "justify" is to "make right" we must wonder what is actually made right. When, in our study of righteousness, we deal only with what it means to make a person right, we are leaving out an even more basic idea. It is not so much that people are made right, but that relationships are made right. (But if we focus only on relationship then we miss the need for personal righteousness.) The key biblical concept of fellowship brings the two together and maintains the proper tension between them. A detailed study of John 14-17 and 1 John 1 would be necessary to understand how fellowship provides the proper balance. We will not take time for that. "Being justified" does not have to mean that people immediately receive a "Christlike character" but it must mean they are participating in an ongoing fellowship with God (a "rightness" of relationship). Maintaining this relationship (from the human side) does not mean the person has a mature, righteous, etc. character, nor does it mean that the person does nothing! It does mean that the person is maintaining a "rightness" of relationship (such as "walking in the light" [1 Jn 1:7]). This can only happen with the cleansing and empowerment of the Holy Spirit. But such a person has truly been made righteous in a relational sense. Of course, this does not mean that the person is doing "right" all the time. Normal relationships would not exist if fellowship required such a high standard for maintenance. Hopefully this discussion will help when we study the contribution of "redemption" and "faith" to the act of justification. It also helps in understanding the two levels of sinning. 3. as a gift [G1431, do_rea]. "Gift" includes the idea of "giving freely" ("freely you received, freely give" [Mt 10:8]) and "without charge" (2 Cor 11:7; Rev 21:6; 22:17). It probably also includes the idea of not holding back, not hesitating, and being generous. However, there is a great paradox here. When people receive a gift totally without strings attached, then it places an even greater obligation upon them. A totally free gift requires an appropriate response of gratitude. The magnitude of the free gift from God actually means that it costs me everything. I must "buy" what is given "without cost" (Isa 55:1). Later Paul will challenge us to become "living and holy sacrifices" because of the "mercies of God" (Rom 12:1). 4. by His grace [G5485, charis]. Paul has been saving this wonderful word. He has not used it since 1:5, 7. Beginning here, he will use it approximately 20 times. Grace is the "unmerited favor" of God that makes justification possible. Some have said that "freely" is the manner in which justification operates, "grace" is the basis or mode, and "redemption" is the means.

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 76 Another way of saying it is that it is the Father's grace, and Son's redemption, and the Spirit's gift. Too often, the Father is pictured as a stern judge who wants to dispense wrath, but the Son "forces" Him to acquit us. Nothing could be further from the truth. He is a loving Father seeking for ways to reconcile people back to Himself (Rom 5:1-10). 5. through the redemption [G629, apolutro_sis]. This Greek word is found in Lk 3:24; Rom 3:24; 8:23; 1 Cor 1:30; Eph 1:7, 14; 4:30; Col 1:14; Heb 9:15. A related word [G3085, lutro_sis] is found in Lk 1:68; 2:38; Heb 9:12; Heb 11:35. Another word [G3084, lutroo_] is found in Lk 24:21; Titus 2:14, 1 Pet 1:18. Another word [G1805, exagorazo_] is found in Gal 3:13; 4:5. The idea of being "bought or purchased [G59, agorazo_] with a price" [G5092, time_] is found in 1 Cor 6:20; 7:23 (cf. 2 Pet 2:1; Rev 5:9; 14:3, 4. where only G59 is used). a. OT background. While the metaphor clearly is from the slave marketplace, it can be misleading if we carry it too far. Instead of the slave market Paul probably is picturing Israel in Egypt when he thinks of redemption. God ransomed Israel from slavery in Egypt (Deut 7:8; 9:26; 13:5; 15:15; 21:8; 24:18; Psa 25:22; 26:11; 31:5; 32:7; 111:9; 130:7-8; Isa 41:14; 43:1, 14; 44:22-24; 51:11; 52:3; 62:12; 63:9). The main reason we must look to the Exodus account for our understanding of redemption is that in the Exodus, Israel simply switched owners. The slaves to Egypt became "the slaves" of God. He did not set them free from an obligation to a master. The covenant showed that YHWH became the God of Israel (a term used hundreds of times throughout the OT). This concept of "exodus" found here will be an important background for chapter 5-8. The twin concepts of covenant (faithfulness to an committed relationship) and exodus (rescue from slavery in Egypt) are tied closely together in Gen 15:13-16 (the covenant with Abraham). The four main aspects of Reconciliation are found in this OT account of exodus and covenant: God Reveals ("I am YHWH"), God Redeems ("You will be My people"), God Relates ("I will be Your God") and God Resides ("I will dwell with you"). These same four aspects must be considered if we are to understand justification and redemption. b. Deliverance. People are not redeemed in name only. There is a true deliverance. A major reference is to the expression "under sin" used by Paul. Later Paul will tell us that redemption is a deliverance from the power of sin. Redemption and forgiveness of sins are tied together (Eph 1:7; Col 1:14). Forgiveness is also tied with justification by Paul (Rom 4:5-8). As with justification, redemption contains the "already/not yet" tension within itself (8:23; 1 Cor 1:30; Eph 1:7, 14; 4:30; Col 1:14). Redemption is liberty, freedom from sin, etc. now, but there is also a fuller redemption as a future event (Rom 8:23-25; Eph 4:30). c. To whom is the ransom paid? Such a question strains the metaphor. Metaphors, after all, are words providing a likeness but not the full reality. For example, Jesus is the Lion of the tribe of Judah, but He is also the Lamb slain from the foundations of the world (Rev 5:5-6). Each metaphor is true only within proper parameters (boundaries, conditions). So it is with redemption. God does not "pay" a ransom to some power higher than Himself, even if that "higher power" is a concept (such as "justice"). There is no higher power than God. There is no greater idea than God. It is His own holiness and integrity that desires justice. But God is not just "true" to Himself; He is "Truth" (which is "a truth" beyond our ability to fully understand). Remember God is faithful because He is true; God is righteous because He is faithful. 6. which is in Christ Jesus. "In Christ" [en Christo_] is one of Paul's favorite expressions. It is used more than 80 times in Paul's letters. He will use it many times here in Romans (3:24; 6:11, 23; 8:1, 2; 9:1; 12:5; 15:17; 16:3, 7, 9, 10). Outside of Paul's letters it is found only in 1 Pet 3:16; 5:10, 14. Paul has saved this expression until now so that he can introduce it in the context of justification and redemption. Bringing it in at this crucial point demonstrates the tie these two terms have with the idea of covenant. The relational aspects of covenant help us to understand the connection between justification and redemption. When these terms are pictured as if God is pardoning and freeing people so that they are "free to go" (to go wherever they like and do whatever they like) then we are creating a wrong metaphor. God freed Israel so that they might enter into covenant with Him. Justification is not a "once for all" pardon as so often pictured by some theologians. The concept of redemption is needed to help us see a more complete picture. "In Christ" provides another portion of the picture. We are only justified and redeemed as we remain in Christ. It is only in the ongoing, abiding presence of the "Spirit of His Son" (Gal 4:6)

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 77 that pardon and freedom are possible. Read this important passage from Galatians. Here we see that we have gone from slave to sin to "heir through God" (4:7). And Galatians 5 shows that we have been freed so that we can serve (5:1, 13). One great term from the OT that addresses the relational aspects of our redemption is "lovingkindness" [H2617a, hesed]. Remember at 1:17 we introduced the connection among some important Hebrew words. For example, in the following passage "lovingkindness" is paired with "righteousness" while "faithfulness" is paired with "judgments": "Your lovingkindness [H2617a, hesed], O YHWH, extends to the heavens, Your faithfulness [H530, emunah] {reaches} to the skies. Your righteousness [H6666, tsedaqah] is like the mountains of God [El]; Your judgments [H4941, mishpat] are {like} a great deep. O YHWH, You preserve man and beast" (Psa 36:5-6). Also please recall the "God Resides" aspect mentioned above.

Jesus gives us another perspective on the righteousness/redemption connection with the story of the person cleansed of an unclean spirit (Mt 12:43-45). The unclean spirit returned to find the person (pictured as a house) "unoccupied, swept, and put in order" (Mt 12:44). The unclean spirit then takes along seven other spirits and returns to live in the person. "Swept and put in order" are pictures of righteousness. "Unoccupied" however shows only one side of redemption (the "set free" part). But we are set free "to serve" which is pictured by God taking up residence as Lord of the house. If the returning unclean spirit had found God occupying the house, it would not have been able to enter again.

The meaning of being "in Christ" is not restricted to this "abiding" concept however. It contains a number of important ideas. For example, there is also a much deeper concept of our participation in Christ's death and resurrection. Paul will take up this aspect in chapter 6 and again in chapter 8 where the "abiding" elements and the "death" elements come together (see also 2 Cor 4:6-12; 13:4-6; Gal 2:15-21; Phil 3:7-11).

ROMANS 3:25 whom God displayed publicly as a propitiation in His blood through faith. {This was} to demonstrate His righteousness, because in the forbearance of God He passed over the sins previously committed; 1. We have finally arrived at the center of our chiastic structure. Now the work of Christ and God is fully in focus. Paul has used the law-court (justified [pardoned]), the slave-market (redemption [liberation]) and now he uses the altar (propitiation [atonement]) as metaphors. God becomes a Priest offering Jesus as the Sacrifice on the "altar" (the Cross). 2. whom. refers back to Jesus. 3. displayed publicly [one word: G4388, protithe_mi]. It literally means "set before" and is found only two other times in the NT: "planned" (Rom 1:13); "purposed" (Eph 1:9). It can mean "to set forth publicly" or "to plan or determine beforehand". Here again we should not think that we need to choose between these meanings. Paul probably was thinking of both meanings when he chose this word. The Easter event was always in God's plan (cf. Isa 52:13 - 53:12; Gal 4:4-7; Eph 1:3-14; Col 1:13-23; Heb 1:1 - 2:4). On the other hand, Paul is stressing that the cross and the resurrection were a public demonstration of God's love. It takes us back to "the righteousness of God has been manifested" (3:21) and forward to "demonstrate His righteousness" (3:25-26). Perhaps Paul is thinking of the demonstrations of God on Mount Horeb at Sinai at the establishing of the covenant with Israel. If so, he is basically saying that God again inaugurates another (the New) covenant with signs and wonders (cf. 2 Cor 3:1 - 4:12; Heb 10:19-31; 12:18- 29).

Another perspective gives the additional sense that with every proclamation of the gospel message the "crucified one" is again "publicly portrayed" (Gal 3:1).

There is another possible element here. If, as we will propose below, Paul has the Day of Atonement in mind as he wrote these words, then he is also contrasting the public nature of the sacrifice of Jesus with the hiddenness of the high priest's work in the Most Holy Place [Holy of Holies]. The high priest alone was allowed to enter this inner sanctuary, and then only once each year. And a veil kept others from viewing his activities. The new openness involved in the New

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 78 Covenant is shown symbolically by the veil of the Temple being torn from top to bottom at the very moment that Jesus died on the cross (Mt 27:51; Mk 15:38; Lk 23:45; Exod 26:31-33). Jesus has entered the Holy of Holies and has become "a new and living way" for us to enter in after Him (Heb 10:19-21; 9:3, 11-14).

How about one more facet of this great event? Paul wants to stress the divine initiative in the great plan for reconciliation. It is only possible because God carried it out by His "predetermined plan and foreknowledge" (Acts 2:23-24; 3:13-15; 4:10-12; 5:30-32; 10:34-43; 2 Cor 5:16-21).

4. as a propitiation. It is not found often in the NT. The family of words and references are: [G2435, hilaste_rion] "mercy seat" (Rom 3:25; Heb 9:5); [G2433, hilaskomai] "make propitiation" (Heb 2:17), "merciful" (Lk 18:13); [G2434, hilasmos] "propitiation" (1 Jn 2:2; 4:10); [H2436, hileo_s] "merciful" (Heb 8:12; Mt 16:22 [lit. {God be} merciful to You]). It is used most often in the LXX to translate the Hebrew word [H3727, kapporeth] for "mercy seat" (more than 20 times in the Pentateuch), e.g., see Lev 16:2, 2, 13, 14, 14, 15, 15). Five times the LXX used it to translate another word [H5835, azarah] "ledge around the altar of burnt offering" (Ezek 43:14[3x], 17, 20; 45:19). "Mercy seat" refers to the lid on the Ark of the Covenant (Exodus 25:17-22) which was found in the Holy of Holies within the Tabernacle. Disagreement among scholars shows up in the various translations, e.g., "propitiation" (NASB, ESV, KJV) "sacrifice of atonement" (NIV, NRSV), "sacrifice of reconciliation" (Williams), "expiation" (RSV, NEB). a. The OT gives us at least two vital truths regarding the "mercy seat" (the covering lid for the Ark of the Covenant). First of all, it is the place where YHWH specifically said He would meet with Israel (Exod 25:17-22; 30:6, 36; Lev 16:2; Num 7:89; 17:4). Secondly, it was here where, once a year, atonement was made for the entire congregation (Lev 16). b. The scholarly debate is basically over two possible meanings. Is Paul thinking about some form of appeasement of God's wrath? Then "propitiation" is the better word. But, if he is considering that which is involved in the removal of sin's guilt, then "expiation" is the better word. However, since most everyone agrees that Christ's sacrifice did result in atonement, some sidestep the "how does it work?" question by using "sacrifice of atonement" (NIV, NRSV). Someone has defined atonement as "at-one-ment" since it is an action whereby two people who were alienated are now reconciled. (They can be "one" again.) The sin that has separated people from God has been "atoned for" by the suffering and death of Jesus. The word "atonement" is more or less a neutral term. It doesn't attempt to answer the "how does it work?" question. c. But when we consider the context, it is difficult not to see Paul's emphasis (since 1:18) on the wrath of God. One of the reasons scholars tend to shy away from "propitiation" as the best translation is that it tends to create a picture of an angry god who must be placated. But such a picture is removed by the opening of this verse (see above). These actions are initiated by the God who loves us so much that He determined to make reconciliation possible even at great cost to Himself. What God has done at the cross is both an expression of His wrath and His love. d. It is important to make one point clear. We do not understand how the actual process works. How is it possible that the crucifixion of Jesus brings about our reconciliation to the Father? We can, using our metaphors, grasp some ideas surrounding the action, but no one fully understands exactly how it all works. We are simply to accept by faith that it does. One of the aspects of faith (i.e., trust) must be active here. e. The Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur [H3725]) described in Leviticus 16 provides one of the best metaphors. The expression "make atonement" [H3722a, kaphar] shows up at least 15 times in this one chapter (16:6, 10, 11, 16, 17, 17, 18, 24, 27, 30, 32, 33, 33, 33, 34). (The LXX uses "exilasketai" to translate "kaphar", a word from the same root as hilaste_rion.) One of the beauties of the picture here is that the symbolism shows both propitiation and expiation. These twin truths are taught by the use of two goats. The first goat is slain and its blood is offered on the mercy seat in the Holy of Holies showing the need for the death of an innocent victim. The sins of the people are laid on the second goat (sometimes called "the scapegoat"),

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 79 and it is sent away. This metaphor shows that Christ is the one who bears [H5375, nasa] away our sin. f. Isaiah 40-66 is also in Paul's thinking as he constructs this verse, especially the Fourth Servant Song (Isa 52:13 - 53:12). Although Paul does not use the language of that "song" here, he does use it elsewhere (cf. Rom 4:25 with Isa 53:6, 12; cf. Rom 5:14, 19 with Isa 53:11-12; cf. Rom 5:1 with Isa 53:5; 15:15 with Isa 52:15; cf. Rom 10:16 with Isa 53:1). This background of Isaiah made it easy for Paul to tie many elements together, such as the righteousness of God, wrath of God, a sacrificial death, a Suffering Servant, justification for many, etc. 5. in His blood. It was necessary for Christ to die. And somehow this necessity is connected with the wrath of God, which Paul will state clearly in chapter 5. "But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from the wrath {of God} through Him. For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life" (Rom 5:8-10). This concept is anticipated by the entire sacrificial system laid out in the OT. For example, in the chapter following the description of the great Day of Atonement, we find this important statement: "For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I [YHWH] have given it to you on the altar to make atonement for your souls; for it is the blood by reason of the life that makes atonement" (Lev 17:11; read 17:10-16; cf. Gen 9:4-6; Deut 12:23-25). We must keep our focus. Blood, in itself, does nothing for us. It is only "blood" as a metaphor (by metonomy) for a sacrificial death (the willingness of Christ to give His life) that can bring about our salvation. 6. through faith [dia pisteo_s]. Considering our discussion regarding faithfulness in 3:22 [dia pisteo_s], I think that Paul is again blending the faithfulness of God with a human response of faith/faithfulness. Neither idea should be excluded here. It fits so well with the overall discussion. However, it must be emphasized that this verse focuses on what God has done and not on the human response, so God's faithfulness should be at the forefront. (Human faith/faithfulness will come to the forefront in 3:27-28. We should allow Paul to hint at it here and not hurry it.) God's faithfulness to the covenant purposes finally produces the Sacrifice (Christ crucified) necessary to bring about reconciliation. The old covenant demonstrated it in a symbolic way with the sacrificial system, but never actually accomplished it. These thoughts lead us directly into the next point Paul will make. 7. to demonstrate [G1731, endeiknumi] His righteousness. For emphasis Paul will repeat this thought [using G1732, endeixis] in the next verse. Paul gives another reason for the public display of the Sacrifice. It is given to show (or perhaps "prove") that God has not been unrighteous in His past dealings with humanity. This thought takes us back to the earlier portions of this chapter where God's character was been challenged (3:3-8). One of Paul's great claims has been the impartiality of God (2:9-11). However, the covenant with Israel, with its provision of forgiveness through the sacrificial system appears to be a bias towards those under the covenant. Now we see that the sacrificial system was only given as a type. In fact, God's refusal to destroy the entire human race might be seen as a lack of righteousness. However, in reality, all forgiveness for sins (Jew and Gentile) in the past was conditioned on this Christ Event. God forgave people prior to this Christ Event because He knew that He would provide the means for that forgiveness. The Christ Event (cross and empty tomb) was coming! 8. because in the forbearance [G463, anoche_] of God. Found only here and at 2:4, but a related word [G430, anecho_] is found ca. 15 times in the NT. God has anticipated that the Sacrifice for Sin was going to happen in the "fullness of time" (Gal 4:4). Therefore He chose to restrain His wrath until a remedy for sin was made available. John will say it this way (using a related form for propitiation - see above): "My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. And if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous; and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for {those of} the whole world" (1 John 2:1-2). 9. He passed over [G3929, paresis] the sins previously committed (3:25). Paresis (found only here) is close to the word for forgiveness [G859, aphesis] in meaning. However it is used for "a temporary remission of debt" making it ideally suited for what Paul is saying. And God is still withholding His wrath from humanity. It must wait for Judgment Day. However, it is clearly evident, that this passing over of sins has made people come up with some false views of God.

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 80 Paul make a glancing reference to this idea in :16; 17:30. Because God delays punishment for sin, people often see it as "getting away with it" ("God must be blind, doesn't care, doesn't exist, etc."). But remember Paul's comment at 2:3-4. We will not escape the judgment of God! Others take the position that it wasn't really necessary for Christ to die ("sin isn't really that bad"). But Paul closes that door firmly in Gal 2:15-21. "I do not nullify the grace of God, for if righteousness {comes} through the Law, then Christ died needlessly" (Gal 2:21). 10. Past, present, future. We must not miss what is being taught here. Christ's death may now be applied to all the people of past ages and for all the ages to come. For example, people living prior to the time of Christ, who trusted in God's provisional forgiveness, are now truly forgiven. It is a once for all sacrifice (Heb 7:27; read 7:19-28; cf. 9:11-14, 24-28; 10:8-18).

ROMANS 3:26 for the demonstration, {I say}, of His righteousness at the present time, so that He would be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus. 1. demonstration of His righteousness. See above at 3:25 (number 7). The NIV uses the term "justice" here, partly (I guess) because they messed up the use of righteousness above when they changed "righteousness of God" to "righteousness from God" (3:21, 22). But the use of "just" and "justifier" in this verse clearly shows that God is demonstrating BOTH His personal righteousness (faithfulness, integrity, character) and His acts of righteousness (wrath, justification) whereby He declares sinners guilty (judgment) or acquitted (justified). 2. at the present time. Again Paul makes us focus on the greatest event in all of history. (Recall the "But now" at 3:21 [cf. Acts 17:30]!) God has now done what was needed for the salvation of humanity (the suffering and death of His Son -- the faithful Israelite). His integrity has been vindicated. He is true, faithful, righteous (cf. 1 Jn 1:9). And He has provided righteousness for humanity. 3. just and the justifier. We must remind ourselves that these words come from the same root as "righteousness". It is perfectly correct to translate the Greek here as "righteous" [just] and "the One who [declares, accept, makes] righteous" [justifier]. Frankly, the reason most translators use the term "justifier" is so that they can avoid the debate (see above). Does justify mean declare righteous, accept as righteous, or make righteous? This debate will never end. There is too much theology at risk! 4. of the one who has faith in Jesus [ton ek pisteo_s Ie_sou]. Literally it says "out of Jesus' faith or faithfulness". This exact expression is unique in the NT. Close parallels are at Gal 2:16 (dia pisteo_s Christou Ie_sou); Gal. 3:22 (ek pisteo_s Ie_sou Christou); and Phil 3:9 (te_n dia pisteo_s Christou Ie_sou). And, of course, Rom 3:22 (dia pisteo_s Ie_sou Christou), which was discussed above. What is fascinating about all of these parallel passages is that "faith/faithfulness" shows up twice in every passage. In every case it makes good sense to consider the first appearance of "faith/faithfulness" as referring the the faithfulness of Jesus and the second "faith/faithfulness" as referring to the human response. There is another important parallel to be considered. The expression "of the faith [of] Abraham" [ek pisteo_s Abraam] (Rom 4:16) matches "ek pisteo_s Ie_sou" perfectly.

I think Paul is saying that God is the justifier because of the faithfulness of Jesus. I especially like it that he uses "Jesus" and not "Jesus Christ" here to stress that the human Jesus was the faithful Israel. However, if I am wrong in my thinking here, I have not lost anything. The thought in the "standard" translation is true enough. However, if I am right, then we find a greater richness to Paul's thought. In addition, if I am also right in seeing an ambiguity and unnecessary "redundancy" (if the standard translation is correct) in Rom 3:22; Gal 2:16; 3:22; and Phil 3:9, then we find the possibility of an even deeper truth. Jesus did not just come as the single faithful Israelite and thus fulfill the covenant promises. He came to create a new Israel consisting of faithful "" (children of Abraham [Rom 4:11-16; Gal 3:6-18, 29]). In ways too deep for us to fully understand, we participate in the suffering, death, resurrection, and resurrected life of Jesus. He was faithful. His followers who live out the resurrected life of Jesus will also be characterized as faithful. He was without sin (Heb 4:15; 7:26; 2 Cor 5:21; Acts 3:14; 1 Pet 2:22; 1 Jn 3:5). His followers will be characterized as "those who do not practice sinning" (1 John 3:1-10).

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 81 ROMANS 3:27 Where then is boasting? It is excluded. By what kind of law? Of works? No, but by a law of faith. 1. Paul again creates an imaginary person for the sake of discussion. Here we have a deliberate change in style. And this is the main reason that almost all scholars see this as a beginning of a new section. While conceding this change in style, I still believe that we should recognize the chiastic structure and see 3:27-28 as transitional (looking both forwards and backwards). This position is supported by the beginning of 3:27, with Paul using not just "Where" but "Where therefore/then" [Pou oun, G4226, G3767]. If I am right and there is a chiastic structure here, then this verse is matched with "for there is no distinction; for all have sinned" (3:22c-23). Paul is again reminding us that no one has any basis for boasting, not even a Jew (cf. 2:17, 23). In regard to judgment and justification, God is completely impartial. 2. It is excluded [one word: ezekleisthe_ from G1576, ekkleio_, "to shut out"]. It is found only here and Gal 4:17. The aorist tense shows a one-time action. In the NT, the passive voice usually means something done by God. So Paul is saying by a deliberate once-for-all act of God, boasting (by anyone) is excluded. Such an action corresponds well with the matching "all have sinned" statement. It also looks ahead to a "final" statement Paul will make near the end of chapter 11: "For God has shut up [G4788, sugkleio_] all in disobedience so that He may show mercy to all" (Rom 11:32). Kleio_ [G2808, "to shut"] is a root of both ekkleio_ [G1576] and sugkleio_ [G4788]. 3. what kind of [one word: G4169, poios]. "What kind of" is the correct literal translation. But the word can also simply mean "what" (NIV). 4. Law [G3551, nomos]. It is translated "principle" in the NIV. Here we have an excellent example of translators trying to be helpful, but instead they deprive the reader of important truths. (They corrected themselves in the TNIV.) Scholars debate the use of "nomos" here. As Paul so often does, he is probably thinking on more than one level. a. "Law" as principle or system. At the more obvious level, Paul is probably using "nomos" to mean "principle" or "system", so that he is contrasting a principle or system of works with a principle or system of faith/faithfulness. b. However, he still wants us to be thinking of the Mosaic Law [Torah] which is used for covenant. But here Paul is NOT saying that the Old Covenant operated on the basis of works while the New Covenant functions on the basis of faith. As we will see in the next chapter, all covenants operate on the principle/system of faith! 5. law of works [G2041, ergon] vs. law of faith. These phrases are set in parallel in the Greek, intended to be contrasted. "Law of works" here should not be translated as "works of the Law"! Paul will use that expression in the next verse (3:28). We must wait for its use there. Paul wants us to understand that people of the Old Covenant did not fail simply because they could not do the "works of the Law" perfectly. They failed because they did not understand that all covenants require a response of faith and faithfulness as the most fundamental aspect of the relationship between those making covenant. The expression "keeping faith" fits nicely here. 6. I would like to introduce some parallel ideas here. I realize that I am getting way ahead of Paul. (He will address these issues later.) It is so important for us to realize that Christians make the same mistakes as the Jews so often did. It has to do with the focus of one's life. When my life is focused on what I should do or should not do, then I will live my life out of a sense of duty. From this viewpoint it is so important that I fulfill all these obligations because they define my life . This response is to operate by a Law of Works. If instead I focus on the relationship formed by the covenant, then relational aspects will define my life . I will constantly view myself as a beloved child of God. This response is to operate by a Law of Faith and Faithfulness. This principle has a lot of "give and take" in it, because it involves attitudes, motives, values, etc. It is not measured in terms of "tasks completed" or "getting the job done" or other measures of perfect performance. Let me try to illustrate. a. Picture a field being harvested, with many people hard at work. One person in the field is the son and heir. However, it might be difficult, at first glance, to pick him out. Many of these workers are there for the money, and they operate on the basis of quotas, hours, etc., seeking to satisfy the employer so that they do not lose their job. The son/heir has far more obligations than a worker does. But a true son does not focus on meeting some quota. Instead, he seeks only to benefit his father. He is "son/heir" first and "worker" second.

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 82 b. Israel was a slave in Egypt. And in a very real sense, at the Exodus, Israelites simply exchanged one master (Pharaoh) for another (God). But that is not the full story! When God entered into covenant with them, He became their God and they became His people (Exodus 6:7). And He chose to dwell with them (Exod 25:8; 29:45-46; Lev 26:11-12). The relationship was elevated above the master/slave aspect to a family relationship. In fact, Israel is (occasionally) called "son" (Exod 4:22-23). The Presence of God was the most important aspect of the covenant since it defined this new relationship (Exodus 33:14-16). c. Jesus illustrated these two different approaches in the parable that has come to be known as the "Parable of the Prodigal Son" (Luke 15:11-32); however, "The Lost Sons" might be a more accurate name. The younger son focused on only one portion of the relational aspects, seeing the privilege of sonship. He wanted his inheritance NOW. Instead of maintaining the faith/faithful relationship with his father, he took the money and left . However, the elder son also missed it. He saw only his duty to serve while waiting for the time when he would inherit (Lk 15:29). A fascinating connection of this parable with what Paul is teaching in Romans is that the elder son in the parable represents the Jews and the younger son represents the Gentiles. d. Jesus also lives out this life. On His last night with the disciples, Jesus washed their feet. He then taught them, saying, "You call Me Teacher and Lord; and you are right, for so I am. If I then, the Lord and the Teacher, washed your feet, you also ought to wash one another's feet. For I gave you an example that you also should do as I did to you. Truly, truly, I say to you, a slave is not greater than his master, nor {is} one who is sent greater than the one who sent him. If you know these things, you are blessed if you do them" (John 13:13-17). Another time He said, "For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many" (Mk 10:45; cf. Phil 2:3-11; Heb 5:8).

ROMANS 3:28 For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law. 1. For [gar]. "For" ties this verse with 3:27. Actually, 3:27 was Paul's main conclusion for this section (3:21-28). This statement is added as a given "condition" to support the "conclusion" (reversing the "logical" order). "Conclude" in KJV is a poor choice. 2. maintain [G3049, logizomai]. This is a very important word for Paul. It is found ca. 40 times in the NT with Paul using it ca. 34 times. See my notes for 2:26 for comments on this word. The NASB translates it "credited" ten times in chapter 4. Paul uses it here to state a fundamental principle which, however, he has not fully explained (or "proved"). He expects to do so in chapter 4. It is a truth that he "holds" dearly, but has not yet given all the convincing evidence for it. However, it would appear that Paul actually expects his readers to agree with him (in general at least) that faith is the condition for justification. 3. a man [G444, anthro_pos = a human being]. Paul is stating a universal principle that holds for everyone (man, woman, Jew, Greek, etc.). Justification is available for everyone, but the condition (faith) must be met. 4. justified by faith. It is important to note that Paul has returned to using the future tense. Here Paul uses it in the sense of what God will decide on Judgment Day after examining the life of the individual. Was it a life of faith/faithfulness? If so, then the person will be acquitted on Judgment Day. 5. apart from the works of the Law. In our chiastic structure, the corresponding passage used the phrase "apart from the law" (3:21). See above for comments on "continuity" and "discontinuity". All of that was extremely important to this whole passage. However, Paul now changes the focus by adding "works" to the discussion. The final determination of justification will not be based on how well people perform the "works" on the law. The determination will be on our relationship to the Lawgiver. And faith is the fundamental condition for this relationship, not works. 6. Faith. But what is the "faith" that is involved in justification? Ah, there's the rub! Why? Because the history of the Christian church has been the story of people defining "faith" to suit themselves. We cannot stop at this point and do an indepth study of faith. For one thing, Paul has more to say about faith! However, a few things should be said before we go on. a. Reformers's bias. Martin Luther was so troubled that the church of his day was selling indulgences (allowing people to buy their way into heaven) that he reacted to anything that

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 83 gave the appearance of "working" our way to heaven. For example, in his translation of Romans, he added "alone" to this verse ("justified by faith { alone }"). But his fear of a "works-righteousness" actually resulted in a weakened definition of faith. The reformers (Luther, Calvin, et al) focused on a great truth ("The just shall live by faith") but removed too much of the "faithfulness" aspect of faith. The rallying cry of the reformation was "sola gratia" (by grace alone), "sola fide" (by faith alone), and "soli Deo gloria" (to God alone be the glory). And they (especially Calvin) made sure that faith was defined in such a way that it was impossible for people to earn or merit justification. But it was a case of overkill. "Sola gratia" (by grace alone) was all that was needed to eliminate any idea of "works- righteousness"! It is impossible for anyone to earn salvation. It is only by the grace of God that justification is at all possible. They were afraid that someone would see the faith expressed by an individual as somehow earning "something" towards salvation. (And, by the way, this bias still affects the way many translators deal with the Scriptures.) So "faith" was described as totally a gift from God. So, from this viewpoint, it doesn't really matter very much what is included in a definition of faith, since it actually was God doing it. b. By an overemphasis on justification to the expense of other metaphors for salvation, they made salvation too much a legal act (with too much emphasis on "justification"). But salvation does not consist solely of justification; it has many facets. For example, what it was that was made "right" is even more important than being declared righteous. To picture justification as bringing about a change of legal status is too narrow a picture. That change in status also meant a change in relationship which is even more important. But also more complex! For one thing, it is impossible for a relationship (by its very definition) to be completely one-sided. Both parties must do something to maintain a relationship! c. Reconciliation. In fact, too much focus on "salvation" misses the real purposes of God. He is interested in reconciliation. I am convinced that if His purpose was to simply save us from wrath (justification, acquittal, etc.), He would, on the basis of Christ's death, acquit the entire human race from Adam to the last person born. But that will not reverse the effects of the sin of Eve and Adam. The key thing they lost was fellowship with God. Faith must be defined in such a way so as to include reconciliation, fellowship, the God/me abiding relationship, interpersonal relationships, etc. Somehow "faith" must also includes the very necessary "effort" required to maintain a right relationship with God. For example, it is impossible to exclude the idea of faithfulness (involving an ongoing, day-by-day effort). d. legal obligation vs. moral obligation. Wow! Is it ever complicated. In fact, it is so complicated that, in reality, only God knows who makes it into heaven where the fullness of reconciliation is finally attained. For example, it is not really "faith alone" because faith is the door that opens up the possibility of love. And true reconciliation is not possible without love at the very center of the relationship. The "love" emphasis found in the Gospel and letters of John is a necessary element in the whole plan of God for reconciliation. Of course, Paul emphasized it as well, e.g., "But now faith, hope, love, abide, these three; but the greatest of these is love" (1 Cor 13:13). F.F. Bruce says it this way, "Yet, while justification in this sense is received by faith alone, 'the faith which justified is not alone'", and then he refers us to Gal 5:6 and Rom 12:1 - 15:13. Earlier I mentioned that God's wonderful gift of salvation places us under great obligation. But this obligation must not be seen as a legal obligation; it is a moral obligation. The three great love commandments in the Bible are moral obligations not legal obligations. (The thief on the cross could not make it to paradise, if loving God was a legal obligation.) Because God has loved us so much, we are obligated to love Him back and to love others. But the very meaning of love is destroyed if it is forced. We must freely chose to love. That is a major point Paul makes in Galatians 5. We are set free (redeemed, justified, etc.) in order to love. If we see the command to love only as a legal commandment, then we are back to "works of the law". If, instead, we see ourselves as the beloved children of God (adopted into His family), then we should (morally, freely) chose to be a servant to further the kingdom of our Father. It is love that has made all the difference. e. The will of God. Let me add just one more element. A genuine concern for the will of God only happens in a love relationship. Before love becomes central to the relationship, people are simply concerned about what they can get out of it (heaven, etc.). However, somewhere down the journey, doing the will of God becomes an essential factor in reconciliation. Note

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 84 especially the warning in Matthew 7:13-27. Hopefully, if I have not just confused you, you see that we have finally reconciled Paul's two great "justified" statements (2:13; 3:20, 28). If we are being transformed into the image of His Son (1 John 2:1-3; 2 Cor 3:18; Mt 5:45) then we are eager to serve the Father in a manner corresponding to the way Jesus served Him. Jesus illustrated this with the Parable of the Two Sons (Mt 21:28-32). Which son did the will of His father? So the fact that, on Judgment Day, God will "render to each person according to his deeds" (Rom 2:6) is completely compatible with a faith/love relationship with God. f. In fact, God showed us in Deuteronomy ("the second giving of the law") that the covenant could not be maintained without a response of love (Deut 6:4-6, quoted below). Note that the word "love" is used at least fifteen times in Deuteronomy and is only found ca. seven times in the previous four books! And in only one of these seven does it refer to people's relationship with God. So, way back in the early portions of the OT, God showed Israel that a faith that results in love is the proper way to relate to the law. But we are getting ahead of ourselves. Paul will address the fulfilling of the law at 3:31.

ROMANS 3:29 Or is God {the God} of Jews only? Is He not {the God} of Gentiles also? Yes, of Gentiles also, ROMANS 3:30 since indeed God who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through faith is one. 1. Or [G2228, e_]. Paul, in his debate with the imaginary person, allows, for a moment, the possibility that he might be wrong (simply for the sake of learning something through debate!). 2. is God {the God} of Jews only? Perhaps God is only the God of the Jews and the Gentiles have a different god. 3. Is He not {the God} of the Gentiles also? The reader (both Jew and Gentile) would answer with a very loud "YES, of Gentiles also"! 4. since indeed God ... is one (solus Deus). There is only one God, so the only possible answer is that He is the God of everyone. But where is Paul going with this "one God/one people" argument? There is now a new covenant which has removed the exclusiveness of the Jews. Since God is the God of everyone, then why would He not allow the possibility of justification for anyone who meets the conditions of the new covenant? Would the Creator actually ignore part of His creation? Doesn't He want the whole creation to be redeemed (8:18-25)? In fact, it is instructive to look at the OT verses in Paul's mind as he makes such a statement. It would be impossible for Paul, raised in the Jewish faith, not to be thinking of the Shema which is read every Sabbath in the Jewish synagogue: "Hear, O Israel! YHWH is our God, YHWH is one! You shall love YHWH your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might. These words, which I am commanding you today, shall be on your heart" (Deut 6:4-6). So love is directly tied to the concept of one God. As will be made plain in the NT, love is the fulfilling of the Law (Rom 13:8-10; Gal 5:14; James 2:8). So love is the key to the "one God/one people" concept. And faith is the door that opens to love. Or to turn it around. Love is faith in action (see Gal 5:6 quoted below). 5. Jew/Gentile, circumcised/uncircumcised. Note that Paul here uses "Gentile" not "Greek" (his usual expression). He has reverted (purposely) to the typical language of Jewish exclusiveness, emphasizing again that there is now "no distinction" (Rom 3:22). Again it is helpful to look elsewhere for what Paul says: "For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything, but faith working through love" (Gal 5:6). 6. will justify by faith [ek pisteo_s]... through faith [dia te_s pisteo_s] (literally "through the faith"). Almost all scholars tell us to ignore the fact that Paul uses two different prepositions here, claiming that there is no difference. But personally I am astonished! Why would Paul, in his effort to show that there is no difference, not be very careful. Why didn't he use the same prepositions? There has got to be something more in his thinking! And I'm not sure I know what it is! Perhaps, as he purposely did with "from faith" [ek pisteo_s] back in 1:17, Paul wants to be ambiguous. He wants us to remember that faith is complex with many dimensions. (For example, Paul wants us to remember that "by faith" includes faithfulness.) However, when we consider that Paul has added "the" to faith [te_s pisteo_s] (left out in most translations!), some ideas come to mind. Note that some translations (NIV, NRSV) try to be helpful but just mess things up. Instead of using "the faith" they substitute "that same faith" deliberately removing any

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 85 distinction Paul may have intended. Here is my attempt to understand what Paul is saying. While Paul has worked very hard to get us to understand that there is "no distinction" between Jew and Greek, we must remember that, when he is saying this, he is focused on justification (especially on Judgment Day). But we must remember that the Jews do have an advantage ("Great in every respect" [Rom 3:1-2]). And Paul will say more in chapters 9-11. They have the "oracles of God" (3:2). The Gentiles do not. Before the Gentiles can have faith they must hear "the faith" (the revelation of God). "The faith" must be delivered to them (cf. 1 Cor 11:23; 15:3; 2 Cor 13:5; Gal 1:23; 3:2, 5; Col 1:23; 2 Tim 4:7; Jude 1:3, 20-21). I think Paul is looking ahead to chapter 10 where he will declare that we cannot have faith until we are given "the word of faith which we [Paul and others] are preaching" (10:8; cf. Gal 1:23). There is a body of truth which must be believed. And we cannot believe if we have not heard it. All this will be examined when we study Rom 10:8-17. For example, "Faith comes from hearing and hearing by the word of Christ" (10:17). Also, looking ahead to the next verse, "the faith" also takes in the many dimensions of "word of faith" involving, not just assenting to a body of truth, but including a response of obedience. "Word", when referring to God's communication to us, has the added dimension of "commandment" (law).

ROMANS 3:31 Do we then nullify the Law through faith? May it never be! On the contrary, we establish the Law. 1. nullify [G2673, katargeo_, to render inoperative, abolish] (cf. Rom 3:3). I think that the key to understanding this verse is to return to the charge Paul faced throughout his ministry. These "slanderous" charges are mentioned in 3:8. Paul is charged with proclaiming a "new faith" that allows people to ignore the commandments of God. 2. Law. Actually it does not say " the law" but simply "law" in both places in this verse. What is rather funny is that "the" is added here (in most all translations) but "the" is left out (or changed to "this") in "through the faith" [dia te_s pisteo_s] which repeats in 3:31 the exact same wording found in 3:30. But first, let's deal with "Law" (capitalized here by the translators to let us know they think it is referring to the Torah). However, there appears to be several possible interpretations. a. Torah (first five books of the OT). People who hold this position support it with the obvious fact that Paul has meant "Torah" many times in the past two chapters when "law" was used. b. Scriptures. Looking back to Paul's reference to "the law and prophets" (3:21), some people see it as meaning the entire OT. c. law as convicting. Here people look back to this aspect of law addressed in 3:19 (cf. 2:15-16). d. law as commandment. As noted above, I have taken this meaning of "law" for use in this verse. 3. through faith. Literally "through the faith" [dia te_s pisteo_s]. Please consider all that has been said above about the many dimensions of "the faith" (e.g. content, commandment, conduct, etc.) as well as the "love" outcome. "Faith" must not be emptied of its many dimensions. If so, it results in some form of "cheap grace" where God swings wide the "door" and lets in anyone who expresses only one dimension of faith. 4. May it never be! [me_ genoito]. This is the same expression used in 3:6. See there for comments. But remember this expression is Paul's most forceful, emphatic form of denial (equate it with an explosion!). 5. On the contrary [G235, alla]. This expression can be translated a number of ways (e.g., otherwise, on the other hand, but). Paul is probably saying that "just the opposite is true". Faith, not only does not abolish commandments, it somehow makes commandments more meaningful, allowing it to finally function the way it should have all along. 6. establish [G2476, histe_mi]. The word is translated "uphold" in several versions (NIV, ESV, NRSV). I prefer "establish" (NASB). Within the context of a faith/love relationship, law (commandment) finally "settles in" to its proper place. The response of faith/love is no longer a "duty" response or the "work" of a servant seeking wages. It is the eager faith/love response of a child to a faithful, loving Father. This new relationship to law was anticipated in the prediction of a new covenant. For example, in one place God said, "I will put My law within them and on their hearts, and on their heart I will write it" (Jer 31:33; cf. Heb 10:16). The law finally comes to its fulfillment, being established within a proper relationship (cf. Rom 5:3-5; 7:7-12; 8:3-4;

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 86 13:8-10; Heb 10:4-22). The Law becomes truly valid only when it is established by the New Covenant. Christ is the "end of the Law" (10:4). He does not destroy it; He fulfills it (Matt 5:17). And when we walk in the "obedience of faith" (Rom 1:5; 16:26), we fulfill [telousa, from G5055, teleo_] the purpose of the Law (Rom 2:27).

ROMANS 4:1 What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh, has found? 1. then [G3767, oun: therefore, then]. We immediately encounter a problem in interpretation. This word is used most often to indicate a conclusion or inference from the material just prior to it. (If so, "therefore" would have been a better translation.) Some scholars think that Paul is making a transition to new material, not drawing conclusions. Of course, they realize that the new material is still related to Paul's overall discussion. Others see 3:27-31 as a thesis statement and chapter 4 as supporting evidence for it. "Then" is perhaps the better translation here (for some reasons given in the next section). 2. Determining why Paul introduces the material given in chapter four is difficult. Some scholars would keep it quite simple and say that Paul's major theme is "justification by faith" and that here he is simply using the story of Abraham as an example of justification by faith (i.e., providing supporting evidence). But I think that Paul has more than one item on his agenda. Let's try to fit chapter four into the present section. The new section began at 3:21, where Paul finally(!) starts showing us how God is going to solve the problems of sin and alienation. A new expression of the righteousness of God (we call it "the gospel"!) has now been manifested (in Christ Jesus). Paul presents at least three key words to help us understand what God has done: justification (from the law-court), redemption (from the slave-market), and propitiation (from the altar). However, more fundamental and clearly foundational to these three are two additional concepts: the righteousness of God and the faithfulness of God. Jesus becomes the faithful Israelite who makes justification (our righteousness) possible. Our response to God is directly paired with these two concepts. What has been "made right" (justified) is our relationship with God. The establishment and continuance of this relationship is conditioned on our response of faith and faithfulness. One way of translating the last phrase in 3:26 is "who is of the faith of Jesus" (Lit. NASB margin). Our response to God must be of the same nature as that of Jesus. He trusted the Father. He was faithful to the Father. So must we be. Another idea from 3:21-31 concerns the universal nature of sin and its solution. The idea of "not boasting" is also found in this section and is used again in chapter 4. However, as we consider these various themes, it becomes rather obvious that most of these have been Paul's major themes since 1:17! 3. Some key words. The following references are for those readers who want to see that several key words span the whole major section we have been studying. a. Circumcision, Uncircumcision. 1) circumcision [G4061, peritome_]: Rom 2:25, 25, 26, 28, 29; 3:1, 30; 4:9, 10, 10, 11, 11, 12, 12; 15:8 2) uncircumcision [G0203, akrobustia]: Rom 2:25, 26, 26, 27; 3:30; 4:9, 10, 10, 11, 12 b. Work. 1) work [G2041, ergon]: Rom 2:6, 7, 15; 3:20, 27, 27, 28; 4:2, 6; 9:11; 32; 11:6; 13:3, 12; 14:20; 15:18 2) to work [G2038, ergazomai]: Rom 4:4, 5, 21; 13:10 c. Law. 1) law [G3551, nomos]: Rom 2:12, 12, 13, 13, 14, 14, 14, 14, 15, 17, 18, 20, 23, 23, 25, 25, 26, 27, 27; 3:19, 19, 20, 20, 21, 21, 27, 27, 28, 31, 31; 4:13, 14, 15, 15, 16; 5:13, 13, 20; 6:14, 15; 7:1, 2, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 7, 7, 8, 9, 12, 14, 16, 16, 21, 22, 23, 23, 23, 25, 25; 8:2, 2, 3, 4, 7; 9:31, 31; 10:4, 5; 13:8, 10 2) lawgiving [G3548, nomothesia]: Rom 9:4 d. Righteousness, Justification. 1) righteous judgment [G1341, dikaiokrisia]: Rom 2:5 2) righteous, innocent [G1342, dikaios]: Rom 1:17; 2:13; 3:10, 26; 5:7, 19; 7:12 3) righteousness, justice [G1343, dikaiosune_]: Rom 1:17; 3:5, 21, 22, 25, 26; 4:3, 5, 6, 9, 11, 13, 22; 5:17, 21; 6:13, 16, 18, 19, 20; 8:10; 9:30, 30, 31; 10:3, 4, 5, 6, 10; 14:17 4) justify [declare/make righteous] [G1344, dikaioo_]: Rom 2:13; 3:4, 20, 24, 26, 28, 30; 4:2, 5; 5:1, 9; 6:7; 8:30, 33

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 87 5) ordinance, etc. [G1345, dikaio_ma]: Rom 1:32; 2:26; 5:16, 18; 8:4 6) justification [G1347, dikaio_sis]: Rom 4:25; 5:18 e. Faith, Believe. 1) to believe [G4100, pisteuo_]: Rom 1:16; 3:2, 22; 4:3, 5, 11, 17, 18, 24; 6:8; 9:33; 10:4, 9, 10, 11, 14, 14, 16; 13:11; 14:2; 15:13 2) faith, faithfulness [G4102, pistis]: Rom 1:5, 8, 12, 17, 17, 17; 3:3, 22, 25, 26, 27, 28, 30, 30, 31; 4:5, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 16, 19, 20; 5:1, 2; 9:30, 32; 10:6, 8, 17; 11:20; 12:3, 6; 14:1, 22, 23, 23; 16:26 f. Boast. 1) boaster [G0213, alazo_n]: Rom 1:30 2) to boast [G2744, kauchaomai]: Rom 2:17, 23; 5:2, 3, 11 3) a boast [G2745, kauche_ma]: Rom 4:2 4) a boasting [G2746a, kauche_sis]: Rom 3:27; 15:17 g. to reckon, to consider, to credit, etc. [G3049, logizomai]: Rom 2:3, 26; 3:28; 4:3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 22, 23, 24; 6:11; 8:18, 36; 9:8; 14:14 4. We have another problem in interpretation! Which question is Paul asking: (a) What then shall we say that Abraham (our forefather according to the flesh) has found? OR (b) What then shall we say that Abraham (our forefather) has found [discovered] regarding the flesh? 5. has found [heure_kenai from G2147, heurisko_]. A common verb [to find]. One interesting possible connection is suggested by Dunn. It is a word that is used frequently in the LXX in the phrase "to find favor [G5484, charin] or mercy [G1656, eleos]" (13 times in Genesis, 4 times in Exodus 33, 6 times in 1 Samuel; Deut 24:1). Here it is in the perfect tense (a past action with results still active in the present). Perhaps Paul has "grace" in the background of his thinking as he writes this (Dunn). 6. according [G2596, kata] to the flesh [G4561, sarx]. Flesh is a crucial term for Paul; he uses it at least 25 times in Romans (55 times in his other letters). The full expression "according to the flesh" is found often also (Rom 1:3; 4:1; 8:4, 5, 12, 13; 9:3, 5; 1 Cor 1:26; 2 Cor 1:17; 5:16, 16; 10:2, 3; 11:18; Gal 4:23, 29; Eph 6:5). The word [sarx] has a wide range of meaning, so that one must look at the context to determine a specific meaning (which is difficult at times). Here are a few general comments. a. Often "flesh" is used in a negative sense (e.g., Rom 8:4, 5, 12, 13; 1 Cor 1:26; 2 Cor 1:17; 10:2; 11:18). Paul has already used it in this sense (2:28, 3:20). Sometimes "according to the flesh" is contrasted with "according to the Spirit" (Rom 8:4, 5; Gal 4:29). Paul uses another interesting contrast: "children of flesh" and "children of promise" (Rom 9:8) which perhaps provides some light on chapter 4. Note the use of "promise" in chapter 4: a promise [G1860, epaggelia] (Rom 4:13, 14, 16, 20), promise [G1861, epaggello_] (Rom 4:21). b. Sometimes the meaning of "flesh" is fairly neutral but focusing on the physical side of being "human" (e.g., Rom 9:3; 1 Cor 10:18; Eph 6:5; Col 3:22; cf. Heb 12:9). Perhaps its use in 2 Cor 5:16 has a similar meaning. c. Occasionally "flesh" is used to describe Jesus (Rom 1:3; 9:5), so it clearly does not always have a negative sense. d. This term for "flesh" will come to the forefront in chapters 7 and 8. 7. Actually, through all of this explanation, we still don't know much about this verse! I think that it is best not to make any firm conclusions at this point. Let the passage that follows inform the meaning of the first verse.

ROMANS 4:2 For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. 1. justified by works. Many people conclude that this chapter decides very clearly that people are justified by faith and not by works. They see it as an either/or situation. But such a simplistic view does not take into account the clear teaching of the Bible. For example, the Biblical use of the "works" concept cannot be restricted to one level of meaning. Furthermore, it does not do justice to the complexity of Paul's thinking on the subject as expressed both here in Romans and elsewhere. They interpret Paul's thinking from years of emphasis following the reformation. They make Paul "think" as Luther, Calvin, et al did. But Paul was a Jew raised in all the traditions of his culture. I cannot take the time and space to go over the many points given

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 88 already to show that there is a sense in which people are justified by works. Instead, let me add a new feature. People who want to be Biblically correct must take seriously that James starts at the same place Paul starts (Gen 15:6) and comes to (what appears to be) a very different conclusion. Dunn has shown a clear parallel in approach between James and Paul: faith/works issue (Rom 3:27-28; Jam 2:18); God is one (Rom 3:29-30; Jam 2:19); Appeal to Abraham (Rom 4:1-2; Jam 2:20-22); citing Gen 15:6 (Rom 4:3; Jam 2:20-22); interpretation (Rom 4:4-21; Jam 2:23); conclusion (Rom 4:22; Jam 2:24). But with "different" conclusions! No matter how hard you try, you cannot read the book of James seriously and not conclude that "justification by works" has some validity. I have already tried to show that these two ("works" and "faith") must go together. So, why does Paul make such a point here of denying "works" for justification? He does it because people so often leave out the ingredient of "grace" and make justification something that can be earned or merited. That we must never do. A basic problem is that people do not understand that this issue (which they mistakenly make the central topic) is not the main issue in chapter 4. It is of secondary importance. The important issue is the idea of covenant (its purpose, validity, etc.). 2. The Old Covenant(s) and the New Covenant. Throughout Paul's entire ministry he had been troubled by people's misrepresenting what he has been saying in "his" gospel (Rom 2:16; 16:25). For many Jews, Paul's ideas are quite radical and they appear to nullify the Law (3:31). Is the New Covenant so radically different from the Old Covenant that the old no longer has any meaning? Paul has dealt briefly with the idea that there is both continuity and discontinuity between the two covenants (3:21). He must now address this problem more extensively. So, a major reason for the material in chapter 4 is Paul's attempt to show his readers that there is continuity between the old and the new. He also has to convince his readers that YHWH is also the God of the Gentiles (3:29) and that somehow they are included in God's great plan for reconciliation. Therefore, Paul's choice of Abraham is not simply to give us an example of faith. Paul had no other option! Abraham is central to the whole idea of covenant. So Paul goes back to the time before the Mosaic Covenant to the covenant YHWH made with Abraham [Abram]. The Davidic Covenant will also be briefly mentioned (4:6-8). It would appear that we should even consider the covenant made with Phinehas (Num 25:7-13; Psa 106:28-31). However, the Mosaic Covenant (the covenant with the whole nation of Israel) is not ignored. It is a grave error not to see that Paul must somehow demonstrate the validity of the New Covenant while showing that God did not make a mistake with the Mosaic Covenant. 3. Symbolism without substance? Paul must seek to clarify a very complex issue. Was the Mosaic Covenant symbolism without substance? It is easy for people to draw such a conclusion from an initial hearing of Paul's gospel. For example, let's consider this question: Did people's response to this covenant result in their justification (acquittal on Judgment Day)? Paul would have responded, "Yes, of course it did!" God is faithful to all the covenants He made. But how can both covenants be valid? On the one hand Paul says, "For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from the works of the Law" (3:28). While on the other hand, he says, "... in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God, who will render to each person according to his deeds [G2041, ergon = works]" (Rom 2:5b-6, quoting Psa 62:12) and "... for {it is} not the hearers of the Law {who} are just before God, but the doers [G4163, poie_te_s] of the Law will be justified" (Rom 2:13). Is it possible that an examination of the life of Abraham will resolve this apparent contradiction? Paul is convinced that it will. 4. he [Abraham] has something to boast about. Here is where I diverge from almost everyone I read. It is almost universally agreed that Paul is saying that Abraham has nothing to boast about. I say that he does! But, before I go any further along this line, let's examine the next phrase. 5. but not before God. Why is this strange expression attached to this sentence? First, because Abraham did have something to boast about. Second, that boasting did not bring about his justification. Justification comes only through grace. So, even though boasting is valid at one level, in the overall picture of justification, it has no value unless it is preceded by and sustained by God's grace. Therefore, boasting (of this type) before God is excluded (2:27). 6. Abraham did have something to boast about. If Paul didn't believe this, then he was probably the only Jew on the planet who didn't! Unless we can move from the "either/or" concept to a spectrum of levels, we will never understand the complexity of the gospel. We must not restrict

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 89 Paul to one-dimensional thinking. There is a great amount of evidence that Abraham was indeed justified by works. a. The literature of Paul's day showed that Abraham had become the example of a person who "kept the law" even before the law existed! And this conclusion was not invented by some wishful thinking. There is a very important passage that the promise made to Abraham was conditioned on his obedience. "I will multiply your descendants as the stars of heaven, and will give your descendants all these lands; and by your descendants all the nations of the earth shall be blessed; because Abraham obeyed Me and kept My charge, My commandments, My statutes and My laws" (Gen 26:4-5; see also Gen 22:16-18, quoted below). b. Paul boasted. Paul believed that there was a time for legitimate boasting. He boasted about himself when it was necessary to defend his ministry (2 Cor 11:10; 12:1; read 11:1 - 12:12; cf. 1 Cor 9:15). He encouraged people to use him as an example (Phil 3:17; 2 Thess 3:7, 9). He made the great claim: "For I am already being poured out as a drink offering, and the time of my departure has come. I have fought the good fight, I have finished the course, I have kept the faith; in the future there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, will award to me on that day; and not only to me, but also to all who have loved His appearing" (2 Timothy 4:6-8). Notice that it is a "crown of righteousness" that is "awarded" to Paul on Judgment Day. Surely Paul intended us to tie this statement with "poured out" and with "fought" stated previously. c. The promise (see below) Abraham [Abram] received was first given way back in Genesis 12:1-3. He responded to the promise with faithfulness (he left home and journeyed to Canaan). Because Abraham believes the promise of a son (Stage 2 of the promise), his faith is reckoned as righteousness (Gen 15). Because Abraham believes God that the son will be through (Stage 3 of the promise), he is given the covenant (Gen 17). Because Abraham believed that God would still fulfill the promise even when He tells Abraham to sacrifice this promised son (Stage 4 of the promise), the promise is finally confirmed (Gen 22). "By Myself I have sworn, declares YHWH, because you have done this thing and have not withheld your son, your only son, indeed I will greatly bless you, and I will greatly multiply your seed as the stars of the heavens and as the sand which is on the seashore; and your seed shall possess the gate of their enemies. In your seed all the nations of the earth shall be blessed, because you have obeyed My voice " (Gen 22:16-18). It is at this culmination of a life of faithfulness (with its ups and downs of course) where James places his focus on "justification by works" (James 2:21). James adds another important point: Abraham was the friend of God (James 2:23; cf. Isa 41:8; 2 Chr 20:7). Titles in the Bible such as this one are only given to those who live out a life that is characterized by faithfulness (not perfection). Moses was called the servant of YHWH (Joshua 1:1). Joshua earned this title only after a lifetime of faithfulness (Joshua 24:29). David was called "a man after my own heart" by God (1 Sam 13:14; Acts 13:22). Of course, these titles [relationships] are only possible because God is gracious. However, none of these titles focus on God's grace. Instead they focus on the human response.

ROMANS 4:3 For what does the Scripture say? "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness" (Gen 15:6). 1. For [G1063, gar] (missing in NIV). "For" shows that Paul is giving an explanation of the previous statement, especially the "but not before God" statement. 2. Scripture. "Scripture" is singular, perhaps to acknowledge that this quotation from Gen 15:6 is essentially unique in the OT. It is quoted in the NT by Paul (Rom 4:3, 20-22; Gal 3:6) and James (2:23). Paul's quotation here is almost exactly from the LXX. It is a good rendering of the original Hebrew, except that Paul replaces "he" with "Abraham" and the Hebrew of Gen 15:6 has no word corresponding to "as" in the regular translations. "He reckoned it to him righteousness" is the more literal translation. 3. believed [H539, aman], [G4100, piseuo_]. Genesis 15:6 is the first occurrence of "believed" in the Bible. Only rarely is "justification" and "faith" connected in the OT. 4. credited [from G3049, logizomai]. Found ca. 40 times in the NT with Paul using it ca. 34 times. This word has broad applications as seen by the various ways it is translated in the NASB (see a listing above in the discussion at 2:26). In Romans alone the translation varies: regarded (Rom 2:26; 9:8); credited (Rom 4:3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11, 22, 23, 24); consider (Rom 6:11; 8:18, 36); take

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 90 into account (Rom 4:8); suppose (Rom 2:3); maintain (Rom 3:28); thinks (Rom 14:14). In general, it refers to the conclusions drawn (or actions taken) after considering all the facts. How is it being used here? a. First of all "credited" is a bookkeeping term, meaning basically to put on the credit side of the ledger. b. However, faith did not make Abraham righteous. In order to understand what is going on here, we must remember that "righteousness" has at least three levels of usage. "Moral goodness" is one meaning. "Innocent" or "acquitted" is another. "Right relationships" is another. Think of a ledger with "Righteousness" (in the sense of "innocent" or "acquitted") at the top. Instead of writing "righteous" ("morally good") underneath, God writes "faith" instead. But "faith" and "righteousness" (in the sense of moral goodness) are not the same. Instead of "moral goodness" as the necessary element for righteousness (in the sense of "acquittal"), God chooses to use "right relationship" with faith as the necessary human response to the gracious offer from God. c. Covenant. So we again return to the idea of covenant, since covenant is a commitment to "right relationship", which, in turn, introduces the concept of faith, since faith is the fundamental element in all two-way relationships. "Abraham believed God" the Scripture says. He not only believed the promise God was making, Abraham put his trust in God. This trust in God is the basis for the covenant ceremonies that follow (Gen 15:7-21 and 17:1-27). 5. it was credited. The passive voice normally means God did it. We must remember that it is only by the grace of God that we are declared "acquitted"; it is not something earned as a result of placing our faith in God. Nevertheless, God has determined that faith is the necessary human response to God's gracious offer. A "right relationship" is established by God. Even though God uses the human response of faith as a necessary element in this relationship, our faith does not establish it or maintain it. Why not? Because we must remember that a "right relationship" requires a proper response by both parties involved. And God will always be the principal party in the maintenance of our relationship with Him. See, for example, 1 Jn 1:3 - 2:2 where God is described as faithful and righteous and as the one who is continually cleansing us from sin. However, faith/faithfulness continues as the necessary human element for maintaining this covenant. 6. believed God. If faith is the necessary human response to God's grace, then it is important that we understand all that is involved in this response of faith. We have explored this a number of times, but at some point we must study it in greater detail. But not now. Let us allow Paul to develop the material he gives us in this chapter.

ROMANS 4:4 Now to the one who works, his wage is not credited as a favor, but as what is due. 1. works (4:4), work (4:5) [G2038b, ergazomai, from G2041, ergon]. We are instructed in the Bible "that those who believed God will be careful to engage in good deeds" [G2041, ergon, 'works']" (Titus 3:8, 14 [read 3:3-8]; Heb 10:24; Eph 2:8-10). So the believer is expected to be working. But that is not the focus of "work" here. It is a matter of priorities. In this context, Paul is writing about people who work with the expectation of being paid a wage corresponding to the amount of work done (e.g., "a day's wage for a day's work"). 2. wage [G3408, misthos]. Found ca. 29 times in the NT, it is translated "reward" 19 times and "wage(s)" 7 times. However, "wages" is its basic meaning. It is possible that Paul borrowed the term "wages" from the LXX at Gen 15:1 [misthos] translating "reward" [from the Hebrew word: H7939, sakar]. Translators fear that a "works-righteousness" might find a foothold in our thinking with the use of this word. So, they translate it as "reward" whenever they think it might be taken as something earned. But, shouldn't we ask ourselves: why would the NT use this same Greek word for both of these two concepts? Because, when we look at the context of the use of this word, we find that it is related in some measure to work performed or action taken. Actually, if translators had used "wages" instead of "reward" in chapter 6 of Matthew, it would be easier to understand what Jesus is saying. (Then we could use the expression "paid in full" for those people choosing earthly wages!) In reality, God is good, and He pays all His debts. It is our choice whether we want to be paid on earth or in heaven. Whenever we do something good, God repays us. Some people say, "No good deed goes unpunished" but that cynical remark is an expression of their disappointment with their "wages" since their expectations lay elsewhere.

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 91 The truth is that God will always overpay people 1000 to 1 (His goodness compared with people's goodness). This complex issue needs more exploration, but we should not tarry here too long. However, we must not leave this issue until we see the importance of Paul quoting Gen 15:6 when Gen 15:1 contains this word (reward, wages). Before the event expressed by "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness" (Gen 15:6), God said to him, "Your reward [wages] will be very great" (Gen 15:1). Remember that, when we look at the total story of Abraham's life, we find several stages (see above under Rom 4:2 [6c]). The "very great reward" statement is given before Abraham enters Stage 2. What is included in the "very great reward" declaration? Probably many things that we can only guess at! (Some translations even make "God" the object of the great reward.) The tense speaks of a future reward. Surely being justified at the final judgment is included. (How could it be called "very great" if it didn't!) So Abraham's faithfulness showed in Stage 1 (leaving family, etc.) will result in final justification (assuming ongoing faithfulness) with God Himself as the greatest reward. This interpretation is completely consistent with the Biblical principle expressed in Rom 2:6. Judgment Day involves examination of an entire life. 3. favor [G5485, charin: grace]. "Grace" is the usual translation of this word. In order to get the full force of what Paul is saying, we must note the parallel expressions. Wages are not credited "according to grace" but "according to debt" (kata charin alla kata opheile_ma). "What is due" is literally "according to debt" [G3783, opheile_ma]. So, for those people who are working for a compensation equivalent to their labors, a just wage will be paid. For those people who work "according to grace" a gracious gift will be given (a gift that far surpasses any "wages" earned!).

ROMANS 4:5 But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is credited as righteousness, 1. one who does not work. Remember, as stated above, Paul is talking about a person who is working but chooses not to work for wages (i.e., a corresponding compensation). Perhaps it would be clearer if we added that: one who does not work {for wages}. 2. believes in Him. People who believe in God have their focus on God and not on some "wages" they might have "earned" from their works. It is a matter of leaving results with God, trusting Him with our future as well as our present situation. 3. credited as righteousness. Paul makes a great claim here. What God did for Abraham He will also do for anyone! We need to study the rest of the chapter to understand Paul's reasoning. What a gracious act! Instead of receiving a just compensation for work done, God gives what could never be earned: a rightness of relationship with God [a new covenant]. The OT has two passages that are closely related to the one about Abraham used by Paul at 4:2 (i.e., Gem 15:6). Both passages use the term "credited" found in Gen 15:6. We must address the question: Why does Paul use one and not the other? a. Psalm 32:1-2. "How blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven, Whose sin is covered! How blessed is the man to whom YHWH does not impute iniquity, and in whose spirit there is no deceit!" (Psa 32:1-2). Paul will draw upon this passage in 4:7-8. b. Psalm 106:31. "They joined themselves also to Baal-peor, and ate sacrifices offered to the dead. Thus they provoked {Him} to anger with their deeds, and the plague broke out among them. Then Phinehas stood up and interposed, and so the plague was stayed. And it was reckoned to him for righteousness, to all generations forever" (Psa 106:28-31; see the story at Num 25:1-13). It is the zeal of Phinehas that is reckoned ["credited"] to him for righteousness. Faith is not mentioned! Why doesn't Paul use this passage since it appears to undermine his declaration regarding faith? Is Paul just ignoring it, picking only those passages that support his thesis (and thus being unfaithful to Scripture)? Of course not! Paul, being a Jew with his thinking saturated with the OT, knows that a close connection exists in the OT between "righteousness" and the actions of life. He does not dispute the reality of the final judgment being based on an evaluation of the entire life. c. Paul, however, is proposing something so very different, different enough to be labeled very radical. What is it? That God justifies the ungodly. Now that really challenges some OT passages! 4. justifies the ungodly. If we are honest in our study of Scripture, as stated above, we need to accept the fact that Paul believed God will justify many OT people (Abraham, Joseph, Moses,

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 92 Phinehas, etc.) on Judgment Day depending on the life they have lived. But, according to Paul, when faith is considered, then a whole new equation is created. One important result has already been touched upon: we can be justified NOW. Now he introduces another truth. The ungodly can be justified now! F. F. Bruce says that this truth is "so paradoxical as to be startling -- not to say shocking." Consider these passages. a. God declares, "Keep far from a false charge, and do not kill the innocent or the righteous, for I will not acquit the wicked" (Exod 23:7). Paul used the same Greek words as did the LXX ("acquit" and "justify" are the same in the Greek). But the two statements are total opposites! b. A judge must not acquit the wicked (Deut 25:1). The OT rightly condemns judges who justify the wicked (Isa 5:23; Prov 17:15; 24:23-26). c. However, the idea of justifying the wicked is not totally foreign to the OT. In Isaiah 52:13 - 53:12, the Suffering Servant "bore the sin of many" (53:12; cf. 53:5-6). "My Servant will justify the many, as He will bear their iniquities" (53:11). Christians believe that this Suffering Servant is Jesus. Later in this book, Paul will declare: "For while we were still helpless, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly" (Rom 5:6). The word "ungodly" [G765, asebe_s] is used in both places (4:3; 5:6) and is a very strong word describing a deliberate refusal to allow God His proper place in our lives. Remember that "the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness [G763, asebeia]" (Rom 1:18). d. Paul will now explore another OT passage that reminds us of the covenant God made with David.

ROMANS 4:6 just as David also speaks of the blessing on the man to whom God credits righteousness apart from works: ROMANS 4:7 "Blessed are those whose lawless deeds have been forgiven, And whose sins have been covered. ROMANS 4:8 "Blessed is the man whose sin the Lord will not take into account" (Ps 32:1-2). 1. credits (4:6), take into account (4:8). Paul has found another OT passage that uses his key word "credits" [G3049, logizomai]). But he is not just adding support to the idea of Abraham being justified, he is adding another dimension with this important passage. 2. just as [G2509, kathaper]. It shows that Paul sees a connection between this passage and the one already studied (Gen 15:6), as well as the general principle he has drawn from it. 3. David. David is mentioned because he represents another covenant God made. But he is also mentioned because, after God made the covenant with David (2 Sam 7), David committed adultery and murder (2 Sam 11). When David repented following the rebuke by Nathan (2 Sam 12), God forgave him. Psalm 51 records David's prayer for forgiveness. What is significant about this psalm is David's expression of confidence in God along with a total dependence on Him. (He had nothing to offer God!) This trust [one of the elements of faith] becomes the basis of God's forgiveness. 4. blessing. This word is deliberate. It indicates the epitome of God's favor. The emphasis here is on the parallel between blessing and sin. Blessedness can be the status of one who was a sinner! No mention of blessing is given for the people who have done good deeds, etc. and thus "earned" God's favor. Instead, the forgiveness of sin is an especially "blessed" event! The deliberate repetition of blessing on the wicked is shocking to the thinking of the typical Jew. For them, sinners (by definition!) were outside the covenant. However, they could not imagine a person being described as "blessed" who was not within the covenant. So, Paul is again, as he did in chapter 2, challenging their idea of who are the covenant people. 5. apart from works cf. 3:20-21, 28; 4:2. Paul is probably using "works" here in the broadest sense. He is not just talking about obedience to the law but the very law itself. Justification is based on faith not on law (or the obedience to it). The law was not given to provide acquittal (see 3:20). That can only happen through grace. 6. Lawless deeds [one word, G458, anomia]. Again, a clear choice of words is used to stress that the person being forgiven is one who is obviously living outside the law (covenant). (Anomia is literally "no law" [a- is a Greek prefix meaning "no, not"].) But what point is Paul trying to make here? The OT has many examples of lawless people being forgiven and returning to the covenant.

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 93 7. forgiven. Note the connection between justification and forgiveness. Paul is very close to equating them! For me, the only way all this makes sense, is to understand that Paul is stressing that God has made justification possible as a NOW experience. It does not have to wait until Judgment Day. If that is true, then the shock is understandable. Why would God, not only forgive, but also justify people described with words such as ungodly (4:5), lawless (4:7), and sinners (4:8) NOW? 8. sins (4:7), sin (4:8) [G266, harmartia]. This is the Greek word typically translated "sin" (lit., to miss the mark). 9. covered [G1943, epikalupto_]. Since this word is found only here in the NT, it is probably unwise to explore too deeply into its meaning. However in the poetic structure of Psalm 32, it is clearly matched with those "whose sin the Lord will not take into account" (4:8). It is interesting that Paul does not include the additional parallel statement "and in whose spirit there is no deceit!" (Psa 32:2b). But it is understandable when we see that Paul is focusing on justification at a point in time. The "no deceit" thought describes the life following the moment-in-time justification.

ROMANS 4:9 Is this blessing then on the circumcised, or on the uncircumcised also? For we say, "Faith was credited to Abraham as righteousness" (Gen 15:6). 1. blessing. This word ties these verses back to the previous ones. It refers to the blessing of justification being available even for the ungodly, etc. It also ties what Paul has said about David back to what has been said about Abraham. David was a circumcised Israelite and was blessed (with forgiveness). Abraham was blessed also. However, was circumcision a factor in his being blessed? 2. circumcised. Circumcision is the key topic for these verses (4:9-12). These verses build upon what Paul has already said about circumcision (2:25-29; 3:1, 30). 3. For we say. Paul is about to again declare his premise statement. He will now begin a serious defense of that statement. 4. The premise statement is "Faith was credited to Abraham as righteousness" (Gen 15:6). Paul claims that faith as the sole requirement for justification, not faith and circumcision .

ROMANS 4:10 How then was it credited? While he was circumcised, or uncircumcised? Not while circumcised, but while uncircumcised; 1. Chronological order. Paul focuses on the fact that the circumcision of Abraham took place after the declaration regarding righteousness. Righteousness was credited to him (Gen 15) before he was circumcised (Gen 17). 2. but while uncircumcised. Although this fact is obvious, people tend to overlook it. There is a sense here that Paul expects some people (many Jews!) to catch this truth for the first time. Abraham was credited with righteousness while uncircumcised. WOW!

ROMANS 4:11 and he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had while uncircumcised, so that he might be the father of all who believe without being circumcised, that righteousness might be credited to them, ROMANS 4:12 and the father of circumcision to those who not only are of the circumcision, but who also follow in the steps of the faith of our father Abraham which he had while uncircumcised. 1. chiastic structure. The structure of these verses show that Paul's central statement is "that righteousness might be credited to them" ("them" = "the uncircumcised"). (Note: the following shows the arrangement in the Greek text, not in the above English translation.)

A. righteousness of the faith which he [Abraham] had B. while uncircumcised C. father of all who believe without being circumcised D. that righteousness might be credited to them C' father of circumcision not to the circumcision only those ... who follow in the steps of B' while uncircumcised A' faith of the father of us -- Abraham

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 94

2. sign [G4592, se_meion] of circumcision, i.e., "a sign that is circumcision" (referring to Gen 17:11 which reads "a sign of the covenant between Me and you"). A "sign" is something that points to some reality that exists. It is not the reality. The "sign of circumcision" was a reminder of the covenant between God and Abraham. 3. seal [G4972, spharagizo_]. This verb is found ca. 15 times. The corresponding noun [G4973, sphragis] is found ca. 16 times. It generally refers to some type of official seal that authenticates the object sealed, such as the book sealed with seven seals in Rev 5 (22 of these 31 appearances of these words are found in the book of Revelation). But a seal is also used to protect its object such as the Roman seal on the tomb of Jesus (Mt 27:66). People are "sealed" for their protection (Rev 7:2-8; 9:4). Paul's apostleship was authenticated by the existence of believers converted through his ministry (1 Cor 9:2) along with corroborating signs (2 Cor 12:12). See also Rom 15:28; 2 Tim 2:19. 4. a seal of the righteousness of the faith. Notice that Paul could have said "a seal of the covenant" between God and Abraham. Instead he focuses on the condition of the covenant. Righteousness is the result of the faith of Abraham. Circumcision is a confirming result (the seal) of this righteousness. One reason Paul does this is to counteract a Jewish tendency to equate circumcision with a person who is under the Law, which confuses it with the Mosaic Covenant. It is a result of the covenant with Abraham. 5. The Holy Spirit as a seal. In some ways "sign" and "seal" say the same thing. But Paul means to use "seal" as something more than "sign" (looking ahead to the New Covenant). The Holy Spirit is the seal of the New Covenant. "Now He who establishes us with you in Christ and anointed us is God, who also sealed us and gave {us} the Spirit in our hearts as a pledge" (2 Cor 1:21-22). "In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation -- having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise, who is given as a pledge of our inheritance, with a view to the redemption of God's own possession, to the praise of His glory" (Eph 1:13-14). "Do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption" (Eph 4:30). We are expected to remember what Paul has already written: "But he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that which is of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter; and his praise is not from men, but from God" (Rom 2:29). 6. while uncircumcised (B, B'). There are several important ideas here. First, there was a long period (at least 13 years) between the "righteousness credited" statement and the actual circumcision of Abraham. In no way could anyone claim these events were simultaneous. It is obvious that circumcision was an external sign and seal which merely confirmed a reality that already existed. Equally important, but not emphasized here by Paul, was this long period of faithfulness (a continual trusting in God's promise and living out this trust by remaining in the land, etc.). However, the most important idea Paul is developing here is that "while uncircumcised" is the same as "while a Gentile" in Jewish conversations. It is probably quite significant that, in the corresponding (B') passage (4:12), "faith" is the next word after "uncircumcised" in the Greek text. Paul want "uncircumcised" to help define "faith" with respect to Abraham. In other words, while Abraham was still a "Gentile" he was blessed with credited righteousness . 7. so that...that [eis to]. Paul will now state the purpose of the way God has dealt with Abraham. 8. father (C, C') and Abraham (A, A'). Now Paul gives us one of the most important words ("father") in this whole chapter (Rom 4:11, 12, 12, 16, 17, 18). See also "forefather" (4:1). This is the word used by Paul to tie the covenant with Abraham with the New Covenant. 9. father of all who believe without being circumcised. Abraham, as a Gentile, believed and received the credited righteousness. He now becomes the father of all the uncircumcised who believe. But in what sense is he their father? 10. father of the circumcised. Paul means for the reader to answer the question within the context of what they have been taught about Abraham being the father of the circumcised. It is the "seed of Abraham" who inherits the promise given to Abraham (see later in this chapter). But Abraham is now no longer just the "forefather according to the flesh" (4:1); he has become the spiritual forefather of all who believe the promise. Later he will clarify the identity of these spiritual children (4:24). Some people consider that "father of the circumcised" refers to all the spiritually

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 95 circumcised (cf. 2:29). But it would be more logical to see this statement as referring to Jews so that it is properly paired with the prior use of "father" (of uncircumcised believers). 11. but who also follow in the steps. "Also" [kai] here does not refer to circumcision and "follow" (in his footsteps). It points to the pattern set by the uncircumcision (Gentile) who believe. Instead of viewing circumcision as an added condition, it does the opposite. The blessing is available to all who believe regardless of whether or not they are circumcised or uncircumcised. Typically, Jews would not have used "following" Abraham in that manner at all! Instead, they might have said "following him in the obedience of the Law" or something closely related. Paul will deal with Law in the next section (Rom 4:13-15). 12. in the steps ... of Abraham. Just for a moment, Paul increases our field of vision. We see that the moment-in-time faith that was credited as righteousness, is just one act in a lifetime of faithfulness. 13. that righteousness might be credited to them. Here is the central statement in this structure. Paul has now made the case for the justification of the Gentiles -- with faith (like Abraham's) as the only necessary human response.

PERSPECTIVE. Let's stop and try to get a perspective of where Paul is going. He is considering the possible routes to justification (righteousness). Paul takes Abraham for the standard. He does this for at least two reasons. First, all Jews would agree to this choice. But more important is the truth that it is God's plan that Abraham would become "father of us all" (4:16, see below). Every possible route must be compared to Abraham with the statement in Genesis 15:6 becoming the criterion: "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness" (Rom 4:3 quoting Gen 15:6). Paul's main focus will be on the various covenants. But first he must explain that the statement in Genesis 15:6 was not based on works (Rom 4:1-5). Next, He expands the explanation to include the possibility that God will justify the ungodly (under the right circumstances). The covenant with David is hinted at in his answer (Rom 4:6-8). We are expected to puzzle out the relationship between this covenant and David's great sin ("whose sin the Lord will not take into account" [Rom 4:8, quoting Psa 32:2]).

Paul then develops his position on justification by considering other covenants: circumcision as sign and seal of the covenant with Abraham (4:9-12), and the law as the benchmark for the covenant with Israel [Mosaic Covenant] (4:13-16). Finally, Paul introduces the New Covenant as he explores the nature of Abraham's faith (4:17-21). Abraham as "the father of us all" (Rom 4:1, 11, 12, 12, 16, 17, 18) is a motif Paul uses to tie all these together. Paul is using a common Jewish form of speech. In order to be called "the son of X" the son must look like, act like, etc. X. (It is in this sense that Jesus spoke of people who love their enemies as being "sons of your Father who is in heaven" [Mt 5:44-45] and called Judas "the son of perdition" [John 17:12].) Therefore, in order to claim Abraham as our father, our faith must be of the same nature as his faith. Paul is challenging all other possible criteria people might use in claiming Abraham as their father. He has been working on this idea almost from the beginning. Remember, for example, his earlier comments on the Law (2:17-24) and circumcision (2:25-29).

However, there is one aspect of this discussion that is missed (or ignored) by many scholars. As we examine Paul's approach to this topic of justification, we should see that he works from two viewpoints. The first viewpoint, and the one most obvious to his readers (especially Jews), is Judgment Day. Who will be justified (declared "acquitted") on Judgment Day? Answer: The people justified on Judgment Day will be those who are "of the faith of Jesus" (3:26 NASB margin). What is the nature of this "faith of Jesus"? It, of course, includes all the aspects of faith, but (if my interpretation of Paul has been correct) the focus is on His faithfulness. It is the faithfulness of the Son that will result in our reconciliation back to the Father. So it is a life of faithfulness that brings about acquittal on Judgment Day. This "Judgment Day" justification has been in the forefront of Paul's letter up to this point. But he has also been getting us ready for the other viewpoint on justification. With the New Covenant, justification need not wait for Judgment Day. We can be justified NOW! What is it that makes possible a "now experiencing" of justification? Well, first of all, as with any possible justification, it is by the grace of God. Given that gift, then the criterion become the human response of faith. What is the nature of this "faith" that brings about Justification Now? Since it is a moment-in-

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 96 time justification, its main focus cannot be faithfulness (which assumes an extended period of time). Read on. Paul wants to help us understand the focus of this faith that justifies now.

What some people miss is that Abraham is the OT type (in the "type-antitype" sense of this word) for both of these forms of justification. James gives us the viewpoint of the faithfulness of Abraham (James 2:14-26). Paul, in Romans 4, gives us the "justified NOW" viewpoint where the faith of Abraham allowed him to be credited with righteousness ("justified by faith") in a NOW experience. Paul actually has used Jesus as our example of faithfulness (see the previous paragraph). However, we must not see Paul as setting one viewpoint in opposition to the other. In reality, faithfulness is merely one aspect of faith. Faith begins as a response (1) of affirmation in the truth of God and (2) of trust in the character, provision, promise, etc. of God. (Another way of saying this is that we affirm Jesus as Christ and trust Him as Savior.) Faith then continues as ongoing faithfulness (obedience to Jesus as Lord).

Before we begin the examination of the next verse (4:13), let us look ahead at the structure. The following pattern is a loose chiastic structure and follows the original Greek sentence structure, not the English translation (as was done with the previous chiastic structure). Note also that "faith of the father of us" is the end of the previous structure and the beginning of this one.

A. faith of the father of us -- Abraham (4:12b) B. not through law C. promise to Abraham or to his descendants (4:13) D. if those of the law are heirs E. faith made void and the promise nullified (4:14) F. for the Law brings about wrath [no law, no violation] (4:15) E' faith in accordance with grace D' guaranteed C' promise to all descendants (seed) B' not to [those] of the Law only A' the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all (4:16)

However, we must not focus too much on this structure so that we lose the overall intent of this passage. Note that each verse (4:13-16) begins with "For" [gar], showing that this passage is given in support of the statement that Abraham is the father of all who believe [both circumcised and uncircumcised] so that "righteousness might be credited to them" (Rom 4:11, the central statement in the previous chiastic structure).

ROMANS 4:13 For the promise to Abraham or to his descendants that he would be heir of the world was not through the Law, but through the righteousness of faith. 1. For [gar] (missing in NIV). Paul wants us to know that this material has a clear tie with what he has just said. "For" [gar] is actually used three times in 4:13-15 making these statements supporting evidence for Paul's premise (uncircumcised and circumcised believers are justified by faith). However, it is extremely important to note that he has moved on to the Mosaic Covenant. He wants us to see that the promise is connected directly to "faith" and only indirectly to "Law" (i.e., Mosaic Covenant). Which means that the fundamental human response for the New Covenant (where the promise is fulfilled) is faith. Faith is primary to a right relationship with God. Relationship to law is only a secondary detail of this primary relationship. 2. not through the Law. In the Greek sentence structure, this phrase follows immediately after the beginning word ("For"). The Bible translators face a dilemma here. Which meaning of "law" is Paul using here? For example, many English translations use "the Law" at this point, but Paul actually does not include the article ["the"]. However, it seems clear that Paul wants us to include "the Law" in our thinking. So why didn't he add "the" to "law" so that we could be certain he was referring to the Mosaic Law? The answer appears to be quite obvious. Paul wants us to consider more than one meaning. In fact, I propose that Paul wants us to consider essentially all the possible meanings! Try these suggestions.

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 97 a. Law as a "badge" for covenant. Of primary importance, Paul uses "law" as a close equivalent to "covenant" (especially since the Mosaic Covenant is used by the Jews as an identity marker [cf. Rom 2:17-24]). It is a major "definition" of who they are. It is in this sense the translation "the Law" (with a capital 'L') is proper. b. Law as the written code. Here we are including both the idea of "the Law" representing the Torah (first five books of the OT) as well as representing all the OT. Again "the Law" makes an acceptable translation. c. Law as convincing. This usage looks back to this aspect of law addressed in Rom 2:12-16. Paul wants to include all the world being held accountable to God ("alternately accusing or else defending them" [2:15]). d. Law as commandment. To the idea of the law "convincing" us Paul now adds the purpose of specific commandments in the Law (see below at 4:15, cf. 3:19-20). 3. promise [G1860, epaggelia]. This word is found ca. 52 times in NT and is used ca. 8 times by Paul in Romans (4:13, 14, 16, 20; 9:4. 8, 9; 15:8). In the OT, "promise" is mostly associated with the idea of inheritance (Rom 4:13; Gal 3:18) and righteousness (Gal 3:21). In the NT, "promise" includes being given the gift of the Spirit (Gal 3:2, 14; Eph 1:13) and being adopted as children of God (Gal 4:5; cf. Rom 8:23) and being given life (Rom 4:17; Gal 3:21). All the promises of God find the "Yes" in Jesus (2 Cor 1:20). God delights to make promises, because He is "for us" (Rom 8:31). It is an expression of His faithfulness (Rom 3:3-4). 4. promise to Abraham or to his descendants. The promise was given to Abraham (Gen 12:1-3; 18:18; 22:15-18) and repeated to his son (Gen 26:3-5) and grandson Jacob (Gen 28:13-14). See also Exod 32:13; 1 Chron 16:14-18; Neh 9:7-8; Ps 105:6-12; Acts 3:25; Gal 3:8). (Note: the following material is taken from my paper on Covenants.) The original promise to Abraham consists of seven statements (Genesis 12:2-3). The number seven in the Bible represents completion or perfection .

A. And I will make you a great nation. B. And I will bless you. C. And make your name great. D. And so you shall be a blessing (or "Be a blessing!") C' And I will bless those who bless you. B' And the one who curses you I will curse. A' And in you all the families of the earth will be blessed.

I have arranged them in a chiastic pattern even though they do not fit neatly into it. It helps to see the change in focus from national to international . And statement "D" is the pivotal point of this change. (It is also the only imperative in the set of seven, but this command "be" is conditioned on the earlier command "Go forth" [12:1] and "be..." [12:2].) The first part of the promise relates to Abraham and his descendants as a distinct people. Abraham will become a great nation, be blessed, and his name will be great. Then the focus changes to others: Abraham will be a blessing, and people will be blessed or cursed according to their relationship to Abraham. Finally, the promise becomes fully international: all families of the earth will be blessed. These two foci are reflected in the two very different covenant ceremonies, stipulations etc. in chapters 15 and 17. There are three major elements to this promise. a. Land. Although land is only mentioned briefly here (Gen 12:1), it will be stressed more later after Abraham actually enters the land, e.g., "To your descendants I will give this land" (Gen 12:7; cf. Gen 13:15-17; 15:12-21; 17:8). b. Nation. There are a number of variations of this promise. It appears that God enlarges this promise as it is repeated. 1) Many descendants. Implied here (and stated later) is the promise of a great number of descendants (cf. 17:2). They shall be as the dust of the earth (Gen 13:16), the stars of the heavens (Gen 15:5; 22:17), and as the sand on the seashore (Gen 22:17). 2) A great nation (Gen 12:2). The original promise to Abram was "I will make you a great nation" (12:2). This promise is expanded to include "a multitude of nations" (Gen 17:4-6, 16-20). At this point the name Abram is changed to Abraham and the name Sarai to Sarah. YHWH promised to make Abraham's name great. Note also that God promised to make

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 98 David's name great (2 Sam 7:9; Psa 72:17). As with David, great name implies royalty. Kings will come from Abraham (Gen 17:6; cf. 23:6) and Sarah (Gen 17:16). c. Blessing. This blessing takes several forms. 1) Abraham will be blessed (Gen 12:2). "I will greatly bless you" (22:17). 2) Those that bless Abraham will be blessed (Gen 12:3). 3) "And in you all the families of the earth will be blessed" (or as some scholars prefer "will bless themselves") (Gen 12:3). "... in him all the nations of the earth will be blessed" (Gen 18:18). 4) "In your seed all the nations of the earth shall be blessed" (Gen 22:18; 26:4; 28:14). 5) "... and your seed shall possess the gates of their [lit. 'his'] enemies" (Gen 22:17b). 5. to his descendants [G4690, sperma]. In the NT, this word is translated as descendant[s] (20X), seed[s] (14X), children (7X). The OT word [H2233, zera = seed] is translated descendant[s] (108X), offspring (39X), seed (48X), family (6X), child[ren] (4X). Paul's approach (in Romans) to this word and to the corresponding OT passages varies from his use in Galatians. a. In Galatians, Paul emphasizes that the word is singular ("seed" not "seeds") in the Hebrew passages under study. There his focus is that "the seed of Abraham" primarily refers to Jesus Christ (Gal 3:16). Once this truth is established, then "seed" may refer to all the people who (through Jesus) inherit the promise given to Abraham (Gal 3:29). These people are "sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus" (Gal 3:26) and they "belong to Christ" (Gal 3:29). Paul further states that the promise is not based on law, since the Law came centuries later (Gal 3:17-18). He does not use either of these arguments in Romans. b. In Romans, "seed" is viewed in the plural sense of "descendants" (4:16, 18; 9:7-8, 29; 11:1; cf. 2 Cor 11:22). Also Paul does not use the "chronological" argument since he wants to allow the possibility that "faith" was displaced by "law" when God established a covenant with Israel (Mosaic Covenant). 6. he would be heir [G2818, kle_ronomos] of the world. "Heir" in the Greek is a compound word formed from "inheritance" [G2819, kle_ros] and "law" [G3551, nomos]. It means something like "lawful inheritance" or the legal heir. It is interesting that there is no statement in the OT that matches this one exactly, although the idea has some support in the OT (Isa 11:10-16; 42:1-9; 49:5-7; 54:1-3; Jer 4:2; Zech 9:9-10; Psa 72:8-11). A few observations should be made. a. he [not "they" as in RSV - corrected in NRSV]. Abraham is the heir, not his descendants. The promise is to both, but "heir" refers only to Abraham. Some have compared this inheritance to the statement by Jesus: "blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth [G1093, ge_] (Mt 5:5). But it is a very different idea. Read on. b. the world [G2889, kosmos]. Actually "the" is missing; it is simply "world" with the focus on people and the total environment in which they live, not kingdoms. There is no thought of dominion here. Earthly kingdoms will be of no importance in this concept of inheritance. Abraham is inheriting children. The writer to the Hebrews shows us that Abraham saw beyond the ideas of a "promised land" and the "father of nations" since "he was looking for the city which has foundations, whose architect and builder is God" (Heb 11:10) and for a better country - a heavenly one (Heb 11:13-16). 7. not through the Law. Again, it is simply "law" not "the Law" including the full range of ideas behind the word "law" (see above). Law is not eliminated by this statement. It still holds a vital place in the life of the believer. But it is not foundational; actually it is a by-product. The fundamental response to the promise of God is a faith that enters into right relationship with God. The very nature of the "faith" results in a life of faithfulness, for which all forms of law offer guidelines. The Law is especially important, since it is the revelation of God ("oracles" [Rom 3:2]). Chapters 6-8 will be an important contribution to our understanding of law. However, we must remember the background Paul has built. a. "... for it is not the hearers of the Law who are just before God, but the doers of the Law will be justified" (2:13). Paul denies that Jews are justified before God simply because they have been "entrusted with the oracles of God" (3:2). Possession of the Law is not what makes them the "seed of Abraham", rather it is having a faith like Abraham's. b. But "doers of the Law" are not those who keep all the commandments perfectly, but those who "fulfill the Law" (2:27), i.e., fulfill the purpose of the Law.

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 99 8. righteousness of faith. Here again Paul is thinking of faith as the fundamental response to the gracious offer of God to enter into a right relationship with Him. This response of faith is absolutely necessary for the right relationship to be established and maintained.

ROMANS 4:14 For if those who are of the Law are heirs, faith is made void and the promise is nullified; 1. for [gar]. Paul continue to offer support for his position. 2. if. Paul now allows us to consider the possibility of law as the fundamental condition for inheritance. He does this, not because he thinks it has any right to be considered, but that we might see the awful consequences if it were true. 3. those who are of the Law is literally "the of law" [hoi ek nomon]. It is another way of identifying "the people of the covenant" [Mosaic Covenant]. It matches the expression "the circumcised" (4:9, 12) used to represent the people of the Abrahamic Covenant. Here "Law" is seen as a "badge" identifying Jews as the people of God. 4. heirs. Notice that Paul has changed from Abraham being the heir to others being heirs. Did I miss something? Have I been confused? Maybe not. The promise has many dimensions to it. Here Paul is referring to the promise of righteousness (note "righteousness of faith" in the previous verse). All people can be heirs (recipients) of this promise. 5. faith. Paul is not denying, even for this discussion, that the response of faith is what established the right relationship (righteousness). The question under discussion is whether or not the criterion for righteousness was changed when the Law was introduced centuries later. 6. void [kekeno_tai]. It is a perfect passive form of kenoo_ [G2758], which is found only 5 times in the NT and used only by Paul: made void (Rom 4:14; 1 Cor 1:17); made empty (1 Cor 9:15; 2 Cor 9:3; Phil 2:7). However, the related term [noun], kenos [G2756] is found ca. 18 times (cf. 1 Cor 15:10, 14, 58; 2 Cor 6:1; Gal 2:2; Phil 2:16; 1 Thess 2:1; 3:5). Perfect tense denotes action in the past with the effects continuing into the present. It means that faith can never be the criterion again. Why? Because an entirely different criterion for righteousness would have been established; a criteron which actually changes the very concept of righteousness (no longer referring to a right relationship). There are two possible interpretations, both of which are probably correct. a. Physical descendants of Abraham. If "righteousness" comes to those who are Jews simply because they are physical descendants of Abraham, then justification ("being made righteous") is a statement of status (such as a certificate of citzenship), not the establishment of a right relationship. b. Keeping the commandments. If "righteousness" comes from keeping the commandments (assuming that were possible), then a employer-employee relationship would be established. The employer [God] must pay the employee [ethical people] certain wages. But such a relationship does not result in reconciliation. The only relationship God considers righteous is the one that ultimately arrives at full reconciliation between two people. It must be a Father- son relationship, where "son" means a person who "looks like" the Father. In order for this to happen, the image of God must be restored in each person. 7. nullified [kate_rge_tai]. It is a perfect passive form of katargeo_ [G2673, to render inoperative, abolish] (cf. Rom 3:3, 31). Again the perfect tense denotes action in the past with the effects continuing into the present. Paul uses decisive language here. If law replaced faith as the criterion, then the promise can never be fulfilled, and therefore it is no longer a promise. a. Keeping commandments. If righteousness is conditioned on keeping all commandments perfectly, then the promise can never be fulfilled, since no one keeps all the commandments all the time. James remind us, in no uncertain terms, that no one should be so foolish as to face Judgment Day placing their hope in keeping the law. "For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles in one {point}, he has become guilty of all" (James 2:10). b. Power to overcome. To choose "law" over "faith" is to get the cart before the horse. Starting the journey to God using law as the standard means that we will never arrive at the destination. "Through the Law {comes} the knowledge of sin" (3:20) and "the Law brings about wrath" (4:15). So, the Law does not supply the overcoming power needed to keep the commandments. In fact, if we choose to start with Law, then we only worsen our condition. Instead of bringing about reconciliation, it has actually increased the alienation (see chapter

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 100 7). Law nullifies the promise. But faith does not nullify law. "On the contrary, we [through faith] establish the Law" (3:31). When faith is the response to grace, then (1) a right relationship is established and (2) God supplies the power, wisdom, and cleansing needed to maintain the relationship. It is from this right relationship (righteousness) that we become overcomers. But more on that later.

ROMANS 4:15 for the Law brings about wrath, but where there is no law, there also is no violation. 1. Law. Paul is probably thinking of the Mosaic Law at the first use of "law", but with the second "law" he expands to include all meanings (see above). 2. brings about [G2716, katergazomai]. The Law actually produces the result. It does not simply reveal or identify the result. This shocking truth needs further explanation. Paul will do so in chapter 7. See especially 7:7-8. Here is an example to illustrate what is happening. To tell a child not to steal an apple is to actually produce a desire for the forbidden fruit. This desire is a form of coveting. It is an outcome of our fallen nature. 3. wrath [G3709, orge_]. Although Paul has not used it often, wrath is an important word for him, He has used it in key places (see 1:18; 2:5; 3:5). If sin increases (coveting the apple) then wrath increases. 4. violation [G3847, parabasis]. It is important to note that this is not the general term for sin. Instead it identifies a specific transgression of law. Transgression [violation] describes a conscious or willful disobedience of a specific commandment. The idea is simple. We may be sinning by coveting what is not ours, but if we don't know that it is wrong, then we are not willfully disobeying God's commandment and therefore we are not subject to the wrath of God. It is still sin, but "sin in not counted where there is no law" (5:13).

ROMANS 4:16 For this reason {it is} by faith, in order that {it may be} in accordance with grace, so that the promise will be guaranteed to all the descendants, not only to those who are of the Law, but also to those who are of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all, 1. For this reason [dia touto, "therefore"]. Paul looks back over his discussion of works, circumcision, and law. None of these can fulfill the promise. The "therefore" also looks ahead to the conclusion he is about to draw: therefore we are left with "faith" as the only possibility. 2. {it is}. These words are not in the original Greek. The NIV supplies "the promise" which is probably the right guess. 3. by faith [ek pisteo_s]. Faith becomes the only option. And remember, this plan of God to use "faith" is not some arbitrary decision by God. The very character of right relationships (even those outside "religion") requires faith as the foundational response. As we have tried to say again and again, the idea of covenant is meaningless without the element of faith/faithfulness. 4. in order that {it may be} in accordance with [hina kata]. All of these words are used to try to get the meaning of just two words in the Greek [hina kata]. "In order that" [G2443, hina] refers to purpose, definition, results. "In accordance with" [G2596, kata] has many uses. It is translated "accord, according", etc. ca. 154 times in NT. It is also translated "against" ca. 52 times. 5. grace [hina kata charin]. If the way I view this portion is correct, this is one of the most important statements in the Bible! The promise is totally of grace. Our definition of "faith" must be within the context of grace. It is not grace and faith, but faith that is aligned with grace and within the context of grace. A "faith" that contains any form of merit is called Pelagianism or semi-Pelagianism (denounced as heresy by the Church Fathers). "Faith according to grace" is one of the great truths highlighted by the Reformation. But the way to describe "faith according to grace" divided the reformers from the very start. For some (e.g., high Calvinists) faith is totally a gift from God (monergism) with the person doing nothing. For others (e.g., Arminians) the ability to express faith is a gift from God (by grace), but the decision to accept or resist grace is the choice of the individual (evangelical synergism). Nazarenes are Wesleyan in their theology and Wesleyanism is one expression of Arminianism. We believe that salvation is a result of cooperation between a person and God. But the ability to cooperate is a gift of God (prevenient grace). So there is no merit involved. 6. so that the promise will be guaranteed to all the descendants. Paul has shown that (a) works, (b) circumcision, and (c) law cannot fulfill the promise. Now, since we see that the fulfillment of the promise is totally by grace, it can be guaranteed to all who take advantage of it (the "seed"). Why

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 101 is it guaranteed? Because the fulfillment of the promise is totally up to God. Paul will now go on to proclaim that the descendants [seed] of Abraham include both believing Jews and believing Gentiles. 7. not only to those who are of the Law. There are various interpretations of this portion. Note that it is "the Law" this time not just "law" as used several times in the preceding verses. Here Paul focuses on the Mosaic Covenant (the covenant with Israel). But exactly how does he use it? a. One position. It is just another way of saying "Jews". But, if this is true, then Paul must not be meaning all Jews or he would (it appears) be contradicting himself. So he must be meaning Jewish Christians. But if this is what he meant, why didn't he say so? b. Another position. However, Paul is not one (as so many reformers are) to totally dismiss the Law. The Law represents the covenant with the nation Israel. So, as we have seen above, if Law does not nullify faith, then the covenant with Israel is just one expression of the covenant with Abraham. Therefore, those people who lived under the Mosaic Covenant in such a way as to fulfill its purpose were actually living in a grace-faith relationship with God. 8. but also to those who are of the faith of Abraham. "Of the faith" is set alongside "of the Law" from the previous statement: not only to those who are of the Law. Why does Paul use "not only" in this statement? He is clarifying the status of the Mosaic Covenant. It is not a limiting of the Abrahamic Covenant so that only Israel has the benefits of the covenant with Abraham. Actually it is simply one way that God expressed the covenant with Abraham (grace-faith). The covenant with Israel is not unique, in the sense that it excludes others from the covenant with Abraham. The promise is for all who have a faith like that of Abraham. 9. who is the father of us all. Here is one of the high points for Paul. He uses the concept of Abraham as father to frame his statements (4:11a, 12b, 16, 18 - note the chiastic structures given above). Paul has shown that Abraham is the spiritual father of both Jews and Gentiles -- the father of all who "look like" Abraham (spiritually). The first portion of the next verse is needed to complete the picture here and fill out the matching with 4:11-12. Paul cites a Genesis passage two chapters later than the one he has been using: "A father of many nations have I made you" (Gen 17:5). This passage clinches Paul's position. Abraham is not just the father of the nation Israel; he is the father of many nations (peoples).

ROMANS 4:17 (as it is written, "A father of many nations have I made you" [Gen 17:5]) in the presence of Him whom he believed, {even} God, who gives life to the dead and calls into being that which does not exist. ROMANS 4:18 In hope against hope he believed, so that he might become a father of many nations according to that which had been spoken, "So shall your descendants be" (Gen 15:5). 1. This passage sets the stage for the remainder of the chapter. Paul will make the application to the Abrahamic Covenant (4:19-22) and then to the New Covenant (4:23-25). 2. Structure. What we have here is a very important pivotal section. It ties in so beautifully with the passage before and the passage after. These verses are framed by two quotations from the OT (see the chiastic structure given here). A key idea in the frame is that Abraham is the father of many nations (B, B'). Inside this frame is another key idea: the faith of Abraham (C, C'). However the central idea of this structure is the character of God (D). What is stressed in the character of God is His ability to fulfill the promise (both to Abraham and to his descendants ["seed"]).

A. as it is written B. "A father of many nations have I made you" [Gen 17:5] C. in the presence of Him whom he believed D. God, who gives life to the dead and calls into being that which does not exist. C' In hope against hope he believed B' so that he might become a father of many nations A' according to that which had been spoken, "So shall your descendants be" [Gen 15:5]

3. "A father of many nations have I made you" [Gen 17:5]. "Made you" [tetheika from G5087, tithe_mi] can mean "set" you or "establish" you. Here it is in the perfect tense (a present reality resulting from a past event). Since at the time of this statement, God had not yet made it happen,

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 102 one would expect the future tense. Instead, YHWH emphasized His ability to do whatever He chooses to do. It is all of God! Wait a minute. Let's look ahead at the B' statement: "so that he might become a father of many nations" (Rom 4:18). It could only happen if Abraham responded with faith! So here we have the classic illustration of what is sometimes called evangelical synergism (see above). In a fundamental sense, God does it all (so that no merit is gained by the human response). But it does not happen without the human response. And how can we read the description of Abraham's response ("In hope against hope he believed") and fail to see that God did not force Abraham to believe. God made belief possible, but it was Abraham's choice to believe. 4. in the presence of Him whom he believed. In reality, it is not the promise that was believed by Abraham, his faith was in the Person who made the promise. The promise is given in Genesis 17:1-7, 15-22. This chapter begins with YHWH declaring, "I am God Almighty [El Shaddai], walk before Me, and be blameless. I will establish my covenant between Me and you, and I will multiply you exceedingly" (Gen 17:1-2). It was only possible to believe because Abraham walked with God in a blameless [but not faultless!] relationship (Gen 17:1; 24:40; 48:15). In the closeness of this relationship, Abraham experienced the revelation of the person, character, etc. of God. This phrase also looks back to the expression "but not before God" (4:2b). When God is introduced "into the equation" new perspectives and possibilities come into being. 5. God, who gives life to the dead and calls into being that which does not exist. Paul describes two aspects of God used by Abraham in his response to the promise of God. There were many more, but Paul has chosen (carefully) these aspects because of their direct bearing on Abraham's immediate situation as well as on the long-term fulfillment of the promise. a. gives life to the dead. This phrase is taken from a standard Jewish benediction (cf. Eph 1:19- 20). "Dead" here is matched with its two uses in 4:19. So the first level of meaning refers to the deadness of Abraham's body and Sarah's womb. God will bring these back to life. The writer of the book of Hebrews adds another dimension to this "life to the dead" idea. That writer tells us that Abraham believed that God could raise Isaac from the dead (Heb 11:17- 19). But the expression also looks forward to the resurrected life of Jesus to be experienced by those who believe in Him (Rom 4:23-25). Note that "dead" is used again: "... Him who raised Jesus our Lord from the dead" (4:24). b. calls into being that which does not exist. "Calling the not-being as being" is a more literal translation. "Call" here does not mean " to describe", rather "effectual summons" would be its meaning (cf. Isa 41:4; 48:13). God is pictured in the role of Creator. In a way corresponding to the creation of the universe (i.e., creatio ex nihilo = out of nothing), He will bring about the fulfillment of His promise. At the time of the promise, nothing existed that could make the impossible promise a possibility. More than the promise of the birth of Isaac is pictured here. It looks ahead to the "seed" (Jesus) who will bless the nations. The miraculous birth of Isaac is a type of the virgin birth of Jesus. The promise of these two births is not based on something God knows that we don't know. The promised outcome will happen because God will make it happen. But more than these two births are involved. God will bring into existence the church (made up of the children of Abraham) out of nothing. There are no existing pre-conditions, except those God personally designates and empowers (faith). We don't create the church. God does. Paul indicates this concept in a passage in Galatians: "But now that you have come to know God, or rather to be known by God..." (Gal 4:9). God is always in charge of the relationship.

6. In hope against hope he believed a. hope against hope. Abraham [Abram] was 75 years old when he departed from Haran to live in Canaan following the promise given him by God. The Scripture clearly states that Sarah [Sarai] "was barren; she had no child" (Gen 11:30). It seems that Abraham brought his nephew Lot with him to be his heir. Any possibility that the heir would come by way of Sarah surely disappeared as the years went by. In addition, Abraham parted company with Lot, so that by the time we read Genesis 15, Eliezer of Damascus was the heir (Gen 15:2-3). At this point, God states that the heir will be a son of Abraham (15:4). When we reach the next stage (Gen 17), Abraham now has a son (Ishmael, son of Hagar). Here God shocks Abraham with the promise that the heir will be a son of Sarah (Gen 17:15-19). Really? Sarah, a mother at

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 103 the age of 90! How can it possibly happen? Paul will deal with that aspect in the next verse (Rom 4:20). Here I want to emphasize the fact that, from Abraham's perspective, God had changed directions several times. This God, who has withheld the full truth from Abraham in the past, is a challenge to faith. Perhaps He will change directions again! It is the same with us. Consider this illustration. God, in answer to a prayer, gives us a promise (perhaps a passage in the Bible) and we place our hope in it. However, the outcome we expect from this promise is not the same as the outcome God planned when He highlighted the promise. As He did with Abraham, God can be very slow about correcting our wrong viewpoint. In the end, He does not give us what we expected, but He still kept His promise by answering it in a different way. b. he believed. What is significant here is that Paul is contrasting two types of hope. We might call them "human hope" and "God-given hope" (i.e., "God-given" hope against "human" hope). As Abraham examined the evidence available to him, he saw no basis for (human) hope. He chose to ignore this evidence and accept the hope given to him by the promise of God. Some people chose to call this action "a leap into the dark", and in one sense it is correct. However, this description leaves out too many details and therefore can be misleading. Having faith and hope in God is more like a child standing on a high platform in the dark. When told by a parent, "Jump, I will catch you" this promise by a trusted person brings a confidence to the leap. It is no longer just "into the dark" but "into the arms" of a parent [God]. This is what Paul meant when he used the phrase "in the presence of Him whom he believed" (Rom 4:17). c. Christian faith and hope. Faith, hope, and love together make up the essential triad of the Christian life, and these three can never be totally isolated from each other. Since they are the basic elements of relationship they will abide forever (1 Cor 13:13). Although it is not the whole picture, there is a proper sequence to these three. Faith is foundational, next comes hope, and finally love. Christian hope and faith strengthen each other. Of course, the major focus of hope is in possible future events. Faith has a focus in the past in that it trusts that the past has been forgiven. But faith is also expressed in the immediate present as it remains focused in an ongoing trusting and serving relationship (love). Love is faith in action. This faith relationship is strengthened by a strong confidence (hope) that the future also is in God's hands. But hope also provides a resource to faith in that it helps faith select from among the sources of evidence, identifying those of greater importance. This selective process can raise conflicting evidence to convincing evidence and it can raise convincing evidence to near compelling evidence (see the chart below). This need for hope is especially true when what we are asked to believe goes beyond present experiences (such as our hope of heaven). As we will see in some of the verses coming up, Christian faith and hope see the evidence provided for us regarding the resurrection of Jesus as evidence of great importance. d. Everyday faith. Although, in one sense, the faith required for justification is a faith that God gives us (see below), we are still involved in the process, and this faith is very much related to the everyday faith that is present in everyday activities of everyone (e.g., sitting on a chair). We need to take time to review the concept of faith. Consider the following charts (taken from some of my other papers).

LEVEL ONE: EVERYDAY FAITH

First of all, faith is built on a foundation of knowledge and experience. It is simply one level in the hierarchy of possible responses to a truth claim. Below is a hierarchy of possible responses to truth- claims. These terms are merely a few points on what should be considered a continuum. You may want to add more terms or use different terms. What I hope is that we understand that acceptance of truth-claims should be in proportion to the amount of supporting evidence.

ACCEPTANCE OF TRUTH-CLAIMS

RESPONSE EVIDENCE IS WORDING

Certainty Compelling "I know..."

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 104

Faith Convincing "I believe..."

Opinion Conflicting "I favor..."

Fancy Not Considered "I fancy..."

Irrational Contrary "I disagree..."

IRRATIONAL. Irrational is the acceptance of a truth-claim when there is considerable evidence, but the evidence strongly supports the rejection of the truth-claim. The evidence is contrary . FANCY. Fancy is the acceptance of a truth-claim when the evidence either to support or to reject the idea is either absent or not considered . OPINION. Opinion is the acceptance of a truth-claim when the known evidence is conflicting such that a strong case cannot be made either for or against the idea. FAITH. Faith is the acceptance of a truth-claim when the known evidence is considerable and that evidence is convincing . CERTAINTY. Certainty is the acceptance of a truth-claim when there is overwhelming evidence and that acceptance is compelling .

WHOLE RESPONSE FROM THE INNER PERSON

MIND HEART WILL Explanation

Cognitive Affective Volitional Domain Head Heart Hands Alternative Names Comprehension Character Conduct Related to... Thinking Being Doing Basic Function Truth Good Right Basic Focus: God Affirming Trusting Obeying Elements of Faith Christ Jesus Lord Faith in Jesus "Anointed" "Savior" "Lord" Lord Jesus Christ Content Commandment Conduct THE Faith The Truth The Life The Way Confessing Jesus as ... True Good Right/Just Confessing God as ... Glorify God Give Thanks Serve God Basic Faithfulness (Rom 1:21) (Rom 1:21,25) (Rom 1:25)

e. Supernatural faith. Although I believe strongly in the Protestant principle that faith is a gift from God, there is not a lot of evidence to support that belief in this passage. Nowhere are we told that God gave him faith. Instead God gave Abraham a revelation of Himself, and Abraham responded with affirmation of and trust in the character, attributes, and promises of God. God provided enough evidence about Himself to Abraham, so that Abraham could (by hope) select this evidence and reject the evidence of their "dead" bodies. I think that God wants to leave some mystery in the process of believing. We should not feel that we can explain it completely. On the other hand, supernatural faith is necessary to bring about a rightness of relationship between God and Abraham. This is why I believe that justification is more than being declared righteous. It is not a legal fiction (as if God were telling Himself lies). Justification provides a rightness of relationship. It is impossible for humans to create or maintain this right relationship without the supernatural intervention by God. 7. so that he might become a father of many nations. It is Abraham's response of faith that makes the promise possible. But such a statement is wrong if it assigns too much credit to Abraham. God is the one who truly makes it possible. He does virtually everything. Abraham only affirms and trusts. 8. a father of many nations. It is important to realize that this quotation is taken from Genesis 17 (see Rom 4:17).

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 105 9. So shall your descendants be. This quotation, however, is taken from Genesis 15. Paul wants us to see that he is tying these two chapters together as closely as possible. We are expected to see that the promise originally quoted is from Gen 15:6, but it only has meaning in the context of Gen 15:5. And Gen 15:5 must be seen in light of Gen 17:5. In other words, two truths become evident. First, Abraham's faith had to be sustained over the many years that separated these two chapters. Which means that all three elements of faith were present. Faithfulness [obedience] is added to affirmation and trust. Second, Abraham's faith had to grow from believing that he would have a son to believing that a son of Sarah would be the means of blessing of the whole world.

ROMANS 4:19 Without becoming weak in faith he contemplated his own body, now as good as dead since he was about a hundred years old, and the deadness of Sarah's womb; ROMANS 4:20 yet, with respect to the promise of God, he did not waver in unbelief but grew strong in faith, giving glory to God, ROMANS 4:21 and being fully assured that what God had promised, He was able also to perform. ROMANS 4:22 Therefore "it was also credited to him as righteousness" (Gen 15:6). 1. Verse 19 gives a look at Abraham's "human hope" and verse 20 gives the corresponding picture of the "God-given hope" provided by the promise (see the discussion above). 2. dead/deadness. Contemplating the "deadness" of his own body and Sarah's womb brings human hope to hopelessness. But considering the evidence of the revelation of God makes God-given hope a possibility. God "gives life to the dead and calls into being that which does not exist" (Rom 4:17). Paul has deliberately chosen "deadness" [G3500, nekro_sis] instead of the usual term "barrenness" [G4723, steira] to describe Sarah's womb to match with this statement given in 4:17. 3. waver in unbelief, weak in faith, strong in faith. Paul intentionally gives us the contrasts. a. Contemplated [G2657, katanoeo_] his dead body and Sarah's dead womb. If this evidence is all that Abraham had, then he would have been described with these words. 1) become weak [G770, astheneo_], the opposite of sthene_s strong. Paul uses the term again only in Rom 14:1-2. 2) waver [G1252, diakrino_]. Elsewhere it is used only at Rom 14:23. 3) unbelief [G570, apistia] b. With respect to the promise of God, Abraham is described with these words. 1) grew strong [G1743, endunamoo_]. From strong [G1412, dunamoo_] 2) faith [G4102, pistis] 3) giving glory to God. 4. giving glory to God. Paul is deliberately contrasting Abraham with the unrighteous people described in Rom 1:18-32. They did not glorify God (Rom 1:21). Abraham is also contrasted with the people described in Rom 2-3. Abraham saw that only God could fulfill the promise, and therefore only He should receive the glory. It is all by grace. This giving glory to God coincided with Abraham's growth in faith. One reason for this growth in faith was the revelation that the apparent "changing directions" by God over the years were really expressions of God's faithfulness. Another element in this growth in faith was that Abraham was allowed to see a greater and grander picture of the outcome of God's promise. His knowledge of the grace of God was enlarged. The blessing would be even greater than Abraham had imagined. 5. fully assured [G4135, ple_rophoreo_]. Here Paul adds another dimension. When Abraham believed the promise, he was placing his trust in the integrity and faithfulness of God. Now Abraham considers the power of God. 6. He was able also to perform. People can make promises and fully intend to carry out the promise. However, circumstances can prevent it from happening. Not so with God. God cannot be thwarted from maintaining His faithfulness and integrity (cf. Paul statements in Rom 3:3-6). He will always be capable of performing what He has promised. 7. Therefore "it was also credited to him as righteousness" (Gen 15:6). Paul now returns to his original statement, but now it is given as a conclusion. Let us take time for a little review. What is the basis for Abraham being credited with righteousness (justified)? a. Was it the Covenant of Works that God made with Adam and Eve (Rom 4:1-5)? No. Such a covenant is possible only if the person is already righteous.

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 106 b. Was it the Covenant with David (Rom 4:6-8)? No. c. Was it because Abraham had the sign and seal (circumcision) of the Abrahamic Covenant [the covenant God made with him] (Rom 4:9-12)? No. He is credited with righteousness prior to circumcision. d. Was it because Abraham kept the law as given in the Mosaic Covenant (Rom 4:13-15)? No. The law cannot make righteous those people who are already unrighteous. That is not the function of law. e. Was it because Abraham believed the promise? Yes! Righteousness is credited as a result of a faith response.

ROMANS 4:23 Now not for his sake only was it written that it was credited to him, 1. not for his sake only. Paul has spent all this effort, starting at Rom 1:1, building a foundation for understanding the grace-faith relationship with God that is available for all. Of course, it is especially true for this chapter where he has been examining the old covenants. He will now apply to the New Covenant what we have learned from this examination. 2. written. Paul is expressing his wonder that the plan for the New Covenant was already in place way back in Genesis 12. The statement regarding Abraham's righteousness (Gen 15:6 quoted in 4:3, 9, 22) was waiting until the coming of Jesus for a fuller understanding. But, when understood, it brings this wonder to all of us when we see how the fulfillment of this statement was greater than anyone could have imagined. "For whatever was written in earlier times was written for our instruction, so that through perseverance and the encouragement of the Scriptures we might have hope" (Rom 15:4). "Now these things happened to them as an example, and they were written for our instruction, upon whom the ends of the ages have come" (1 Cor 10:11). Paul sees the story of Abraham as foreshadowing a greater fulfillment in the New Covenant. 3. credited to him. Righteousness (justification) is credited to Abraham through the grace-faith response. It is the same for us. Of course, it is true that our situation is different from that of Abraham. However, the parallels of our justification with Abraham's justification are striking. But we must again remind ourselves, Paul does not present Abraham simply as an example for us of the proper grace-faith response. He is still the father of us all. So there is a direct connection between Christian faith and Abraham's faith. Again we must remember Paul's emphasis upon continuity between the old covenants and the New Covenant. Remember Paul's (deliberately) brief grace-faith statement that highlights the continuity among these covenants: ek pisteo_s hina kata charin (Rom 4:16a). Translation: {it is} ek pisteo_s (by faith), hina (in order that) {it may be} kata (in accordance with) charin (grace).

ROMANS 4:24 but for our sake also, to whom it will be credited, as those who believe in Him who raised Jesus our Lord from the dead, 1. but for our sake also. So Abraham is the prototype of our grace-faith relationship. See above regarding the continuity among the covenants. Notice how Paul shows this continuity with the expressions "but ... also" and "not only" (4:12, 16, 23-24; 5:3, 11). 2. to whom it will be credited. Paul has been emphasizing the NOW aspects of justification, but now he returns to thinking of the future, i.e., the Judgment Day viewpoint. 3. as those who believe. This wording hides the parallel nature of these two expressions: "to whom it will be credited" and "to the ones believing" (a more literal rendering). In the same way Paul has shown us both the NOW (the instantaneous) and the ONGOING (the developmental) aspects of his faith/faithfulness, he now adds ongoing faithfulness to our initial act of faith. "Believe" is in the present tense, showing continuous action. 4. who believe in [tois pisteuousin emi]. This expression can note more than an affirming and trusting relationship. It can be a description of a personal commitment. 5. in Him who raised. It is not unusual for Paul to declare that God raised Jesus from the dead (see Rom 8:11; 10:9; 1 Cor 6:14; 15:15; 2 Cor 4:14). However, it is unusual to focus faith in God; it is most often focused in Jesus. One reason for this approach is obvious. Paul wants us to see the parallel with Abraham. Abraham believed in a type of resurrection from the dead ("God, who gives life to the dead" [4:17]). And this faith was focused in the God who promised and who was capable of performing (4:17-22). Paul is probably thinking of the entire plan of reconciliation, which highlights the other aspect of our connection with the faith of Abraham. In

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 107 one sense, Christian belief is more than "believing in Jesus" since it includes the Christian Hope that God will bring to completion the full plan of reconciliation. The faithfulness of the Son makes it possible, but full reconciliation is with the Father. 6. raised Jesus our Lord from the dead. An examination of the NT shows that Paul has chosen to use a creed-type statement that certainly was familiar to the readers (cf. Acts 3:15; 4:10; 10:40; 13:30, 37; Rom 6:4; 8:11; 10:9; 1 Cor 15:12, 20; Gal 1:1; Eph 1:19-20; Col 2:12; 1 Thess 1:10; 1 Pet 1:21). As we can see from the verse that follows (4:25), here Paul is stressing that the resurrection is one of the necessary elements in God's overall plan for redemption. God did not raise Jesus from the dead simply to demonstrate His power. Resurrection is one of the central elements of the grace-faith relationship that will result in reconciliation. Jesus must be Lord before this plan will work. The plan is not yet completed. A dead Jesus simply will not be able to complete the plan. Paul will now state this truth more fully in a type of creed format with the clear intention that we will remember it as something central to our faith.

ROMANS 4:25 {He} who was delivered over because of our transgressions, and was raised because of our justification. 1. Paul places these twin statements in a parallel format. And it is obvious that Paul expects us to pair the death of Jesus ("was delivered over") with our transgressions and to pair His resurrection ("was raised") with our justification.

"{He} who was delivered over---because--of--the--transgressions--of us and was raised------because--of--the--justification---of us"

2. Isaiah 53. Paul statements here are clearly based in Isaiah 53 (the Suffering Servant), where transgression is an important word. Death and resurrection are also central themes in Isa 53. Paul continues his pattern of using Isaiah 40-66 as a foundation for what he says, especially about the righteousness and faithfulness of God to the purposes of the covenants. 3. was delivered over [G3860, paradido_mi]. This word is found in Isa 53:6, 12 [LXX]. It is in the passive voice and is focused on God allowing it to happen. So the idea includes the betrayal by Judas, something God allowed to happen. On the other hand, Jesus was being obedient (faithful) to His Father's plan. He allowed the Father to hand Him over into the hands of sinners (cf. Mt 10:4; 17:22; 20:18; 27:2; Mk 9:31; 10:33, 45; 14:1-2, 10, 21, 41; 15:1; Acts 2:23; 3:13; Rom 8:32; 1 Cor 11:23). 4. justification [G1347, dikaio_sis]. This exact term is found only here and at 5:18, although it is directly related to Paul's other uses of the various terms for righteous/justify. It is found in the Hebrew text of Isa 53:11. Justification is usually associated with the death of Jesus rather than His resurrection (Rom 3:24; 5:9; 6:7; 8:33-34; Eph 1:7). Paul will clairify this in the next chapter (cf. Rom 5:8-10). He is looking ahead to a fuller description of our relationship with God. Paul has given us many ideas, expecting us to look beyond justification as a simple forensic (legal) process. And it is true. This legal process is the basic idea in justification. But there is more to the process of reconciliation than being declared righteous or credited with righteousness. Judgment Day justification happens as a result of the resurrection life of Jesus being present in the believer. It is a living, dynamic relationship, not simply a legal action (cf. 5:2, 8-10; 6:1-11; 8:1; 1 Cor 15:17; 2 Cor 5:21). The way justification is tied to the resurrection introduces us to the next chapter (Rom 5).

ANTICIPATING THE NEW COVENANT

At several places in the OT, YHWH stated that He would make a New Covenant with Israel. From what Paul has said regarding Abraham, we now know that this New Covenant is available to all people who have the faith of Abraham. They become his children.

So far the focus of Paul's discussion of the New Covenant has been on the faithfulness and righteousness of God to his covenant promises. This faithfulness and righteousness (justification) is

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 108 extended to include all who enter into the grace-faith relationship Paul has presented. But there is much more to this grace-faith relationship than justification (righteousness).

A. JEREMIAH. Jeremiah 31 is the most important chapter in the OT for directly declaring the coming of a new covenant. "Behold, days are coming," declares YHWH, "when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah, not like the covenant which I made with their fathers in the day I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt, My covenant which they broke, although I was a husband to them," declares YHWH. "But this is the covenant which I will make with the house of Israel after those days," declares YHWH, "I will put My law within them and on their heart I will write it; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people. They will not teach again, each man his neighbor and each man his brother, saying, 'Know YHWH,' for they will all know Me, from the least of them to the greatest of them," declares YHWH, "for I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin I will remember no more." (Jeremiah 31:31-34).

Let us note some of the elements of the New Covenant as described in Jeremiah 31. 1. God's law will be within them. It will be written directly on the heart. Along with this description is given the typical covenant formula: "I will be their God, and they shall be My people" (Jer 31:33). This connection is extremely important, since it shows that law is still vital in the New Covenant. However, it will no longer be external; in some way God will internalize it. So Paul still has a lot to tell us about the New Covenant! 2. There will be a new level for knowing God. What is implied here is some type of immediate and intimate knowledge. God may be known personally and experienced directly. Such knowledge does not include knowing everything about God however. There will still be vital truths that must be affirmed. 3. There will be a new type of forgiveness available. The old covenants only dealt with iniquity and sin in a symbolic way. God will make provision for true forgiveness.

B. EZEKIEL. Ezekiel gives some additional dimensions to the OT proclamation of a New Covenant. Read Ezek 11:19-20; 18:30-32; 36:22-33, especially the last reference. Here are some excerpts.

- Thus says the Lord God [Adonai YHWH], "It is not for your sake, O house of Israel, that I am about to act, but for My holy name, which you have profaned among the nations where you went. I will vindicate the holiness of My great name which has been profaned among the nations, which you have profaned in their midst. Then the nations will know that I am YHWH," declares the Lord God [Adonai YHWH], "when I prove Myself holy among you in their sight" (Ezek 36:22-23). - "Then I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you will be clean; I will cleanse you from all your filthiness and from all your idols. Moreover, I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you; and I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. I will put My Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes, and you will be careful to observe My ordinances. You will live in the land that I gave to your forefathers; so you will be My people, and I will be your God. Moreover, I will save you from all your uncleanness..." (Ezek 36:25-29; cf. v.33). - "And I will give them one heart, and put a new spirit within them. And I will take the heart of stone out of their flesh and give them a heart of flesh, that they may walk in My statutes and keep My ordinances and do them. Then they will be My people, and I shall be their God" (Ezek 11:19-20). - "Therefore I will judge you, O house of Israel, each according to his conduct," declares the Lord God [Adonai YHWH]. "Repent and turn away from all your transgressions, so that iniquity may not become a stumbling block to you. Cast away from you all your transgressions which you have committed and make yourselves a new heart and a new spirit! For why will you die, O house of Israel? For I have no pleasure in the death of anyone who dies," declares the Lord God [Adonai YHWH]. "Therefore, repent and live" (Ezek 18:30-32).

Here are some of the interesting details from Ezekiel. 1. The New Covenant will be a vindication of God's holiness. 2. God's holiness will be provided for His people. 3. This holiness includes a true cleansing from sin.

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 109 4. The heart of stone will be replaced with a heart of flesh. This symbolic picture involves a real transformation. What actually takes place? How is it possible? Ezekiel briefly mentions two things. a. How is it possible? God will actually put His Spirit within us. b. What takes place? We will walk in all His statutes and observe all His ordinances. 5. In the same direct manner as Jeremiah, Ezekiel ties the keeping of God's commandments with the covenant formula: "Then they will be My people, and I shall be their God" (Ezek 11:20; 36:28; cf. Jer 31:33). Faith/Faithfulness remains a fundamental condition for all covenants. 6. Cooperating with God. Ezekiel gives us a fine example of the way the reconciliation process works. He tells us that God will give us a new heart and a new spirit. Then he tells us that we should cast away our transgressions and make for ourselves a new heart and new spirit.

C. MANY OTHER FEATURES. There are many other features of the New Covenant given in the OT. For example, we have already mentioned Paul drawing upon the Suffering Servant passage in Isaiah 52:13 - 53:12. And that is just one example of Paul's use of Isaiah 40-66. There are also the many messianic prophecies in the OT, especially in the Psalms and the Prophets. We cannot expect Paul to deal with all the OT passages regarding the New Covenant. However, the passages cited above from Jeremiah and Ezekiel are enough to show us that Paul still has a lot of ground to cover. And he is now ready to do so. Notice for example some indicators of a change in direction for Paul. (Please realize that the numbers used below are quick estimates.) 1. He will move away from righteousness as a central theme. Righteousness and its related words appear ca. 37 times in the first five chapters; they appear only ca. 19 times in all the remaining 11 chapters. 2. The same is true for faith (believe, faithfulness). It is found ca. 36 times in chapters 1-5 and 25 times in the remaining 11 chapters. The change in emphasis is even more pronounced when we see that 10 of the 25 uses are in chapter 10, leaving only 15 times faith is used in 10 chapters. 3. Up to this point he has hardly mentioned Jesus (1:1-8; 2:16; 3:22-26; 4:24 -- five times in chapters 2-4). Now he will focus more on the work of Christ. Jesus Christ in mentioned more than 60 times in chapters 5-16. 4. The same is true for the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is mentioned only two times in chapters 1- 4. He will be mentioned at least 25 times in the remainder of the book (17 times in chapter 8 alone).

BB4509 (6-10-10): Lee Brown's Notes on the Bible: Romans 1-4, page 110