73 Cf. Wilckens, “ Auftreten-Lassens in der Geschichte ”.
71 εἰς αὐτὸ τοῦτο (again in 13:6; 2 Cor. 5:5; Eph. 6:22; Col. 4:8) means “just this (and nothing else)” (BDF 290[4]). It seems to stress the idea of purpose.
72 LXX has διετηρήθης, “you have been preserved”; Paul may have felt that ἐξήγειρα was nearer the Hebrew הֶעֱמַדְתִּיךָ. Whether that was so or not, “I raised you” is more dynamic than “you were preserved” (cf. LXX of Jer. 29:15; Hab. 1:6; Zech. 11:16).
73 Cf. Wilckens, “Auftreten-Lassens in der Geschichte”.
Cranfield C. E. B. Cranfield: A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans (Edinburgh, I [1975]; II [1979])
74 Paul uses ἐνδείχνυμι in nine of its 11 New Testament occurrences (three in Romans). Power quite often means something like “saving power” (e.g., 1:16; 1 Cor. 1:18), a meaning which would be very appropriate here.
75 “Wherefore therefore”as in v. 16; see the note on 5:10.
76 Burton comments on the present tense here and classes it among those in which “it is possible that a particular imagined instance in the present or future is before the mind as an illustration of the general class of cases” (MT, 313).
RSV The Revised Standard Version
77 Cf. H. H. Rowley, “His act was none the less his own because God could use it. But for Pharaoh’s oppression Israel would never have perceived that the God who elected her was a gracious and saving God” (The Biblical Doctrine of Election [London, 1952], p. 133).
78 “God punishes by delivering up to sin”(K. L. and M. A. Schmidt, TDNT, V, p. 1030; they also speak of “The self-hardening of man as his hardening by God, the guilt and responsibility of man as self-judgment and yet also God’s judgment” [p. 1024]).
79 Brevard S. Childs discusses the hardening of Pharaoh and minimizes the theological interest in the Exodus account; he thinks the terminology describes rather Pharaoh’s resistance to the signs God did in Egypt (Exodus [London, 1974], pp. 170–75).
a 20 Isaiah 29:16; 45:9
b 25 Hosea 2:23
c 26 Hosea 1:10
d 28 Isaiah 10:22, 23
e 29 Isaiah 1:9
80 βούλημα is not a common word. G. Schrenk shows that it means here “the purposeful intention of God” (TDNT, I, p. 637). We perhaps see something of the stress on purpose in the fact that it was sometimes used of a last will and testament (see MM).
81 ἀνθέστηχεν is perfect tense. NIV takes it as equivalent to a present (as Cranfield, Lagrange, and others). It could be taken as “hath resisted” (KJV), but NIV is probably correct. A number of translations have “Who can resist?” but this does not appear to be the meaning.
82 As Job found out, with the result that he repented in dust and ashes (Job 42:6). But there is a difference between the honest searching of a Job or a Jeremiah and the objector of whom Paul writes and whose objection is characterized by “insolence rather than anguish” (Lagrange).
83 A very unusual form of address in the New Testament; see the note on 2:1. BDF 146 (1b) discerns “some emotion” in the use of the expression here, but Turner sees “no great emotion” (M, III, p. 33). It seems wiser not to insist on it.
Wesley John Wesley: Explanatory Notes upon the New Testament (London, 1977)
84 Translations like “my friend” (GNB) or “sir” (NEB) reduce this to an ordinary form of address and miss the contrast.
85 μενοῦνγε (which is not frequent in the New Testament) is “used esp. in answers, to emphasize or correct … even—contrary to class. usage—at the beginning of a clause … rather, on the contrary” (BAGD). Moule sees it here as adversative, “But who are you… ?” (IBNTG, p. 163).
86 ἀνταποχρίνομαι means “answer in turn” and thus “answer back” (“answer by contradicting” [Chamberlain, p. 133]). “The language is startling” (Earle) and thus underlines the incongruity of the question.
87 The verb πλάσσω means “to form or fashion out of a soft mass”, while the noun πλάσμα “is commonly used for the product of the artisan or artist” (H. Braun, TDNT, VI, pp. 254, 255). Braun finds a reference here to Old Testament passages speaking of the potter and the clay, though there God’s “sovereignty is orientated to the bringing of salvation” while here “man is set before the tremendum of a demonstration of judgment by the God who exercises both mercy and hardening. Man, as God’s product and creature, is absolutely dependent on the deity. He is thus delivered up to God’s judgment and referred to His mercy” (pp. 260–61).
Harrisville Roy A. Harrisville: Romans (Minneapolis, 1980)
88 Like this reflects οὕτως, an unusual construction: “An adverb in place of a predicate acc. is found only in R 9:20”(BDF 434[2]).
89 ἤ.
90 Some translations have “power”, but ἐξουσία means “right”. The potter does not have to ask permission before he can go to work. He is entitled to do what he wants to with his clay.
91 πηλός can mean “mud” as well as the potter’s clay. But no doubt “clay” is the meaning here.
92 Cf. Barrett on Dodd: “To stress this point, however, is to emphasize a detail in the analogy instead of the major comparison, which is between the final responsibility of the potter for what he produces, and the final responsibility of God for what he does in history.”
93 Cf. Hodge, “It is not the right of God to create sinful beings in order to punish them, but his right to deal with sinful beings according to his good pleasure, that is here asserted.” Similarly Murray, “Paul is not now dealing with God’s sovereign rights over men as men but over men as sinners.”
94 Cf. Bruce “all are guilty before God; no-one has a claim on his grace. If he chooses to extend his grace to some, the others have no ground for arguing that he is unjust because he does not extend it to them. If it is justice they demand, they can have it”.
95 φύραμα means “that which is mixed (fr. φυράω) or kneaded, (a lump or batch of) dough” (BAGD). It is applicable to the doughlike stuff on which the potter works.
96 ὃ μὲν... ὃ δέ is apparently an example of the use of ὅς as a demonstrative pronoun (BAGD). εἰς is used to convey the idea of purpose.
97 Robinson comments, “God, Paul has just said, is not to be charged with injustice even if no principle can be seen in his dealings. But in fact, so far from being unjust, his record with men reveals precisely the opposite quality. There is a principle and it is one of quite unmerited mercy.”
Knox The Interpreter’s Bible, IX, introduction and exegesis by John Knox (Nashville, 1978)
98 BDF have a note on the anacoluthon, which, they say, is avoided if the χαί of v. 23 is dropped with B Or vg etc. (BDF 467). But this attestation is not sufficient to counter the suspicion that the reading arose as an attempt to smooth away the difficulty.
99 C. Maurer accepts the “What if” solution and paraphrases the passage in these terms: “What if God in fulfilment of His will, to demonstrate His wrath and reveal His power, endured with much patience vessels of wrath appointed for destruction, and did so for the one purpose that He might reveal the riches of His glory, which He works on the vessels of mercy which He prepared beforehand to His glory and to which He has called us not only from among the Jews but also from among the Gentiles, how much the more then should defiant obstinacy turn into humble praise?” (TDNT, VII, p. 363).
100 G. Stählin, who sees God’s longsuffering as having “the same enigmatic dual operation as all God’s tokens of grace”, he paraphrases this verse in these terms: “But if God tolerated in great longsuffering the vessels of wrath which were made for destruction, because He willed to manifest His wrath and declare His power in them, (he did it) also in order that he might make known the riches of his glory in the vessels of mercy, which he had prepared long before for glory” (TDNT, V, p. 426).
101 δυνατόν; the neuter of the adjective used as an abstract noun, a use which is apparently peculiar to Paul (BDF 263[2]). Moule lists this among passages where “there seems to be no implied noun, or at least it is hard to conceive of one” (IBNTG, p. 96).
102 Notice the aorist ἤνεγχεν. Paul does not use the present, which would emphasize God’s continual practice, but the tense that tells us that he bore with people like Pharaoh. That he bore with Pharaoh rather than destroyed him shows that even in wrath God remembers mercy.
103 μαχροθυμία, “longsuffering”; see the note on 2:4. J. Horst says that this passage rules out the possibility of “irresolution on the part of God, as though He could decide only after a period of waiting.” He further says, “God’s patience does not overlook anything. It simply sees further than man. It has the end in view” (TDNT, IV, p. 382).
104 Note the change from εἰς τιμήν and εἰς ἀτιμίαν of v. 21. These people are “characterized by wrath”, not “destined for wrath”.
BDF F. Blass and A. Debrunner: A Greek Grammar of the New Testament, trans. and rev. R. W. Funk (Chicago, 1961)
105 Käsemann comments, “Naturally an impersonal process of wrath, carried forward by the σχεύη (contra A. T. Hanson…) is not in view” (p. 270).
106 χατηρτισμένα. The verb means “to render ἄρτιος, i.e. fit, complete” (AS). The perfect tense conveys the idea of completely fitted for destruction (cf. Moffatt, “ripe and ready to be destroyed”). Paul does not use προχαταρτίζω as in 2 Cor. 9:5.
107 Gifford remarks that “vessels of wrath fitted for destruction” is a description “eminently applicable to the mass of the Jewish nation in St. Paul’s day” (cf. 2 Thess. 2:15–16). There is a reference to people now Christians who had once been “children of wrath” (Eph. 2:3). Would Paul have regarded such a transposition as possible for “vessels of wrath”?
108 χαὶ ἵνα. It is not suprising that χαί is omitted in some MSS (B cop vg Or etc.), for this gives an easier sense. But the word should surely be retained both because of its attestation and because it is the harder reading. ἵνα indicates purpose, but it is not clear whether it depends on ἤνεγχεν (“bore the vessels of wrath in order to make known…”) or χατηρτισμένα (“prepared for destruction in order that he might make known…”), or whether it may be equivalent to an infinitive (“to manifest his wrath … and to make known his mercy”).
109 γνωρίζω is found in Paul in 18 of its 26 New Testament occurrences.
110 προετιμάζω is used only of God in the New Testament (again in Eph. 2:10; BAGD note its use in other literature). εἰς indicates the purpose of the preparation.
111 There is no antecedent for οὕς other than σχεύη, but there is no real difficulty in seeing an ad sensum construction. Moule sees a displacement from ἡμᾶς, οὓς χαὶ χτλ. (IBNTG, p. 168).
112 ἐχ means “out from”, and its repetition makes it clear that the call applies to both Jews and Gentiles. But it does not apply to all of either group, only to those “called out from” the number. The church is neither a Jewish nor a Gentile community.
Bengel John Albert Bengel: Gnomon of the New Testament, II (Edinburgh, 1873)
113 “Paul is able to show from Scripture itself that even under the Old Covenant God’s saving action already envisaged a new creation of Israel”(Kertelge).
114 He introduces it with ὡς χαὶ ἐν τῷ Ὡσηὲ λέγει, which is an unusual way of citing Scripture. It is found again in Mark 1:2, on which SBk comment that an exact parallel is not found in rabbinic literature.
115 Turner regards οὐ λαόν μου as one of the passages “where the negative expressions form a single idea” (M, III, p. 282); it “serves as a proper name” in Hosea (BDF 426).
116 LXX has ἔρω but Paul χαλέσω; it is characteristic of the apostle to emphasize the divine call. Some think that χαλέω with a double accusative means “name” (e.g., SH). But it is impossible to limit the meaning in this way when Paul uses the verb. If it does not mean “name”, it means “name effectually”, name in such a way as to make them what the name signifies.
117 Here we have οὐ with the participle, not μή. Chamberlain finds about 20 examples of this construction in the New Testament and says, “It is always used for a definite denial” (p. 159). That meaning is appropriate here. BDF point out that LXX translates the Hebrew לאׄ with οὐ plus an articular participle (430 [3]).
118 Rahlfs reads ἐλεήσω but notices ἀγαπήσω in some MSS, notably B.
119 The perfect ἠγαπημένην indicates a continuing state; the love of God is no transitory phenomenon.
120 ἐχεῖ. It is often said that Paul has inserted this word into the text of LXX. He may have done so, for there are MSS which do not have it. But Rahlfs accepts the word, so it may be the right reading. For Paul’s meaning the word is important.
121 Note the emphatic pronoun ὑμεῖς.
NASB The New American Standard Bible
NEB The New English Bible
122 δέ. The former translation sees a transition from the previous section to this one, whereas “but” marks a contrast.
123 χράζει.
Käsemann Ernst Käsemann: Commentary on Romans (Grand Rapids, 1980)
124 ὑπέρ, according to Moule, means here “concerning, about” (IBNTG, p. 65). O’Neill, however, thinks of it as “for the sake of”, and BAGD think the sense might be “in the interest of”. H. Moule suggests “over”: “with the thought of a lament over the ruined ones.” But “concerning” is simpler.
125 ἐάν with the subjunctive. Burton sees it as “referring to a future possibility, or what is rhetorically conceived to be possible” (MT, 285 [b]).
126 The language of the quotation is not Pauline. This is his one use of ἀριθμός (18 times in the New Testament) and of ἄμμος (five times in the New Testament).
Lenski R. C. H. Lenski: The Interpretation of St. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans (Minneapolis, n.d.)
127 In some MSS the words ἐν διχαιοσύνῃ ὅτι λόγον συντετμημένον occur after συντέμνων, but most agree that this is an attempt to assimilate the text to that of LXX. The words should be rejected.
128 συντελέω, which means “1. bring to an end, complete…. 2. carry out, fulfill, accomplish” (BAGD), is found here only in Paul (six times in the New Testament), while συντέμνω, “cut short, shorten, limit”, is found nowhere else in the New Testament.
GNB Good News Bible (Today’s English Version)
129 προείρηχεν, used here only in Romans.
130 εἰ with past tenses of the indicative: “If he had not left us (as he has) … we would have been like Sodom (as we are not)….”
131 χύριος Σαβαώθ.
Hodge Charles Hodge: A Commentary on Romans (London, 1972 repr. of 1864 edn.)
132 The verb is ἐγχαταλείπω, a double compound with the meaning “leave behind” (BAGD).
133 σπέρμα.
134 Cf. Murray, “The emphasis upon the sovereign will of God in the preceding verses does not eliminate human responsibility, nor is the one incompatible with the other.”
a 33 Isaiah 8:14; 28:16
135 The verb διώχω, “pursue”, may here convey the imagery of a footrace (as in Phil. 3:12; so Shedd, Leenhardt, and others); Wilckens thinks it corresponds to τρέχειν in v. 16. The idea is of an earnest striving.
136 Denney finds the repetition “striking: it is the one fundamental conception on which Paul’s gospel rests.”
137 Cf. Cragg, righteousness “may stand either for a certain pattern of behavior or for a certain kind of relationship with God. The Jews were apt to use it in the former sense; Paul insists that it must be used in the latter.”
138 χαταλαμβάνω means “seize, win, attain, make one’s own” (BAGD). The meaning here is something like “attain.”
139 δέ introduces “an explanation or an intensification” (BDF 447[8]). ἐχ πίστεως does not mean that the righteousness originated with faith, but that the faith of the believer is the means whereby he receives the righteousness in question.
140 Cf. Tom Wright, “the law was actually intended to evoke faith. When, therefore, Gentiles come to believe in Jesus Christ, they are in fact fulfilling the law, whether or not they have even heard of it” (Gavin Reid, ed., The Great Acquittal [London, 1980], p. 25).
Brown John Brown: Analytical Exposition of the Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Romans (Grand Rapids, 1981 repr. of 1857 edn.)
141 Calvin comments, “The whole verse, therefore, means that although Israel depends on the righteousness of the law, it has not obtained the true method of justification, viz. that which is prescribed in the law.”
142 “The paradoxical state of affairs exhibited in the Christian Church is absolutely inexplicable except by the inscrutable fiat of God, unless the principle of justification by grace through faith is accepted” (Dodd).
143 ἐχ πίστεως.
144 ἀλλʼ ὡς ἐξ ἔργων. The ἀλλʼ makes a strong contrast, while ὡς “stresses the contrast between the true way, viz. faith, and the false way, viz. works” (Leenhardt).
145 Cranfield comments: “The christological content of Israel’s disobedience is now laid bare—and the intimate and essentially positive relation between the law and Christ” (Interpretation, XXXIV [1980], p. 71).
146 “Regardless of how the synagogue may have read the latter verse (i.e. Isa. 28:16)—of Zion, Messiah, faith, the remnant, or simply ‘of him who believes’—Paul interpreted either ‘stone’ as referring to ‘the Lord of hosts,’ to the Christ, ‘set’ for the Jews’ stumbling”(Harrisville). G. Stählin holds that this passage was taken messianically by the Jews in pre-Christian times (TDNT, VI, p. 755 n. 56).
147 Dodd appeals to Rendel Harris for the view that the combination was made “in a very early collection of proof-texts from the Old Testament”; Dodd also discusses these passages in According to the Scriptures (London, 1957), pp. 41–43.
148 πέτραν σχανδάλου. This second word properly denotes the bait stick of a trap, the stick that triggers off the trapping mechanism when dislodged by a bird or beast. This obviously means trouble for the trapped, and the word is used generally for trouble.
149 ὁ πιστεύων ἐπʼ αὐτῷ. The masculine seems to mean that Paul is speaking of faith in Christ; otherwise we would have needed a feminine to agree with πέτραν. The construction of πιστεύω with ἐπί and the dative is found in quotations from LXX in 10:11; 1 Pet. 2:6 (also in Matt. 27:42; Luke 24:25).
150 Bultmann points out that in the Old Testament the “shame” words are often linked with judgment (TDNT, I, p. 189) and that in this passage we have the Old Testament sense (p. 190).
[1]Morris, L. (1988). The Epistle to the Romans (343). Grand Rapids, Mich.; Leicester, England: W.B. Eerdmans; Inter-Varsity Press.
a 5 Lev. 18:5
b 6 Deut. 30:12
c 7 Deut. 30:13
d 8 Deut. 30:14
e 11 Isaiah 28:16
f 13 Joel 2:32
NIV New International Version
BDF F. Blass and A. Debrunner: A Greek Grammar of the New Testament, trans. and rev. R. W. Funk (Chicago, 1961)
1 εὐδοχία. It is preceded by a μέν, which has no answering δέ. BDF note that this is “excusable or even good classical usage” and give the meaning as “so far as it depends on my desire” (447 [4]). Lagrange sees it as meaning “certainly”.
2 As a translation for רָצוֹז “goodwill, favour, acceptance, will” (BDB). See G. Schrenk, TDNT, II, pp. 742ff. He favors the meaning here as “the will of the heart which becomes petition to God” (p. 746).
3 Paul uses δέησις here only in Romans, but 12 times out of its 18 New Testament occurrences. He is very interested in prayer.
4 Moule says of εἰς σωτηρίαν, “has their salvation as its purpose” (IBNTG, p. 70).
TDNT Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, a translation by Geoffrey W. Bromiley of Theologisches Wörterbuch zum Neuen Testament (Grand Rapids, 1964–76)
5 His expression is ζῆλον θεοῦ, which is best taken as an objective genitive with the meaning “zeal for God” (the same expression is used in a different sense in 2 Cor. 11:2). The expression could mean “a very great zeal” (“a divine zeal”, as Olshausen puts it), but this does not suit the context as well.
Barrett C. K. Barrett: A Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans (London,1957)
6 Commentators often take ἐπίγνωσις to mean a fuller and more comprehensive knowledge than γνῶσις, but J. Armitage Robinson’s examination of the word makes that difficult to hold (St Paul’s Epistle to the Ephesians [London, 1907], pp. 248–54). His conclusion is that “γνῶσις is the wider word and expresses ‘knowledge’ in the fullest sense: ἐπίγνωσις is knowledge directed towards a particular object” (p. 254). In the present passage he thinks that “the word may perhaps suggest the idea of discernment” (p. 252). Bultmann sees here “the sense of obedient recognition and insight into the will of God” (TDNT, I, p. 707).
7 Or “For”, γάρ.
8 Shedd finds KJV, “going about to establish” their righteousness, “felicitous, implying the toilsomeness and futility of the attempt.” Paul has used ἱστάνω, a variant of ἵστημι, of establishing the law (3:31) and in Hebrews we find ἵστημι of establishing a covenant (Heb. 10:9); there is the idea of “making it stand”. The Jews were trying to make their righteousness stand, that is, stand in the judgment.
9 Once again Käsemann thinks that righteousness is to be understood as power (p. 281). But this is not what Paul says and it is reading something into the passage.
10 The verb ὑπετάγησαν is sometimes taken as middle (SH), but it is probably better to see it as passive though used in the sense of the middle, “they did not subject themselves”.
11 γάρ.
SH William Sanday and Arthur C. Headlam: A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans (Edinburgh, 1907)
NEB The New English Bible
12 τέλος.
13 See, e.g., C. Thomas Rhyne, CBQ, 47 (1985), pp. 486–99. Cranfield also accepts this view and argues strongly against the usual understanding, “end”. George E. Howard sees the meaning as “goal”, but in the sense that the aim and goal of the law “was the ultimate unification of all nations under the God of Abraham according to the promise. In this sense Christ is the telos of the law; he was its goal to everyone who believes” (JBL, LXXXVIII [1969], p. 336).
BAGD Walter Bauer: A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, rev. and aug. by F. Wilbur Gingrich and Frederick W. Danker from the 5th edn. (Chicago, 1979)
14 Church Dogmatics, II/2 (Edinburgh, 1957), p. 245. He sees τέλος νόμου (like the rabbinic kelal) “as a comprehensive formula for the manifold content of the Law, as a designation of the common denominator, the sum of all its demands, or ontically as the substance, the be all and end all of the Law, or practically, as its meaning in virtue of which it has authority as law and which is immediately also the way to its fulfilment” (ibid.).
Calvin John Calvin: The Epistles of Paul the Apostle to the Romans and to the Thessalonians (Edinburgh, 1961)
15 Paul uses τέλος, but “fulfilment” is rather τελείωσις (see, e.g., the entries in BAGD).
Denney James Denney: "St. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans" in The Expositor’s Greek Testament, II (Grand Rapids, 1979 repr.)
16 εἰς might be understood as “with reference to” or it may express result (TH accepts this) or purpose (“for the attainment of righteousness, as a means to righteousness” [IBNTG, p. 70]). On the whole, purpose seems most likely.
17 Denney argues that while it is true and Pauline that Christ is the consummation and the goal of the law, “these ideas are irrelevant here, where Paul is insisting, not on the connection, but on the incompatibility, of law and faith.” F. W. Danker in his review of Cranfield’s commentary says forthrightly that “end” is the meaning: “Those who seek refuge in Torah promote a coterie; Christ aims to terminate the Balkanization of humanity, for he makes righteousness a reality for anyone who believes, and without reference to Torah” (Interpretation, XXXV [1981], p. 191).
18 V. P. Furnish, Theology and Ethics in Paul (Nashville, 1968), p. 161. He also says, “in Christ, the law’s true function is for the first time accurately appraised and its true ‘goal’ achieved.”
18a Robert Jewett argues for the meaning “Christ is the goal of the law” (Interpretation), XXXIX [1985], p. 354).
19 γάρ.
20 Whether we should place ὅτι after γράφει (with א* D* 33* etc.) or after νόμου (with P46 אc B etc.). The weight of MS evidence favors the second, and this should be accepted.
RSV The Revised Standard Version
NASB The New American Standard Bible
21 γράφω can take an accusative of the person or thing written about (see BAGD 2.c).
22 αὐτά and ἐν αὐτοῖς are read by most MSS, but the former is omitted in some and the latter is replaced by ἐν αὐτῇ in some. Certainty is impossible (Cranfield regards αὐτά and ἐν αὐτοῖς as assimilation to the text of LXX, while Metzger sees the omission of αὐτά and the use of ἐν αὐτοῖς as “scribal emendations”), but we should probably take the first-mentioned position.
23 δέ.
24 ἐχ πίστεως, as in 9:30; Gal. 5:5.
Shedd William G. T. Shedd: Commentary on Romans (Grand Rapids, 1980 repr. of 1879 edn.)
25 Cf. Murray, “It would be a complete misconstruction of Deuteronomy to interpret it legalistically. The whole thrust is the opposite (cf. Deut. 7:7ff.; 9:6ff.; 10:15ff.; 14:2ff.; 15:15f.; 29:9f., 29; 32:9; 33:29).”
26 That is is like the pesher formula of the Qumran scrolls in which the commentator introduces an application of the words of the Bible to events in his own day. Cranfield does not consider Paul arbitrary in using this method, for “Christ is the goal, the essential meaning, the real substance of the law.”
27 Turner sees this as a “simple infinitive of purpose” (M, III, p. 135); it is the purpose of the suggested ascent to bring Christ down.
Käsemann Ernst Käsemann: Commentary on Romans (Grand Rapids, 1980)
28 ἀναβαίνω is found in Paul seven times out of its 81 New Testament occurrences (here only in Romans), and χατάγω once out of nine. Neither verb is part of the apostle’s characteristic vocabulary.
29 χαταβαίνω, like the verbs in the previous verse, is unusual in Paul, being found four times only out of 81 times in the New Testament.
30 “The abyss”is used for “the sea” in LXX of Ps. 107:26 (106:26, LXX). Paul’s use is thus not unprecedented. This is Paul’s one use of the word.
31 They are used in this way, e.g., in the Talmud: B.M. 94a; Git. 84a.
32 Cf. Leenhardt, “Paul has recognized the real bearing of the Deuteronomic text, whereas his modern detractors have failed to see it.”
33 Cf. Barth, “The Word is nigh unto us. Wherever we cast our eye, the dynamite is prepared and ready to explode.”
34 ῥῆμα, which is not common in Paul; he has it eight times whereas he uses λόγος 84 times.
TH Barclay M. Newman and Eugene A. Nida: A Translator’s Handbook on Paul’s Letter to the Romans (New York, 1973)
35 Nygren comments, “In its literal meaning this passage refers to the law, but in the deeper sense, intended by God beforehand, it refers to ‘the word of faith.’ ”
36 τῆς πίστεως could be understood in the sense “the faith”, the body of Christian teaching. But it is more in keeping with the way the word is used in the rest of this chapter to see it as used in the sense “trust”.
37 The verb is χηρύσσω, for which see the note on 2:21. It points to the derivative nature of the message; the herald does not deliver an oration of his own composing, but passes on the message that has been given him.
Wilson Geoffrey B. Wilson: Romans (Edinburgh, 1976)
38 ὁμολογέω means basically “to say the same thing”, so one of its meanings is “to agree”. It is used of making a legal confession (cf. Acts 24:14), but also in a religious sense, as for confessing sins (1 John 1:9). It may refer to a public declaration (Matt. 7:23), to which confessing of Christ is a similar usage (see BAGD). Paul uses it four times.
39 The succession of second person singular pronouns is not to be overlooked. This is another example of the “1st and 2nd person sing., used to represent any third person in order to illustrate something universal in a vivid manner by reference to a single individual, as though present” (BDF 281). Paul is describing “something universal”; there is but one way for both Jew and Gentile.
40 Deissmann points out that the word was used very frequently of Nero, the Emperor at the time: “the statistics are quite striking; everywhere, down to the remotest village, the officials called Nero Kurios” (LAE, p. 353). A little later this title became a religious test, as when the officials tried to get Polycarp to say “Lord Caesar” and to offer sacrifice, both of which he steadfastly refused to do (Martyrdom of Polycarp 8:2) and which led to his execution.
41 Olshausen remarks that “A dumb faith is no faith” and draws attention to 2 Cor. 4:13.
42 The aorist πιστεύσῃς may well point to the initial act of believing, as Parry thinks.
43 πιστεύεται. Moule speaks of “apparently impersonal Passives, where in reality the noun cognate to the verb can in most cases be supplied as subject”. This passage, he says, “is in a different class, and is striking” (IBNTG, p. 27), but unfortunately he does not say what this class is.
44 εἰς διχαιοσύνην, where εἰς may express either purpose or result (cf. 1:16).
45 For Paul’s frequent use of πᾶς see the note on 1:5.
46 πλουτέω usually signifies “to be rich” in the sense of possessing riches for oneself, though it is sometimes used figuratively of being rich in good words and the like, which points to being outgoing. But BAGD cite no other passage in the New Testament for the sense of being generous, of giving riches away (though they note one in Philostratus).
47 Similarly Calvin notes that the riches of God are not “diminished by His liberality”, and he draws the lesson that Christians should not “envy the blessings of others, as if they lost anything thereby.”
48 ἐπιχαλέω means “to call, call upon” and is used of giving a name. In the middle it is used of calling on someone for aid, sometimes in a legal context (where it is a technical term; cf. Acts 25:11 etc. of Paul’s appeal to Caesar), sometimes in calling on a deity (see BAGD).
49 SH draw attention to its used in LXX for calling on Yahweh and they consider it significant that it is here applied to Christ.
50 πᾶς... ὃς ἄν. For Paul’s fondness for πᾶς see the note on 1:5. Cf. Bengel, “This monosyllable, πᾶς (all), more precious than the whole world….” Moule sees a latent conditional clause here: “whoever invokes, is close in sense to if anybody invokes” (IBNTG, p. 151). But this still implies universality.
a 15 Isaiah 52:7
b 16 Isaiah 53:1
c 18 Psalm 19:4
d 19 Deut. 32:21
e 20 Isaiah 65:1
f 21 Isaiah 65:2
51 Scott remarks, “This passage might seem to be only a digression, but it is central to the whole Epistle. More plainly than anywhere else Paul here discloses his purpose in writing as he does to the Roman church. He is coming to Rome in order to make it his starting-point for a new mission, and he needs the co-operation of the Christians in the capital” (p. 59).
52 BDF see this as an example of climax, which “consists in taking up the key word of the preceding member in the following one” (493 [3]; cf. 5:3ff.).
53 οὖν may do no more than play its part in introducing the rhetorical question, but it may possibly have adversative force (BAGD 4). A number of commentators point out that in this part of the letter several paragraphs have οὖν at the beginning, and this strengthens the view that a new paragraph begins with v. 14.
54 The series of subjunctives beginning with ἐπιχαλέσωνται shows that the questions are deliberative (Burton classes them as “rhetorical deliberatives” [MT 169]) and not only rhetorical. Such questions are concerned with possibility, desirability, and the like. It is this idea of possibility in the subjunctive that is the justification for NIV’s can throughout (there is no verb “can”). BDF translate here “how should they, can they… ?” (366 [1]) while Burton has “how shall they… ?” (MT 169).
55 εἰς ὅν follows ἐπίστευσαν not ἐπιχαλέσωνται (cf. BAGD πιστεύω 2aβ). The whole clause will be the object of ἐπιχαλέσωνται. πιστεύειν ἐις is not common in Paul (Gal. 2:16; Phil. 1:29; cf. Col. 2:5).
56 The genitive οὗ is the normal construction after ἀχούω of persons; it means “whom”, not “about whom” (which, as Cranfield points out, would be very unusual Greek). Lenski rightly points out that οὗ should not be taken as “where”.
57 χωρίς is occasionally used as an adverb (John 20:7), but in the New Testament it is mostly a preposition. Paul uses it 16 times (six being in Romans).
58 It is perhaps a little strange that Paul uses the participle χηρύσσοντος when the noun χῆρυξ was available. But this noun is comparatively rare (three times in the New Testament, of which two are in Paul), whereas the verb is frequent (61 times, of which Paul has 19). The participle will be somewhat more dynamic than the noun. It indicates an activity and not merely a person.
59 Cf. G. Friedrich, “This statement is decisive for our understanding of the preaching office. The fact that ἀποστέλλειν is linked with χηρύσσειν elsewhere in the NT is no accident. It belongs to the very nature of things. Without commissioning and sending there are no preachers, and without preachers there is no proclamation” (TDNT, III, p. 712).
SBk H. L. Strack and P. Billerbeck: Kommentar zum Neuen Testament aus Talmud und Midrasch, 4 vols. (München, 1922–28)
60 ὡς is used occasionally in exclamations with the meaning “How!” BAGD cite only this passage in the New Testament for this meaning but add, “Cf. 11:33” (IV.6). The word is common in Paul (158 times).
61 ὡραῖος connects with ὥρα and points to what is timely or seasonable; from that it is but a step to ripe, beautiful. Paul uses the word only here.
62 εὐαγγελίζομαι is quite often followed by what is proclaimed, but ἀγαθά is somewhat unusual. It emphasizes the goodness of the good news. Paul is not thinking of some run-of-the-mill good tidings, but of something really outstanding, the gospel.
63 ἀλλʼ, the strong adversative, used “with a stronger reference to the difference than δέ would have provided” (BDF 448[3]). Lenski renders, “But (alas!)”.
64 ὑπαχούω is used of the gospel in 2 Thess. 1:8, of “the faith” (Acts 6:7), and of “the word” of the preachers (2 Thess. 3:14). Paul uses the verb 11 times; obedience is important to him.
Haldane Robert Haldane: The Epistle to the Romans (London, 1966 repr.)
65 Wilson points out that the words Paul quotes are “at the head of the clearest prediction of Christ’s sufferings in the whole of Scripture”.
66 ἀχοή can mean that by which one hears (the ear, the sense of hearing), the act of hearing, or the thing one hears (which might be a report or rumor or, as here, what is preached). The dative after πιστεύω means “give credence to”.
67 Dodd comments, “The proof is complete: Israel has been rejected, not because God did not give them the opportunity of salvation, but because they refused it when it was given.”
Hendriksen William Hendriksen: New Testament Commentary: Exposition of Paul’s Epistle to the Romans (Grand Rapids, I [1980]; II [1981])
68 ἄρα is inferential, “so then”.
69 Cf. Boylan, “what is χήρυγμα from the preacher’s standpoint is ἀχοή from that of his audience” (on v. 16).
70 Käsemann points out that there is nothing in the context about the command of the historical Jesus sending the disciples; “Mission is now traced back to the exalted Lord, which was not possible prior to the quotation” (p. 295). But it is scarcely justified to divorce the exalted Lord from the historical Jesus. G. Kittel has a better perspective when he says this passage “certainly has in view the recorded ῥήματα; nevertheless, as the Χριστοῦ shows, it refers also to the Word of the present Lord as this is at work in the ἀχοή” (TDNT, IV, p. 109). Both are involved. The change of preposition is interesting: faith arises “out of” (ἐχ) hearing, and hearing is “through” (διά) the word of Christ. A. Oepke finds in this usage of (διά) “a tendency for the instrumental to become causal” (TDNT, II, p. 68). He also remarks, “Paul surely saw an inseparable unity between the pneumatic Christ and the historical” (p. 67).
71 ἀλλά.
72 μή introduces a question expecting the answer “No”, but the question itself contains the negative οὐ. Burton holds that each of the negatives has its proper force, “οὐ making the verb negative, and μή implying that a negative answer is expected to the question thus made negative” (MT, 468). The result is that a positive answer is anticipated. Gifford says the meaning is “Nay verily” rather than “Yes verily”; it corrects the suggestion that they did not hear. Cf. Parry, “μή can it be pleaded that… ?”
73 TH advises translators that they should make of this “a strong statement: ‘but it is certainly true that they did indeed hear….’ ”
74 μενοῦνγε, which Moule sees as adversative, “On the contrary, ‘Into all the earth…’ ” (IBNTG, p. 163). Turner comments on the unclassical position of the expression (M, III, p. 338).
75 φθόγγος is used of “any clear, distinct sound” (LSJ) and sometimes refers to the sound of musical instruments. But it is used also of speech. In the second line we have ῥήματα, which certainly means coherent speech, often words or sayings.
76 οἰχουμένη means “the world” in the sense of “the inhabited earth”. Paul does not use the word elsewhere.
77 Again the strong adversative ἀλλά introduces something contrary to what might have been expected.
78 μή introduces the question, but οὐ is found with the verb: the question negates the suggestion that Israel did not know. It is not certain where the question ends, and some put the question mark after πρῶτος: “Was not Israel the first to know the gospel?” (cf. Scott). But, as Leenhardt points out, though the grammar will allow this, “the meaning loses”. We should end the question at “know”. Paul is surely saying that Moses said this first and that Isaiah made the same point later (cf. CBSC, Michel, etc.).
Hodge Charles Hodge: A Commentary on Romans (London, 1972 repr. of 1864 edn.)
79 παραζηλόω is used four times in the New Testament, three in Romans and all in Paul.
80 παροργίζω. Both verbs are followed by ἐπί, which BAGD class here under the heading “of that upon which a state of being, an action, or a result is based” and specifically “w. verbs that denote aroused feelings” (ἐπί, II.1.b.γ).
81 ἀσύνετος, “senseless, foolish, implying also a lack of high moral quality” (BAGD).
82 Cf. Earle, “used of those who fail to understand the clear, simple things of God, who do not have sense enough to know the truth.”
83 The connective is δέ, which Shedd sees as having here “a somewhat adversative sense”.
84 ἀποτολμᾷ χαὶ λέγει. The construction is paratactic where we might have expected a participle; perhaps this puts a little more emphasis on “dares”. The verb occurs only here in the Greek Bible.
85 ἐμέ is emphatic in both lines. It is none less than God for whom they were not looking or asking. There is a problem with the ἐν before τοῖς in some MSS. It may have arisen, as Cranfield thinks, because the dative is not an easy construction after εὑρέθην. BDF see only one genuine dative of object in the whole New Testament (in Luke 23:15); this one they regard as “related to ‘to appear’ ” (cf. Acts 1:3) (191 [3]). If ἐν is read, it “appears to stand for the customary dat. proper”, as in Gal. 1:16 (220 [1]; see also Turner, M, III, pp. 58, 264). Fortunately the sense is clear, whichever reading is adopted.
86 ἐμφανής, found only here and in Acts 10:40 in the New Testament.
87 It is usually held that Paul takes words meant for Israel and applies them to the Gentiles. But Calvin points out that Isa. 65:1 goes on to refer to “a nation that was not called by my name” and thus to the Gentiles. Most accept “a nation that did not call on my name”, which, of course, could apply to Israel but also to the Gentiles. SBk cite rabbinic support for the view that the words refer to Rahab and Ruth. Whatever Isaiah had in mind originally, Paul sees in the words a reference to the Gentiles.
88 πρός seems not to mean “to” (though Godet accepts this). The words are not an address to Israel but a statement about the nation. The preposition can come close to the meaning “against” (Luke 20:19), but it is better to see it as “concerning”, “with respect to” (as in Luke 19:9; Heb. 1:8).
89 ἐχπετάννυμι is found only here in the New Testament. It means here “spread or hold out the hands in an imploring gesture” (BAGD).
90 Cf. Denney, “The arms outstretched all the day long are the symbol of that incessant pleading love which Israel through all its history has consistently despised. It is not want of knowledge, then, nor want of intelligence, but wilful and stubborn disobedience, that explains the exclusion of Israel (meanwhile) from the Kingdom of Christ and all its blessings.”
91 λαός is normally used of Israel, just as ἔθνος (v. 19) is the word for the Gentile peoples.
92 ἀπειθοῦντα normally means “disobedient”, but it is sometimes used of those lacking faith; Paul may see something of this meaning here. At any rate both are involved.
93 ἀντιλέγοντα means “speak against” and thus “oppose, refuse”.
94 Barth comments, “Guilt is not innocence. Guilt means that we can, but we will not…. Characteristic of men is a tenacious, profitless opposition to God.” Cf. Hendriksen, “The passage indicates that Israel was fully responsible for the divine judgment that was pronounced upon it.”
1 Achtemeier sees this chapter as the climax of the discussion begun in the first chapter. “Fittingly enough, since the story of the rescue of God’s creation began with Israel, the chosen people, it will also conclude with them, with this difference however—their belonging to the chosen people is now on the same basis as the gentiles: on the basis of trust in Jesus Christ.”
a 3 1 Kings 19:10, 14
b 4 1 Kings 19:18
c 6 Some manuscripts by grace. But if by works, then it is no longer grace; if it were, work would no longer be work.
d 8 Deut. 29:4; Isaiah 29:10
e 10 Psalm 69:22, 23
2 οὖν.
Shedd William G. T. Shedd: Commentary on Romans (Grand Rapids, 1980 repr. of 1879 edn.)
Barrett C. K. Barrett: A Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans (London,1957)
Hendriksen William Hendriksen: New Testament Commentary: Exposition of Paul’s Epistle to the Romans (Grand Rapids, I [1980]; II [1981])
3 The question introduced by μή looks for the answer “No.” The verb ἀπωθέω expresses vigorous action, “push aside”, as when the Israelite pushed Moses away (Acts 7:27); its position gives it a certain emphasis. The juxtaposition of ὁ θεός and τὸν λαόν should not be overlooked; they belong together.
4 μὴ γένοιτο.
5 ἐχ denotes origin, and the one ἐχ refers to both the seed of Abraham and the tribe of Benjamin. φυλή may denote a nation or people (Matt. 24:30; Rev. 1:7), but it is used more characteristically of the 12 tribes of Israel.
Hodge Charles Hodge: A Commentary on Romans (London, 1972 repr. of 1864 edn.)
6 Barrett sees the existence of Jewish Christians as evidence that God had not in fact rejected his ancient people. But there was only a small number of Jewish Christians. “This very fact, however, suggests a line for advance. There are important Old Testament precedents for the presence of such a minority within an apostate people.”
NIV New International Version
7 He refers to what the Scripture says ἐν Ἠλίᾳ, “in the passage called ‘Elijah’ ” (Moffatt). People did not refer to chapter and verse in those days; they located passages by their content. We see a similar usage in Jesus’ ἐπὶ τοῦ βάτου (Mark 12:26). SBk find the usage in the rabbinic writings, and Turner says “there are class. exx.” (M, III, p. 261).
8 ἐντυγχάνω has meanings like “meet”, “turn to”, “appeal to”, “petition”, and thus “pray”. It is used of praying ὑπέρ, “on behalf of” someone (8:27, 34), but here χατά, “against”, a meaning not found elsewhere in Scripture but attested in the apocrypha (e.g., 1 Macc. 8:32; 11:25). This is an indictment of evildoers and a plea that God take action against them.
9 χατασχάπτω means “tear down, raze to the ground” (BAGD). It is found here only in the New Testament (but see Acts 15:16).
Cragg The Interpreter’s Bible, IX, "The Epistle to the Romans," exposition by Gerald R. Cragg
10 ἀλλά introduces a contrary position, this time in the form of a question.
11 LSJ include “oracular response, divine injunction” among the meanings of the word χρηματισμός, but Anthony Hanson sees its use here as unusual and refers to “this remarkable use of ‘oracle’ ”. He concludes his examination of the use of the term in this passage with “The oracle in Romans xi.4 then points to a revelation of God’s nature, but suggests that what was indirectly revealed in the old dispensation has been directly revealed in Christ in the new” (NTS, XIX [1972–73], pp. 300, 302). Bo Riecke notices the use of the word in a variety of contexts such as money-making, healing, and official response, but here “Elijah is thought of, not as an attorney submitting written petitions, nor as a mantic practising incubation, but as a man of God receiving revelations” (TDNT, IX, p. 482).
12 χαταλείπω usually has a meaning like “leave (someone or something) behind”; BAGD cite only this passage in the New Testament for the meaning “leave over; see to it that someth. is left” (cf. Sir. 24:33). But clearly this is the meaning here.
13 So Cranfield. Cf. Calvin, “we may take the definite for an indefinite number.”
14 Bengel points out that it is not a small number. He also notices that in an adjoining chapter it is the number of the Israelites in Ahab’s victory over Ben-Hadad (1 Kings 20:15); it is a significant number, though of course still a remnant.
15 The relative is not οἵ but οἵτινες, “who were of such a character that….”
16 Hodge thinks it is not so much contempt as that Baal was regarded as both masculine and feminine. But in 1 Sam. 7:4 where we read of Baals and Ashtoreths (this latter meaning feminine deities) both nouns are feminine. See also Hos. 2:8; Zeph. 1:4. See IBNTG, p. 183.
17 οὕτως οὖν with its inferential force introduces the application to the current situation of what had happened so long before. For ἐν τῷ νῦν χαιρῷ cf. 3:26.
18 λεῖμμα, here only in the New Testament, is cognate with χατέλιπον in v. 4. There was a reference to ὑπόλειμμα in 9:27. See further the note in TDNT, IV, pp. 194–214.
19 Dan G. Johnson points out that the concept of remnant may be understood in terms of judgment or of hope; in ch. 9 it pointed to judgment; “But for Paul the remnant motif is now a sign of hope that all Israel will be saved” (CBQ, 46 [1984], p. 96).
Nygren Anders Nygren: Commentary on Romans (London, 1952)
20 χατʼ ἐχλογὴν χάριτος. For ἐχλογή see the note on 9:11; here it signifies the choosing out of some from a larger group.
21 “It is God’s free generosity, not their own deserts, which preserves the remnant” (CGT).
22 γέγονεν, where the perfect carries the note of permanence: “there has come to be and there remains”.
23 Turner sees in this passage (vv. 5–8) Paul’s equivalent of the “messianic secret” in Mark: “St. Paul saw the secret as due to God’s deliberate act, but in his view it was achieved not so much by the parabolic method as by a process of making dull the spiritual faculties of the Jews” (Grammatical Insights, p. 49).
24 There is no verb in the clause and we must supply one, but Burton points out that the use of εἰ plus the nature of the sentence shows the class of conditional even without the verb (MT, 243). In the previous sentence Paul has used the genitive χάριτοσ; the change to the dative χάριτι does not mean a change of meaning.
BDF F. Blass and A. Debrunner: A Greek Grammar of the New Testament, trans. and rev. R. W. Funk (Chicago, 1961)
JB The Jerusalem Bible
25 Leenhardt points out that “the works of Israel are of no avail either to establish the covenant, or to maintain it, or to annul it.”
26 NIV mg. includes some words found mostly in the later MSS. It is impossible to understand why they would have been deleted if they had been in the original, and most agree that the reading should be rejected. See the note in Metzger.
27 He uses ἐπιζητέω, which Abbott-Smith calls the “ ‘directive’ of ζητέω”, meaning “to inquire for, seek after, wish for”.
28 ἐπιτυγχάνω means “1. to light upon. 2. to obtain, attain to” (AS). In late Greek it is followed by the accusative (as here) more often than the genitive (as in Heb. 6:15; 11:33). BDF point out that of the use with the genitive “there are vestiges only in the better educated authors” (171 [2]).
29 This appears to be the only place in the New Testament where ἡ ἐχλογή is used for οἱ ἐχλεχτοί. The use of the term may put some stress on the idea of election rather than the individuals elected (SH).
30 δέ has adversative force and puts the others in contrast with the elect.
31 Paul’s verb is not the one he used for hardening in 9:18, but πωρόω, which means “cause a stone or callus to form” (LSJ). It is used of the uniting of fractured bones; thus it can denote a very hard deposit. NEB and some other translations have “were made blind”, a rendering Bruce justifies since in modern English “blindness” is commonly used for moral or spiritual insensitiveness. But it is better to retain Paul’s imagery.
SH William Sanday and Arthur C. Headlam: A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans (Edinburgh, 1907)
32 Cf. Leenhardt, “If the creature refuses to be carried along by the current of divine grace, his very refusal drives him toward nothingness, for one cannot refuse the call of God except by positively opposing Him.”
33 πνεῦμα χατανύξεως. The latter word is apparently derived from χατανύσσω, which means “1. to strike or prick violently. 2. to stun” (AS). There may be some confusion with χατανυστάζω, “to fall asleep”; at any rate, in LXX χατάνυξις can translate הַּרְדֵּמָה “deep sleep” (it does in Isa. 29:10). Possibly also there is the thought of repeated blows bringing about a state of insensibility. Whatever the reason, in passages like this the meaning is something like “torpor of mind, stupefaction”. This is the only New Testament occurrence of the word.
34 τοῦ with the infinitive is a construction that ordinarily denotes purpose and sometimes result, but neither suits this passage very well. BDF find this “a peculiar use of the inf.” and translate “such ears that they…” (393 [6]); cf. also M, III, p. 141).
35 ἕως τῆς σήμερον ἡμέρας (cf. Acts 20:26; 2 Cor. 3:14) is a curious expression, but it is found a number of times in LXX. The meaning is not in doubt.
36 Cf. Parry, “The justification of this use of the passage is that to the Psalmist also the persecutors were his own people. The punishment is inevitably found in the very privileges and faculties which they had misused” (CGT).
37 Some see a cultic reference. Käsemann (p. 302), e.g., thinks there is a reference to Jewish piety which causes the blinding and fall of the nation. But this is not a natural understanding of table.
38 παγίς means a “trap”, but in the New Testament it is always used figuratively “of things that bring danger or death, suddenly or unexpectedly” (BAGD).
39 θήρα in this context does not differ greatly from παγίς. It does not occur in either the Hebrew or the Greek of the passage Paul is quoting. Nor is it found elsewhere in the New Testament.
40 σχάνδαλον.
41 ἀνταπόδομα, “repayment”, may be used in a good sense (Luke 14:12) or a bad sense (as here).
42 The verb σχοτίζω is always in the passive in the New Testament, “be darkened”. In 1:21, as here, it refers to the mind. τοῦ with the infinitive might indicate purpose here, but result is equally possible.
NEB The New English Bible
43 νῶτος is used here only in the New Testament.
44 Cragg has an apposite comment: “Judgment is inseparable from the rule of law in a moral world; to ignore it is not a proof of our emancipation, but merely an indication that indifference is bordering on folly.”
45 οὖν.
46 In 9:32 the verb is προσχόπτω; here it is πταίω. This latter is always intransitive in the New Testament (five times; Paul has it only here).
Black Matthew Black: Romans (London, 1973)
47 TDNT, VI, p. 884. W. Michaelis comments, “Falling does not mean becoming guilty; it refers to the possibility that Israel will persist in its guilt, or rather that it will be abandoned by God in its guilt, that it will be excluded from salvation” (ibid., p. 164).
48 ἵνα usually denotes purpose, “in order that”, but if that is the meaning here it ought to be the purpose of the subject of the verb ἔπταισαν, i.e., of the Jews. But obviously it was not their purpose that they would fall. There is a good note in SH in which it is made clear that ἵνα can denote result. This should be accepted here. Chamberlain argues that “It is hardly conceivable that Israel stumbled in order to fall, but it is quite in keeping with Israel’s history to say that she stumbled so (seriously) that she fell” (p. 185).
49 The question is introduced by μή.
50 ἀλλά.
51 παράπτωμα. It is a question whether we should see this as a continuation of the metaphor of stumbling (as Moffatt, “by their lapse…”). But Paul’s habitual use of this word is for a sin, and it is better to see his normal use here. The word is cognate with πίπτω, not πταίω.
52 The expression is introduced with εἰς τό, which normally indicates purpose. For the verb παραζηλόω see the note on 10:19.
53 H. Moule has a long note in which he brings this out. Haldane draws attention to another point arising from the admission of the Gentiles: “We ought to remember that the Lord may have infinitely wise and gracious motives for His most severe and terrible judgments. Thus did the fall of the Jews become the occasion of the Gentiles being enriched with the inexhaustible treasures that are in Christ….”
54 Notice that εἰ begins vv. 12, 14, 15, 16, 17, and 21, a noteworthy succession of “if” clauses. Lenski points out that here “The condition is one of reality. Only in such conditions can the verb be left out.”
55 ἥττημα is a very rare word (apparently cited again only in Isa. 31:8; 1 Cor. 6:7, in both of which it means “defeat”). Scholars who consider this meaning unsuitable in this passage point to the use of πλήρωμα later in the verse. They suggest that since that word has numerical force, “the full number”, ἥττημα must mean the opposite, it must signify a diminution of the number. Thus Barrett, “whatever be the witness of etymology, Paul is not here speaking of a defeat of Israel but of a diminution of their numbers.”But it is not only etymology; the use in other passages is also important. Thus Leenhardt, “the only known meaning of ἥττημα is relative to quality (inferiority, degeneration…)”. It seems that we should not understand the word of a numerical reduction, but rather in some such sense as “defeat” (as Murray, Cranfield, etc.).
56 For the normal genitive after πλοῦτος cf. the riches of God’s kindness (2:4), of his glory (9:23), of his wisdom and knowledge (11:33), of his grace (Eph. 1:7), and so on. The list could be extended. But πλοῦτος χόσμου, meaning riches “for” the world rather than “of” the world, is unusual. Turner remarks that χόσμος is anarthrous in the genitive after another noun (M, III, p. 175) and that ἔθνη is especially liable to be anarthrous (p. 181). But this does not affect the meaning.
57 πλήρωμα has a variety of meanings, the most favored being “that which is brought to fulness” (full number) and “fulfilment”. The former is seen by many as the meaning in v. 25 and is accepted here by Black, SH, and others. “Fulfilment” in the sense of fulfilling the divine demand is favored by BAGD, fulness of salvation by Lenski, and there are other views.
Barclay William Barclay: The Letter to the Romans (Edinburgh, 1957)
58 Parry points out that in chs. 1–3 Paul had made it clear that Israel and the Gentiles failed in the same way; now he is clear that they are saved in the same way.
Knox The Interpreter’s Bible, IX, introduction and exegesis by John Knox (Nashville, 1978)
Denney James Denney: "St. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans" in The Expositor’s Greek Testament, II (Grand Rapids, 1979 repr.)
59 The expression is ἐφʼ ὅσον. Olshausen points out that we should supply with it τρόπον, not χρόνον, “in so far as”, not “so long as”. This is followed by a μέν which lacks an answering δέ but which is accompanied by οὖν to mean something like “Contrary to what you may be inclined to think” (Cranfield). BAGD do not connect μέν with οὖν but take the former to indicate a contrast.
60 ἐθνῶν ἀπόστολος with the attributive genitive coming first (BDF 474[4]); ἔθνη is especially liable to be anarthrous in such expressions (M, III, p. 181).
GNB Good News Bible (Today’s English Version)
61 His word is διαχονία. Originally it meant the service of a table waiter and later it came to mean lowly service in general. It is not without importance that this term came to be the typical term for Christian ministry. Christian ministers (even apostles) are not lords of the flock, but servants.
62 εἴ πως (see 1:10; Phil. 3:11). πώς is the enclitic, meaning “somehow, in some way, perhaps” (BAGD), not the interrogative πῶς, “how?” Burton comments on this use of εἰ: “An omitted apodosis is sometimes virtually contained in the protasis, and the latter expresses a possibility which is an object of hope or desire, and hence has nearly the force of a final clause” (MT, 276).
NASB The New American Standard Bible
63 Arouse … to envy translates the verb παραζηλόω, used here as in v. 11.
64 Paul uses the active of husband and wife saving each other (1 Cor. 7:16), of Timothy (1 Tim. 4:16), and, of course, of Christ (1 Tim. 1:15; 2 Tim. 4:18). The active is more common outside Paul and, e.g., James always has it.
65 Käsemann comments, “nowhere is it more evident that apocalyptic is the driving force in Paul’s theology and practice” (p. 306). This perhaps shows the weakness of that scholar’s position, for there is nothing here about apocalyptic (unless we say that the verb “save” can be used in no sense other than an apocalyptic one and insist that “fullness” and “life” are apocalyptic terms). The whole context is concerned with the problem of Israel’s failure to accept the gospel while the Gentiles responded to it. If apocalyptic is no more evident elsewhere in Paul than it is here, we must conclude that it is not a significant concept for the apostle.
66 ἀποβολή is a comprehensive word and can be used of loss by death (BAGD). In its only other New Testament occurrence it refers to the loss of a ship (Acts 27:22).
67 Note anarthrous χόσμος in the genitive after the noun on which it depends, as in v. 12 (M, III, p. 175).
68 πρόσλημψις, here only in the New Testament.
69 Paul has ζωὴ ἐχ νεχρῶν, but the final resurrection is spoken of as ἀνάστασις νεχρῶν (1 Cor. 15:12 etc.).
TH Barclay M. Newman and Eugene A. Nida: A Translator’s Handbook on Paul’s Letter to the Romans (New York, 1973)
70 Murray has a powerful argument for the figurative interpretation. “It must be accorded its full force as that which brings ‘the reconciliation of the world’ to climactic realization”; he refers to “an unprecedented quickening for the world”.
71 In LXX we read of ἀπαρχὴν φυράματος, the same language Paul uses here.
Harrisville Roy A. Harrisville: Romans (Minneapolis, 1980)
72 Cf. Dodd, “A truly remarkable horticultural experiment! Paul had the limitations of the town-bred man … he had not the curiosity to inquire what went on in the olive-yards which fringed every road he walked.”
73 The passages cited to attest this are Columella, De re rustica v.9.16 and Palladius, De insitione xiv.53–54. Michel, Cranfield, and others draw attention to these passages.
74 Pauline and Other Studies (London, 1906), p. 223.
75 εἰ with the aorist indicative. δέ is better understood as “now” than as “but”.
76 σύ is emphatic. The passage is another example of the use of the pronoun in what Robertson calls “the representative sense” (Robertson, p. 678). Cf. BDF 281.
77 ἀγριέλαιος. The word refers to a tree; shoot is NIV’s addition. It is generally held that the word is used here as an adjective (though BAGD think “it may also be taken as a subst., as we say ‘oak’ of a piece of furniture”).
78 Some try to apply their grammar strictly and see the meaning as “in the place the branches occupied”, but, as Godet says, this is “rather forced”.
79 συγχοινωνός may be used of sharing in any one of a variety of things (cf. 1 Cor. 9:23; Phil. 1:7; BAGD note its use for business partners). Denney comments, “there is an argument in σύν. At the best, the Gentile only shares with Jews in the virtue of a root which is not Gentile, but Jewish.”
80 The most probable text is τῆς ῥίζης τῆς πιότητος (א* B C Ψ); some MSS have τῆς ῥίζης χαὶ τῆς πιότητος (אc A Db.c P33), and some omit τῆς ῥίζης (P46 D* G). But these latter two appear to be scribal attempts to improve on the first (Metzger says they “are suspicious as ameliorating emendations”).
Harrison Everett F. Harrison: “Romans” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, 10 (Grand Rapids, 1976)
81 Dodd makes an important point: “The illustration shows clearly how complete, in Paul’s thought, was the continuity between the Christian Church and the Israel of the Old Testament. The Church is not a new society; it is ‘the Israel of God’ ”.
BAGD Walter Bauer: A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, rev. and aug. by F. Wilbur Gingrich and Frederick W. Danker from the 5th edn. (Chicago, 1979)
82 The οὐ before the emphatic σύ, the τὴν ῥίζαν preceding its verb, and the strong adversative ἀλλά all make for an emphatic declaration.
83 Cf. Wesley, “Had the graft been nobler than the stock, yet its dependence on it for life and nourishment would leave it no room to boast against it. How much less, when, contrary to what is practised among men, the wild olive tree is engrafted on the good!”
Murray John Murray: The Epistle to the Romans, 2 vols. (Grand Rapids, 1960 and 1965)
84 Gifford reminds us that “it would be arrogant and selfish to assume, as in this supposed reply, that the advantage of the Gentiles was the direct and sole cause of God’s casting away of His people.”
85 τῇ ἀπιστίᾳ. Turner classes this as “cause” and remarks, “This dat. is extraordinary” (M, III, p. 242). BDF 196 also class it as “dative of cause”, while Moule sees it as “virtually instrumental” (IBNTG, p. 44). A preposition might have been expected.
86 σὺ δέ, where the pronoun emphasizes the subject and δέ may be adversative, “but you” (RSV).
87 There is no ἵνα, as in v. 19; the branches were not broken off “in order that you might stand….” For this use of stand cf. 1 Cor. 10:12.
Calvin John Calvin: The Epistles of Paul the Apostle to the Romans and to the Thessalonians (Edinburgh, 1961)
RSV The Revised Standard Version
88 εἰ with the aorist tense is a condition of reality, “if (as is the case)….”
89 φείδομαι is a Pauline word (seven times out of ten in the New Testament, three being in Romans). Natural renders χατὰ φύσιν, where the noun means “nature”, a word that may in turn mean “the nature (natural powers or constitution) of a person or thing” (AS).
90 The text behind NIV (and most modern translations) is supported by א A B C P etc., but the insertion of μή πως before οὐδέ is found in our oldest witness P46 and MSS like D G Ψ etc. Gifford thinks that μή πως was inserted by scribes “to soften the stern note of warning.” Metzger holds that “copyists may have taken offence at its presence here because of its apparent unrelatedness”, so his committee put it into the text but within square brackets. It is impossible to be certain of the original.
91 οὖν.
92 χρηστότης.
93 ἀποτομία, twice in this verse and here only in the New Testament, derives from ἀποτέμνω, “to cut off”. AS sees it as meaning “steepness, sharpness”, and thus “severity”. Olshausen says the word “is equivalent to ὀργή, but is preferred on account of the figure of the cut-off branches.”
94 To renders ἐπί, used here of “feelings, actions, etc. directed toward a pers. or thing…. Esp. also if the feelings or their expressions are of a hostile nature toward, against”(BAGD III.b.ε).
95 μὲν... δέ marks a contrast.
96 ἐπιμένω means much the same as μένω, though perhaps with some strengthening of the idea of persistence.
Cranfield C. E. B. Cranfield: A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans (Edinburgh, I [1975]; II [1979])
97 Calvin comments that it is “improper to say in particular of any of the godly that God had mercy on him when he chose him, on condition that he should continue in His mercy. The perseverance of faith, which perfects the effect of God’s grace in us, flows from election itself.” In any case Paul “is not discussing here the special election of each individual, but is setting the Gentiles and Jews in opposition to one another.” Cf. Bruce, “The perseverance of the saints is a doctrine firmly grounded in New Testament (and not least in Pauline) teaching; but its corollary is that it is the saints who persevere.”
98 ἐπεί is a causal conjunction, “because, since”. Here there is an ellipsis, “since (if it were different)….” NIV gives the sense of it.
99 δέ can, of course, mean “and”, but it seems that here it has adversative force. Paul is contrasting his hypothetical Jew with his hypothetical Gentile.