Romans 12
Romans 12
VI. CHRISTIAN LIVING, 12:1–15:13
It is something of a pattern with Paul to begin a letter with a strong doctrinal section and follow this with an exhortation to live out the Christian faith (see Galatians, Colossians, and 1 and 2 Thessalonians; the pattern is not so apparent in Corinthians or Philippians). This is a Pauline distinctive; SH point out that it does not occur in Peter or John. When he uses this pattern Paul is saying that the Christian life is dependent on the great Christian doctrines. Because these things are true, this is the kind of person you should be, is the line of reasoning. In a way we can say that here Paul is still concerned with justification by faith, for it is fundamental to him that the justified man does not live in the same way as the unrepentant sinner. “Faith expressing itself through love” (Gal. 5:6) is the kind of faith of which he has been writing, and he now turns to what he earlier called “the obedience that comes from faith” (1:5). The legalist says something like “Do these things and you will live”, but Paul is saying “Live and you will do these things.” Only when the power of sin is broken by what God did in Christ can ethical admonitions be effective (and not simply increase sin; Achtemeier makes this point).
This does not mean that Paul makes this a hard-and-fast rule, so that all the doctrine comes in chapters 1–11 and all the ethical teaching from this point on. He has a not inconsiderable amount of such teaching in the earlier part of the letter: “do not let sin reign in your mortal body” (6:12); “we serve in the new way of the Spirit” (7:6); “You … are controlled not by the sinful nature but by the Spirit” (8:9), and much more. But there can be no doubt that in these concluding chapters the way Christians live preoccupies the apostle to a far greater extent than in his earlier argument. There is little that is specific to Rome in most of what Paul says in this section, but since he had never been to Rome this is not surprising. He evidently assumes that what applied to Christians generally applied to Roman Christians specifically.1 Many commentators have pointed out that there is much in these chapters that reminds us of the teachings of Jesus; Paul was carrying on the kind of teaching that Jesus had committed to his followers. What he says is very practical. As Handley Moule put it, in this part of the epistle the Christian “is told how not to dream, but to serve.”
A. The Christian Attitude to God, 12:1–2
1Therefore, I urge you, brothers, in view of God’s mercy, to offer your bodies as living sacrifices, holy and pleasing to God—which is your spiritual worship. 2Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God’s will is—his good, pleasing and perfect will.
Paul begins by making it clear that in view of the wonderful salvation of which he has been writing believers must respond with wholehearted commitment. Being the servants of a God who loves like that means that the whole of life is to be lived in service to God.
1. Therefore2 is an important word. Paul is not writing an essay in abstract ethics, but telling the Romans what their conduct must be in light of what God has done. We should probably not tie it in too closely to the immediately preceding words (though there is a good sequence of thought), but take it as referring to the whole massive argument that has preceded it.
I urge you is variously understood. The verb3 can mean “to call alongside, summon” and thus “exhort” or “beseech” or “encourage”, and it has other meanings (see BAGD). Some commentators see the word as meaning “implore” (NEB) or the like, to which Cranfield objects that there is a note of authority and we should understand the word in the sense “exhort”. Lenski goes so far as to urge “admonish”. But Bengel has the succinct comment: “Moses commands: the apostle exhorts.” The question is whether there is a decided note of authority or whether Paul is taking a lower profile and simply commending what he regards as desirable modes of conduct. There can be no doubt that Paul is quite capable of taking a strong line and delivering firm instructions when that is called for. But there is no doubt either that he prefers to have people see for themselves what is desirable and do it. It thus seems that something less than a command is what is needed: “beseech” or “urge” is the meaning.4 The decision is to be that of the Romans; the surrender to God must be completely willing.
Paul adds a note of warmth with his address, brothers, and proceeds to appeal to God’s mercy, though it is not clear how he makes the connection. NIV has in view of where KJV has “by”.5 We should probably accept “by”. It is on the grounds of the mercies of God that Paul makes his appeal. NIV has mercy, though the Greek is plural.6 An appeal on the basis of mercy comes fittingly after the conclusion of chapter 11, and indeed after the whole of the argument up to this point.7
The appeal is that the readers offer their bodies as sacrifices, a suggestion whose force would be more obvious to Paul’s first readers than to most modern students. First-century people were familiar with the offering of sacrifices whereas we are not. They had stood by their altar and watched as an animal was identified as their own, as it was slain in the ritual manner, its blood manipulated, and the whole or part of the victim burned on the altar and ascended in the flames to the deity they worshipped. To suggest that they themselves should be sacrifices was a striking piece of imagery. Paul’s verb offer8 could be used of offerings of various kinds (it is used, e.g., in 6:13, 16, 19), but it was a technical term for the offering of a sacrifice.
The use of the term bodies is interesting, for Paul surely expected Christians to offer to God not only their bodies but their whole selves. Indeed, Leenhardt takes it here to mean “the human person in the concrete manifestation of his life”. Many others take up a similar position (NEB, “your very selves”). But we should bear in mind that the body is very important in the Christian understanding of things.9 Our bodies may be “implements of righteousness” (6:13) and “members of Christ” (1 Cor. 6:15). The body is a temple of the Holy Spirit (1 Cor. 6:19); Paul can speak of being “holy both in body and in spirit” (1 Cor. 7:34). He knows that there are possibilities of evil in the body but that in the believer “the body of sin” has been brought to nothing (6:6); sin does not reign in the believer’s body (6:12). Grace affects the whole of life and is not some remote, ethereal affair.
Many translators do as NIV and speak of living sacrifices, qualifying this with holy and pleasing to God, but the Greek speaks of a sacrifice and follows the word with three qualifiers; in other words, living is not separated from holy and pleasing to God. Living marks a difference from the general run of sacrifices. It is true that animal victims were living when they were brought to the altar (a dead animal could not be brought for sacrifice), but as offered they were dead. Paul can speak of believers as dying to sin (6:2), but his emphasis is on the glorious life they now live with Christ (6:8); they are “alive from the dead” (6:13). As offered they are alive. The sacrifice of which Paul writes demands not the destruction but the full energy of life. It is positive and dynamic. This sacrifice is also holy, which we understand as “consecrated” (Moffatt) or “dedicated” (NEB). It is given over entirely to God; the believer is his alone. Further, it is pleasing to God.10
This, Paul says, is your spiritual worship, an expression that could be understood as KJV, “your reasonable service.” There are problems relating to both adjective and noun.11 Today most interpreters understand the adjective as spiritual, which makes good sense and is certainly in mind. But it is hard to think that the connection with “reason” has been completely lost, and there is something to be said for “intelligent worship” (Phillips) or JB’s “that is worthy of thinking beings”. In any case it is a striking word to use in connection with the offering of the body. The noun may be understood of service in general or of the particular service rendered in the act of worship. Harrison sees “service” as having the advantage that it “covers the entire range of the Christian’s life and activity.” But in the end we are left with the fact that Paul has used two words, both of which are ambiguous. We cannot feel confident that either “spiritual” or “rational” is absent from the adjective or that “worship” or “service” is lacking in the noun. There is a “rich complexity” (Leenhardt) in the expression.12
2. With this positive attitude toward God Paul links a negative attitude to the pattern of this world (he has negatives also in vv. 3, 14, 16, 19, and 21; there are things the Christian must avoid as well as things to do). Cranfield argues strongly that there is no great difference in meaning between the two verbs NIV translates conform and be transformed, though he notes that many commentators do see a difference. Hendriksen has a long note in opposition to Cranfield’s position.13 There can be little doubt that the two verbs are not synonyms and that there is a basic difference between outward conformity and inward transformation.14 Those who object to making the difference too sharp have this going for them, that “conformity to this age is no superficial matter” (Barrett). But while this should be granted, it is still the case that Paul is looking for a transformation at the deepest level that is infinitely more significant than the conformity to the world’s pattern that is distinctive of so many lives. The word for world is often translated “age”;15 there is a temporal force to it and Leenhardt can say, “what madness it is to join in this puppet show which is displayed on a tottering stage”.16 Christians have been introduced into the life of the world to come; what a tragedy, then, if they conform to the perishing world they have left.
The transformation is to take place by the renewing of your mind.17 The believer, whose life is that of the new age, does not think like an unbeliever. The reference to the mind is important. Paul does not envisage a mindless emotionalism, but a deeply intelligent approach to life, as characteristic of the Christian who has been renewed by the Holy Spirit. The term mind is not confined to intellectual pursuits (it includes an important moral element), but it certainly embraces them.18 The force of the present tense should not be overlooked; Paul envisages a continuing process of renewal.19
The purpose (Cranfield) or the result (Lenski)20 of this is not so much that you will be able to test (as NIV) as that “you will test”; the renewal gives more than a possibility. NIV has rendered the one Greek verb by test and approve, which is a good solution of a difficult translation problem.21 The word here will include test, for Paul is not advocating an uncritical approval, but it will also include approve, for more than the process of testing is in mind. Indeed, there is probably more than approving, for Paul is really saying not only that the Romans would find out that God’s will is good, but that having found out, they should put it into practice. He is arguing for the spiritual discernment that ascertains what God wants us to do and then sets itself to do it.
NIV takes three adjectives that Paul uses and applies them directly to God’s will, speaking of his good, pleasing and perfect will. But this may not be the best way of taking the Greek.22 It is tautology to say that God’s will is pleasing to God. We should rather see the three adjectives preceded by the article as meaning “the thing that is good and pleasing and perfect.” It is that which is the will of God. “The Christian has received the ability to prove what God’s will is in the concrete situation” (Nygren). The renewal of the mind enables the believer to discern what is good, what is pleasing to God, and what is perfect.23 And having discerned it, that same renewal sets him to the task of performing what is seen as the will of God.
B. The Christian Attitude to Other Christians, 12:3–16
Paul turns to the kind of conduct that should characterize Christians in their relations with other believers. It was just as easy for them as it has been for Christians through the centuries to have wrong ideas about themselves and those they meet and to fail in their Christian performance accordingly. The apostle proceeds to some considerations that Christians should always have in mind. He refers to the way believers should act towards other Christians, then somewhere along the way goes on to the way they should behave towards those outside. I have made the break at the end of verse 16, but others prefer to make it at the end of verse 13. That is quite possible, and indeed the whole section is somewhat loosely structured as Paul moves from one topic to another. As long as we do not insist too rigidly on our way of following the apostle’s thought, not much hinges on where we end our section.
1. Humility, 12:3
3For by the grace given me I say to every one of you: Do not think of yourself more highly than you ought, but rather think of yourself with sober judgment, in accordance with the measure of faith God has given you.
3. There is a tendency to make this and the following verses refer to people holding official positions in the church (thus Brown regards vv. 3–8 as “a directory to the gifted office-bearers of the Church” [p. 429]). This is probably misguided, for we know little about what offices existed in the church at the time Paul wrote, and in any case he puts what he says in very general terms. Since a good deal of it applies to all believers, there is no reason to think that he was referring to office-bearers as such.24
For25 … I say leads into a series of directives that spell out the implications of what Paul has just said.26 He is an apostle and therefore a teacher. So he exhorts by the grace given him (cf. 1:5; Eph. 3:8).27 It is interesting that at the beginning of the chapter he made an appeal, whereas now he enjoins by virtue of his apostolic authority. Grace will refer to the grace of apostleship, but it should probably not be confined to that. Paul had many gifts of grace, and he is surely including them all as justifying him in the line he is now taking. He addresses his words solemnly to every one of you. Each of the Roman Christians has a gift and therefore a responsibility. With a complex play on words28 Paul makes a powerful exhortation to humility. His first infinitive (the verb occurs here only in the New Testament) conveys the idea of thinking of oneself more highly than one ought.29 This is a natural human tendency. As Denney puts it, “To himself, every man is in a sense the most important person in the world, and it always needs much grace to see what other people are, and to keep a sense of moral proportion.” Rather, it is important to think of oneself with sober judgment30 (Moffatt, “take a sane view of himself”).
Paul proceeds to the thought that this is to be done in accordance with the measure of faith God has given. NIV omits “to each” with which this clause starts, but it is important. Paul is not speaking only about great leaders, but about all the Romans. “To each” God has given faith as the measure.31 Without faith none of the gifts can be exercised, and faith is the standard whereby they are to be estimated. If we take this with full seriousness, seeing God as the sole author of the gifts and ourselves as totally dependent on him for them all, it is unlikely that we will be arrogant. Humility proceeds from genuine faith. There is another thought here. When we see that God is the giver of all the gifts and that faith is the measure, we will not deny our own gifts either. Being sober-minded means recognizing what God has given us and being zealous in its use as well as humble.
2. Difference of Function, 12:4–8
4Just as each of us has one body with many members, and these members do not all have the same function, 5so in Christ we who are many form one body, and each member belongs to all the others. 6We have different gifts, according to the grace given us. If a man’s gift is prophesying, let him use it in proportion to his faith. 7If it is serving, let him serve; if it is teaching, let him teach; 8if it is encouraging, let him encourage; if it is contributing to the needs of others, let him give generously; if it is leadership, let him govern diligently; if it is showing mercy, let him do it cheerfully.
The church is likened to one body with its multiplicity of members a number of times (e.g., 1 Cor. 10:17; 12:12–30; Eph. 1:23; 4:4–16; 5:23–30; Col. 1:18, 24; 2:19; 3:15). Evidently the thought of the basic unity underlying considerable diversity made a deep appeal. Paul also has lists of “gifts” in the church in other places (1 Cor. 12:4–11, 28–30; Eph. 4:7–11; cf. also 1 Cor. 14). Here his point is that different members of the church have different gifts, all of which have their place. Each should use whatever gift he has to the full.
4. That there be unity of Christians in the church just as32 there is unity in the members of the physical body matters a great deal to Paul. Clearly he found the illustration of the human body a very useful and convenient one. Here his point is that it takes many members to make up the body, but they do not all have the same function.33 Our physical body is certainly a unit, with all the members contributing to the good of the whole. But equally certainly a wide variety of function goes into making up that one body.
5. In the same way34 we the many are one body in Christ. Paul does not speak of “the body of Christ” as in Ephesians and Colossians, but of “one body in Christ” (“one body in union with Christ”, GNB).35 There the point is the headship of Christ, here that of the unity of the members of the body for all their diversity, a unity brought about by the fact that they are all in Christ, a unity that does not reduce them all to a drab uniformity. And there is interdependence, for each member belongs to all the others.36 The interrelatedness of Christians is important; Paul does not say “members of one body” but “members of one another” (cf. Eph. 4:25). We should also bear in mind that “members” has no meaning apart from the body; one cannot be a “member” of nothing.37
6. We now come up against another of Paul’s difficult pieces of grammar. It is possible to take the opening of this verse as a continuation of the sentence in the previous verses, for we have is really a participle, “having”, and there is no main verb following. But it is generally agreed that it is more likely that we have a new sentence here38 and that Paul wants us to supply the verb. This may be in the indicative (We have different gifts, NIV), but it is more usual to see an imperative as needed (“Having gifts, let us…”, RSV etc.). Gifts introduces a characteristic Pauline concept.39 It may refer to special gifts of the Spirit like tongues, or it may be used of divine endowments generally, which appears to be the meaning here. Different40 brings out the truth that God does not make Christians into a collection of uniform automata. They differ from one another both in their native endowments and also in the gifts that God gives them through the Spirit. The differences are not arbitrary but according to the grace given us. The thought of grace persists. The apostle is not writing about some human excellence. And given is important.41 It is not a matter of the believer making an earnest effort in order to produce some spectacular result in Christian character or achievement, but something God has given.
The first of the gifts Paul considers is prophecy,42 which accords with the high esteem in which it was held in the early church generally. It is second only to the apostolate in lists which rank gifts in order of importance (e.g., 1 Cor. 12:28), and the church is built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets (Eph. 2:20). Nobody in the New Testament explains precisely what this gift was, but it appears to mean that there were people who had the gift of passing on direct words from God. They were people who could say “Thus says the Lord.”43 There is an extended treatment of prophecy in 1 Corinthians 14, still without a definition. It is common to supply an imperative here (“whether prophecy, let us prophesy…”, KJV), though some prefer an indicative (“we should do it”, GNB).44
The prophet is to do this in proportion to his faith, an expression that has been variously interpreted.45 It looks as though the prophet, a man or woman of faith, is to speak in accordance with that faith; personal faith which puts the prophet into immediate touch with God dictates what is to be said. The warning, it is said, is against continuing to speak “when he has nothing further to say that is inspired by the Spirit” (Leenhardt). Against this it is urged that this “would open the gates to every abuse and even false teaching” (Käsemann, p. 341). It is pointed out that faith here has the article, “the faith”, and the suggestion accordingly is made that the prophet is to prophesy in accordance with the faith, the general Christian position. Advocates of both positions argue their case with some fierceness. On the one hand are those who maintain that it is nonsense to speak of an official check on a charismatic gift; a “charisma” by definition needs no “official” authorization. On the other are those who say that if there is no check the way is wide open for any heresy to be introduced; all a man has to do is claim that he is a prophet. Perhaps what decides the point is the way prophecy was in fact practised. Paul tells us that two or three would prophesy and “the others should weigh carefully what is said” (1 Cor. 14:29). It is clear that the early church was well aware of the danger of false prophets (Matt. 24:11, 24); there must be a testing of the spirits (1 John 4:1–6). It is some such process of which Paul appears to be speaking here.
7. Paul moves to serving, a very general term46 which became the normal New Testament word for the service Christians perform, but which was also used of the service of the deacon. Some see an official function here; Wilson, for example, says, “ ‘Ministry’ may refer either to the ministry of the word or to the office of a deacon.” But this is surely to make too specific a very general word. The same criticism should be made of translations like “administration” (JB); as far as our information goes the early church had very little administration, and in any case a “charismatic administration” is pretty close to a contradiction in terms. Chrysostom has a wiser comment, “every spiritual work is a ministry.” Elsewhere Paul tells us that there are “different kinds of service” (1 Cor. 12:5; the same Greek word), which should put us on our guard against a too precise identification of the gift. It seems that Paul is simply moving on from prophecy. It is not given to all to prophesy. If anyone is not given that great gift but is given the more humdrum gift of being able to serve in a lowly place, then he should not sigh for what he does not have but use the gift God has given him. And the ability to do lowly service well is a gift. Many quite brilliant people seem constitutionally unable to perform lowly service well. There is a lot of lowly service to be done, and anyone who has the gift of doing it should rejoice at the wonder of divine grace.
Next we come to teaching.47 The teacher is to be about his work. In the early church with its fewness of books and with most of its members having little or no education the place of the teacher must have been very important. There was no question of the ordinary church member learning about faith by reading many books at home. He learned from what the teachers had to say. We do not wonder that Paul makes much of this gift.
8. Paul continues with his participles, going on to encouraging.48 The exact meaning of this verb is uncertain (see on v. 1). It may mean “exhorting” (as many think) or “consoling”, but there is a good deal to be said for NIV. Luther comments, “The teacher transmits knowledge; the exhorter stimulates”, and however we translate, something like this is in mind. For many people in the early church life was a pretty grim affair; there must have been a continuing need for people who could encourage others, and it is interesting to find that there were people who had a gift for this sort of thing.
Contributing to the needs of others says a little more than the Greek does. Paul’s participle means no more than “he who imparts”, and there are those who think that the apostle is referring to “the deacons who are charged with the distribution of the public property of the Church” (Calvin). But this is probably to make the gift more of an office in the church and, as we have seen, this is an unlikely reading of the list. NIV is probably correct. There must have been many poor people in the church of the time, and Paul is speaking to those who had the gift of coming to the assistance of the poor. They should do this, he says, generously.49 NIV may be correct (many favor the meaning “generously”), but perhaps something like “single-mindedly” is the idea. The giver should not have other motives, like the desire to be well thought of. Giving is concerned with the need of the other person only.
Leadership is a general term which neatly reflects Paul’s word.50 As elsewhere in this list, some have made the term specific and understood it to mean “elder” or “president”. The term comes between one that refers to giving and another that refers to being merciful, which leads some to the idea that what is meant is the administrator of the congregation’s charitable work. All such suggestions seem to be going beyond what the term implies in this context. It is better to let it remain general, “he who leads”.51 Leadership is to be exercised “with diligence” or “eagerness”.52 The leader must not be slack, but do his work well. If he does not, then all the followers are affected. The leader’s work is very important.
So is that of showing mercy.53 The general thrust of the participle is clear, but the precise application is not so plain. Since mercy is necessarily shown to those in difficulty of some sort, we may well assume that Paul is referring to the sick, the suffering, the indigent, and the like. And he says that mercy should be shown cheerfully.54 The word clearly points to something far from a grim determination to get through an unpleasant task. The person who has this gift is to be “radiant with joy” (Lyonnet, quoted in Leenhardt). Mercy is not a grim duty but a joy and a delight.
3. Love of the Brothers, 12:9–10
9Love must be sincere. Hate what is evil; cling to what is good. 10Be devoted to one another in brotherly love. Honor one another above yourselves.
9. At this point Paul moves from the charismatic gifts, functions exercised by individuals, to virtues he expects to see in all believers. Characteristically he begins with love. At the beginning of 1 Corinthians 13 he passes from the topic of “spiritual gifts” to that of love, and in Galatians 5:22 he puts “love” first in his list of the fruit of the Spirit. In similar strain he passes here from the “gifts” to the love that should characterize Christians. Perhaps we can say that what follows is little more than a spelling out of what love means. Wilckens sees Paul as saying that in all the conduct of the Christian, “inside and outside the church, the one foundation and criterion is: love.”55 It is clear from the emphasis Paul gives to love throughout his writings that he saw it as particularly important, both the love of God in Christ that brought our salvation (5:8) and the loving response that sinners make when they become believers.56 Since he has no verb here, we could understand him to say “Love is without hypocrisy”. This would be a worthwhile affirmation about love, but it is not easy to fit into what follows. It is better to understand an imperative, as throughout this section: “Let love be without hypocrisy.”57 There must have been a temptation for imperfectly instructed Christians to claim virtues they did not have. But the New Testament writers consistently look for sincerity, especially when it is a question of love. Love was the basis of their salvation as well as in the forefront of the life they were expected to live.58
Yet another change of construction brings us the participle, best understood as used in the sense of the imperative.59 Hate what is evil, writes Paul, where his verb is a strong one, expressing utter abhorrence of the evil thing (cf. KJV, “abhor”).60 We should be clear that love is quite different from sentimentality. True love involves a deep hatred for all that is evil, for evil can never benefit the beloved. There will be a special hatred for the evil in the beloved and the evil that touches the beloved, but Paul’s expression is general. He is saying that the person who really loves with the deep fervor of Christian agapē will have a holy hatred for every evil thing.
With this is joined cling to what is good, where there is another picturesque verb.61 It can mean “to glue”, though this use does not occur in the New Testament. But it indicates that the tie it denotes is of the closest sort. The Christian’s attachment to the good is a very firm tie, and not a casual approval. The Christian is committed to the way of goodness; his whole life is wrapped up in it (“glued” to it).
10. Paul proceeds to use two compound words to convey the idea of the love that unites Christian people. The first is that rendered brotherly love,62 a concept that appears to be unique to the Christians. The Jews had the idea that they were all brothers, a concept that the Christians took over and applied to themselves, as we have seen. It might also be used by such groups as the Essenes, and there are examples of its use for fellow countrymen, for members of a religious society, and even for friends (see TDNT, I, p. 146). But the idea of brotherly love in such groups is not found anywhere but among the Christians.63 They saw themselves as a family in a special sense. God was their Father and they were all brothers and sisters. Therefore they were united in a love that other people saw only in those of a natural family.
This is further brought out with the adjective NIV renders Be devoted.64 The adjective is used with imperatival force, as are other terms in this sequence (as most translations render it).65 KJV has “Be kindly affectioned”, where “kindly” is used in its original sense, “referring to kin”. It is a family word. Paul is underlining the truth that Christians are members of one family and that accordingly they should have a warm and fervent love for one another. They should be a family not only in a formal sense, but in a sense that is marked by a love not seen elsewhere. Paul has spoken of a love for all that should be characteristic of Christians (v. 9), but that does not preclude special affection for those within the family.
NIV translates a very difficult expression Honor one another above yourselves. The trouble here is that the verb is used in a way that is difficult to find elsewhere, which makes us uncertain of the precise meaning.66 The alternatives appear to be “be eager to show respect for one another” (GNB) and “let each man consider the other worthy of more honor than himself” (TH). Following on the reference to love within the Christian family there can be no doubt that Paul is telling the Romans not to push for first place for themselves; they are to seek honor for one another rather than for themselves. At the same time we must bear in mind that he has just condemned the love that is hypocritical (v. 9), so we must beware of interpretations which imply that the gifted believer affirms that the less gifted are superior to himself. Paul is not advocating hypocrisy but humility, and that love which eagerly seeks out and rejoices in and honors the good qualities in other believers.67
4. Some Practical Advice, 12:11–16
11Never be lacking in zeal, but keep your spiritual fervor, serving the Lord. 12Be joyful in hope, patient in affliction, faithful in prayer. 13Share with God’s people who are in need. Practice hospitality.
14Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse. 15Rejoice with those who rejoice; mourn with those who mourn. 16Live in harmony with one another. Do not be proud, but be willing to associate with people of low position.a Do not be conceited.
11. Zeal translates a word that combines the ideas of haste and diligence.68 It is an important aspect of the Christian’s commitment. Never be lacking is another use of the adjective in the sense of an imperative,69 but be lacking does not give the sense as well as “do not be lazy” (GNB). The word signifies “indolent” or “lazy”, and Paul is telling the Romans that where zeal is needed they must not be lazy people.
But keep your spiritual fervor is perhaps not the best translation. There is nothing in the Greek corresponding to NIV’s but; Paul has a long series of these injunctions with no connective, and we lose something of the flavor with such insertions. And his imperative is something like “with respect to the spirit, boiling.” It is not easy to determine whether or not we should spell the noun with a capital letter (to refer to the Holy Spirit). Great names can be cited to support either view, and it is difficult to see a convincing reason for excluding either. There is much to be said for the view of Leenhardt: “the spirit of man, of course, when filled and aglow with the Spirit of God” (cf. Käsemann, “according to Rev 3:15 lukewarmness is the worst offence. If nothing burns, there can be no light” [p. 346]). It is important that the human spirit be on fire, but Paul is not referring to something that occurs by some natural process but as a result of the indwelling Spirit of God.70
The verse is rounded off with serving the Lord, where the verb71 points to thoroughgoing devotion, service like that of a slave. There is nothing half-hearted about it. There is a textual problem in this part of the verse, with some MSS reading “the time”.72 If we adopt this reading, the meaning will be “meet the demands of the hour” (NEB mg.) or “Seize your opportunities” (Barclay). It might also be understood in an eschatological sense; the children of the new age should accept the challenges of that age. All these give a good sense, but we should probably accept the reading as “the Lord”.73
12. The first of three more clauses is Be joyful in hope. Both joy and hope are characteristic New Testament concepts. The early Christians often had little to be joyful about or to hope for in this world, but they rejoiced in the Lord always (Phil. 4:4) and they knew Christ in them, “the hope of glory” (Col. 1:27).74 It is not that hope is itself the object of the Christian’s joy; rather, it is that which, being what it is, inevitably leads the Christian to rejoice. Hope lifts him out of his present difficult circumstances, and rejoicing is the inevitable result.
Patient in affliction is another characteristic New Testament attitude. Patient may give a wrong impression; Paul’s word denotes not a passive putting up with things but an active, steadfast endurance.75 And something like that is needed, for affliction denotes not some minor pinprick, but deep and serious trouble (see the note on 2:9).
Faithful in prayer brings us to another characteristic of New Testament Christianity. Paul has a great deal to say about prayer,76 and it is clear that he himself was constant in his praying. It is a very important part of the Pauline understanding of Christianity. Faithful is perhaps not forceful enough for the word Paul uses.77 “The strong word suggests not only the constancy with which they are to pray, but the effort that is needed to maintain a habit so much above nature” (Denney). We are left in no doubt but that persistent prayer is a necessary part of the Christian life.
13. The participial construction continues with imperatival force. There is a textual problem as to whether we should read “needs” or “remembrances”.78 Most scholars accept “needs”, but some cite Zahn for the view that Paul is referring to the contributions to his collection for the poor saints in Jerusalem (cf. 15:25; Cranfield finds no evidence for this meaning for the word). Another idea is that the readers are being invited to remember the saints as a way of gaining encouragement. But this involves the use of “saints” as outstanding Christians, a later usage than that of the New Testament, where the word means all believers. We should reject “remembrances” and understand the word to mean “needs”. There is further discussion about the meaning of the verb.79 Some hold that Paul is urging the Roman Christians to make themselves one with the needy, to share in their predicament. It seems more likely that he is calling on them to come to the aid of such people, but this will certainly be in no condescending manner but as being one with them. The early church took a deep interest in the poor, whose lot in the first century was often desperate. Calvin commented, “It generally happens that those who are more weighed down by poverty than others and stand in need of help are treated with greatest contempt.” Whatever the situation in Reformation Europe, Paul wanted there to be no doubt about Christian concern in first-century Rome. The needy were not to be a class apart, for the more well-to-do were to share in their needs.
With this he links Practice hospitality. The exercise of hospitality was of great importance to the church of that day. It was not always possible or desirable to stay in inns, and in any case inns were not always available. But Christians like Paul travelled widely in the exercise of their ministry, and it mattered very greatly that wherever they went they found hospitality among the believers. They were all one family, and they readily welcomed as guests even believers whom they had never met (cf. 3 John 5). The verb for practice is unexpected80 and points to vigorous effort. Leenhardt reflects that “Christian hospitality must inconvenience us more than that of the world; we do not choose our time or our guests”. Paul is not advocating a pleasant social exercise among friends, but the use of one’s home to help even people we do not know, if that will advance God’s cause.
14. It is possible that we move now to Paul’s instructions about Christian behavior toward outsiders; this is surely the meaning of the first injunction in this verse. But the following words seem to apply better to what Christians should do among themselves. In any case Paul is not dividing up his instructions to conform to a neat pattern, and it should not surprise us if he moves from believers to non-Christians. His construction changes, and he now uses the imperative instead of the participles that have been so characteristic of this chapter. This leaves the readers in no doubt that they have a firm instruction as to how to behave toward the persecutors.
Bless can be used in various senses, all good. Here it will be used in the sense “ask God to bless” (GNB). Paul takes the verb he has just used for pursuing hospitality and enjoins his readers to call down God’s blessing on people who pursue, who persecute. This seems to be a reminiscence of the teaching of Jesus (cf. Matt. 5:44; Luke 6:28); it is certainly in harmony with his general approach. It sets a very high standard for Christians. Paul is not saying simply that they should refrain from retaliating against persecutors or that they should forgive them. He is saying that they should actively seek their good as they pray for God’s blessing on them.81 His own practice agrees with this (1 Cor. 4:12–13). Most MSS refer to those who persecute you, but it is omitted in some of them. If it is omitted, it is persecutors in general, not only those who persecute the believers, who are to be the objects of blessing.
Bless is emphasized by being repeated, and it is reinforced with the prohibition of the opposite: do not curse. This is Paul’s only use of the term (it occurs five times in the New Testament). The present imperative may imply that it has already started and have the meaning “Stop cursing”. But perhaps this is reading too much into a tense. It is, however, the natural thing among the ungodly. Paul makes it clear that it has no place among those whom Christ has saved.
15. The commands continue, but they are now continued with infinitives82 as Paul enjoins his readers to Rejoice with those who rejoice and to mourn with those who mourn. Sympathy is an important Christian virtue. Chrysostom points out that it “requires more of a high Christian temper, to rejoice with them that do rejoice, than to weep with them that weep. For this nature itself fulfils perfectly: and there is none so hard-hearted as not to weep over him that is in calamity: but the other requires a very noble soul, so as not only to keep from envying, but even to feel pleasure with the person who is in esteem.” Cranfield cites Origen, who points out that people sometimes rejoice and weep at the wrong things and suggests that we rejoice “in those experiences in which he is most truly himself”. This is true, but it does not appear to be what Paul is saying. The apostle is not trying to cover every case, but simply calling for sympathy. The Christian is not to be indifferent to the joys and sorrows of others.83
16. Paul now reverts to his participial construction, still with imperatival force. NIV’s Live in harmony with one another is a defensible translation, but so is GNB’s “Have the same concern for everyone”. Paul’s Greek has a meaning like “thinking the same thing to one another”.84 There is no question but that Paul is advocating genuine unity, and his words probably are to be taken in the sense “Be of the same mind”.
He goes on to a negative which NIV renders Do not be proud and which might be more literally rendered “not thinking high things”.85 The true Christian is genuinely humble and is not given to thinking high things about himself.
On the contrary,86 he is to be willing to associate with people of low position. There is a difficulty here in that the Greek rendered people of low position is ambiguous; those same words may be translated “willing to do menial work” (mg.).87 Those who take the term as neuter point out that the preceding adjective is certainly neuter (“high things”) and argue that we should take this one as neuter to agree. Those who favor the masculine point out that elsewhere in the New Testament this word is always masculine and argue that the masculine gives a better meaning. Both are possible and both are true. It may be that the ambiguity is intentional and that we should accept both meanings.88 The verb translated associate with has the meaning “lead away” or “carry off with” (BAGD); here it is in the passive, “be led away”,89 which thus may mean “be accommodated to humble people” or “to humble ways”.
A final command enjoins the readers, Do not be conceited, or “do not be wise in your own sight”.90 The person who is wise in his own eyes is rarely so in the eyes of other people. Haldane says caustically, “Self-conceit is an evidence of weakness of mind and of ignorance.”
C. The Christian Attitude to Non-Christians, 12:17–21
This should not be regarded as a hard-and-fast division. Some of what we saw in the previous section applies to the way Christians should behave towards outsiders and some in this section to their treatment of fellow believers. But there is a difference of emphasis, and predominantly here Paul is concerned with how Christians should behave towards those who do not profess the faith (Lagrange makes the division at this point).
17Do not repay anyone evil for evil. Be careful to do what is right in the eyes of everybody. 18If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone. 19Do not take revenge, my friends, but leave room for God’s wrath, for it is written: “It is mine to avenge; I will repay,”a says the Lord. 20On the contrary:
“If your enemy is hungry, feed him;
if he is thirsty, give him something to drink.
In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head.”b
21Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.
17. A further participial construction enjoins the readers to repay evil to “no one”.91 Paul has the word in an emphatic position: Christians should repay evil to no one at all, Gentile or Jew, Christian or pagan. It is a universal duty for believers, a duty which is brought out in a variety of ways in the New Testament (cf. Matt. 5:39ff., 43–44; 1 Cor. 13:5–6; Gal. 6:10; 1 Thess. 5:15; 1 Pet. 2:23; 3:9). Clearly it is an important part of Christian living. There is a sense of equivalence about both repay and for;92 Paul is dealing with a natural human tendency to get “even”.
Be careful to do is NIV’s rendering of a verb meaning “think beforehand, take care” and thus “1. care for, provide for…. 2. take thought for, take into consideration, have regard for” (BAGD, who class this passage under 2).93 What is right translates one word which is more usually taken to mean “good”,94 and this not of a hidden, interior goodness only (though the deeds in question must have this characteristic as well), but of a goodness that is manifest to all.95 NIV agrees with GNB, “Try to do what everyone considers to be good”, and other translations, but this does not seem to be what Paul is saying. He is not appealing to his readers to fall in with generally accepted moral maxims (people’s minds are darkened, 1:21, and they will not always approve what is right in the sight of God). He is calling on them to live out the implications of the gospel.96 Their lives are to be lived on such a high plane that even the heathen will recognize the fact.97 They will always be living in the sight of non-Christians, and the way they live should be such as to commend the essential Christian message (cf. Prov. 3:4; Matt. 5:16; Luke 2:52; 2 Cor. 4:2; 8:21; Tit. 2:10).
18. Attention shifts to the importance of living peaceably; the opening If it is possible shows that this cannot always be done.98 It is qualified with as far as it depends on you.99 The Christian is never to take the initiative in disturbing the peace. Regrettably it may be disturbed, for the Christian lives among evil people and they will sometimes refuse to let peace remain. But that is their responsibility. As far as the Christian is concerned, there is to be no breach of the peace. This must also be qualified by the fact that the Christian is to bear witness to the truth and to live by Christian principles. Peace at the price of the sacrifice of truth or the compromise of principle is not asked for. The Christian, because he is a Christian, cannot do such things. “As far as it depends on you” includes the thought “you, being who you are, someone redeemed by Christ and called to live in his service.”100 We must bear in mind that Paul often uses military metaphors, as when he speaks of the Christian’s armor (Eph. 6:11ff.) or of fighting the good fight (2 Tim. 4:7).101 We need such metaphors as well as the exhortation to peace if we are to be true to Paul’s thinking. Brown has a significant comment: “To ‘live peaceably,’ is descriptive of that state, in which a man does not disturb others, and is not disturbed by them. The first is always in our own power, the second is not” (Brown, p. 474). Paul is urging his readers to do all that is in their power to bring about and to preserve peace; but that does not remove the possibility that others will make this laudable endeavor impossible.
Barth has a comment about a further aspect of our subject. He says, “Our fellow men have no right to peace. Everything they do irritates us. Unattractive, crotchety, impenitent….” We do not live in an ideal world, but a world peopled by sinners. The command to live peaceably is meant, not for an ideal environment, but for this sinful world, a world inhabited by people like us! The command should cause us to do some self-examination before we blame other people too quickly for the difficulties in which we find ourselves. And it is a command meant to be obeyed, not the occasion for a crop of plausible excuses as to why we did not obey it.
19. One last participle with imperatival force gives us the injunction Do not take revenge.102 Even when someone has done us harm we are not to seek retribution; that is not our function.103 Paul slips in the address “beloved” (NIV, my friends), which is particularly appropriate in a place where he is urging the Roman Christians to a line of conduct which runs counter to a strong natural urge. He is making it clear that the command does not arise because he is indifferent to them, for he loves them. “The believers are entreated by the voice of love to walk in love” (CBSC).
But, he says, using the strong adversative104 to set what follows in sharp contrast to the thought of taking revenge. Rather, we should leave room for God’s wrath, or, more exactly, “Give place to the wrath”.105 Some have taken “the wrath” to be the wrath of the injured person, who is then counselled not to bottle up his anger but to find some outlet for it. Others have thought of the wrath of the opponent and suggested that the injured person should keep out of the way (“leave the place, and let wrath occupy it; or give place, as a man would do if attacked by a wild beast, stepping aside to let it rush by”, Haldane). But NIV is surely right in seeing a reference to “the wrath of God” (cf. 5:9; 1 Thess. 2:16). The force of the article is that “we must think of it as the well-known wrath” (M, III, p. 173), that is, the divine wrath.
Paul backs up his injunction with a quotation from Deuteronomy 32:35 in a form identical to that in Hebrews 10:30 but differing from LXX (it is like that in the Targum of Onkelos; see SBk). Perhaps both Paul and the writer to the Hebrews used a translation that has not survived.106 The passage makes it clear that God has taken to himself the task of avenging those wronged. They are not to take things into their own hands, but leave it to him. In the light of 13:4, it is possible that on occasion this may take place through the secular power, but Paul will not be thinking of that exclusively or even mainly. The eschatological wrath of God is that which in the end will punish all evildoers. The translation of NEB, “Justice is mine”, reminds us that we should not think of God as vindictive. Whenever his wrath is seen in punishment, this is an activity in which justice is done.
20. The apostle makes his meaning clear by citing examples of acceptable behavior. On the contrary sets what follows in sharp contrast with taking vengeance into our own hands.107 The quotation, taken from Proverbs 25:21–22 (basically LXX), urges the reader to give food and drink to an enemy who is in need.108 The implication is that we should give any help that is needed (and not confine our help to these two articles of diet). This is no piece of lofty, ethereal advice without application to the practicalities of daily life, but something very down-to-earth. Cragg comments, “spiritual fare is poor sustenance for an empty stomach…. To a hungry person blessing means bread”.
The quotation goes on to refer to this as heaping burning coals on his head, a most unlikely procedure if taken literally. It is clearly a metaphorical expression whose meaning is not obvious. From early times some have drawn attention to Old Testament passages expressing the idea of punishment (e.g., 2 Sam. 22:9, 13 = Ps. 18:8, 12; Ps. 11:6; 120:4; 140:10). The thought then would be that by doing your enemy kindness you were increasing his guilt and magnifying his punishment.109 But to most commentators this seems an impossible way of understanding the passage. The context is dominated by thoughts of love, and indeed the whole paragraph (vv. 9–21) is an expression of what Christian love means in practice.110 For reasons like this most agree that something like Moffatt’s translation gives the sense of it: “for in this way you will make him feel a burning sense of shame”. William Klassen, however, has made a detailed examination of the problem and rejects such solutions. “The interpretation so widely accepted by interpreters that the coals of fire refer to shame, remorse, or punishment lacks all support in the text.” He points to a custom attested in Egyptian literature whereby a penitent person carries coals of fire in a bowl on his head and to contacts between Proverbs and Egyptian writings and says, “In the Egyptian literature and in Proverbs the ‘coals of fire’ is a dynamic symbol of change of mind which takes place as a result of a deed of love.”111 Whether we prefer to go along with Moffatt or with Klassen, there can be no doubt that Paul is referring to the change in the enemy which deeds of love effect. As Barrett, Bruce, and Barclay all say in one form or another, we should use deeds of love to turn the enemy into a friend.
21. Paul rounds off the section with an exhortation to defeat evil: Do not be overcome112 by evil.113 Paul does not spell it out, but the context and his whole argument show that to be overcome by evil means to respond to evil with evil. When we do this we simply increase the amount of evil in the situation. The command not to do this is an important negative; evil must not be allowed to triumph.
Then Paul goes on to the positive: but overcome evil with good. Evil cannot stand against good. This is a very different attitude from that of the dying Mattathias who commanded his sons, “avenge the wrong done to your people. Pay back the Gentiles in full…” (1 Macc. 2:67–68). Such an attitude is very common, but it overlooks the fact that to retaliate is to be overcome, not to win, for the enemy has then succeeded in bringing us down to his own level.114 We should be clear that Paul is not laying down some useful ethical precepts for the edification of the general public. He has spent a lot of time in this letter on the subject of justification by faith, and it is the justified person of whom he continues to write. Those who know what it is to be justified by God’s grace, know also what it is to have the love of God poured into their hearts through the Holy Spirit (5:5). They know the new power that comes from the love the Spirit brings. That is why and that is the way they overcome evil with good. The way of love lifts them above all vindictiveness.