a 27 or will be
100 The verb is ἐπιμένω, which was translated “continue” in v. 22.
101 NIV renders γάρ after all, but “for” is the meaning. εἰ is yet another conditional meaning, “if (as is the case)….” σύ is the emphatic pronoun.
102 Notice that ἐξεχόπης is followed by its own preposition ἐχ, but later in this verse ἐνεχεντρίσθης by εἰς.
103 παρὰ φύσιν. This receives emphasis from its prominent position. It is a significant point.
104 χαλλιέλαιος, “good olive tree”; it contrasts with ἀγριέλαιος, “field olive tree”, i.e., one that grows unaided in the fields. The good olive tree is one that has been cultivated.
105 NIV has how much more readily, but the Greek is simply πόσῳ μᾶλλον. Boylan remarks that this means “How much more certainly!” rather than “How much more easily!” We are not to think of one thing as more easy than another for omnipotence. Paul is talking about what is fitting, not about what is easy.
106 Barrett sees this passage as pointing to processes that go on in every age: “Paul’s picture is of the religious and the irreligious man. The former lives in an atmosphere which should constantly remind him that God is in heaven and he upon earth (Ecclus. v.2); but in this atmosphere he makes himself at home and domesticates his God. The irreligious man stumbles by accident (as he may think) upon the terror and the grace of God, and supplants his brother, because he knows he has no virtue and no piety to offer to his Maker, but trusts the grace he has glimpsed in Christ. And the religious man, or Pharisee, learns with painful inward struggle that he must divest himself of his pride, count his gains loss and his boasts dung, in order to be found in Christ, with a righteousness not of his own fabrication but from God (Phil. iii.8f.).” We should beware of treating Paul’s argument as an academic exercise.
a 27 or will be
b 27 Isaiah 59:20, 21; 27:9
c 31 Some manuscripts do not have now.
107 μυστήριον is used by Paul 20 (or 21; see 1 Cor. 2:1) times out of 27 (28) in the New Testament; again in Romans only in 16:25 (which “virtually furnishes a definition” of the term, Murray). In the “mystery religions”, a well-known feature of the Hellenistic world of the time, the mystery stood for a secret that was made known only to the initiates, a meaning we can see also among the Jewish apocalyptists.
108 ἵνα expresses purpose.
109 It is uncertain whether we should read the dative ἑαυτοῖς or whether it should be preceded by παρʼ (which, however, may be due to assimilation to 12:16; Prov. 3:7) or by ἐν (which could come from Isa. 5:21). Cf. BDF 188(2), “both prepositions following references in the LXX”. Fortunately the sense is not greatly affected.
110 Black comments on “wise in your own conceits” (KJV), “a matchless translation capturing exactly the nuance of Pauline thought and emotion.” He thinks that the Greek expression “clever in oneself” “may have been an idiomatic one for ‘too clever by far in his own esteem’ ”.
111 The verb is γέγονεν and its subject is “hardening”; RSV renders it “has come”. The perfect tense denotes a continuing state.
112 πώρωσις (elsewhere in the New Testament only in Mark 3:5; Eph. 4:18) means “a covering with a callus, a hardening: metaph. of dulled spiritual perception” (AS).
113 ἄχρις οὗ “can be regarded strictly as prepositional = ἄχρις ἐχείνου χρόνου ἐν ᾧ” (IBNTG, p. 82). This adds to the point that the hardening is partial (vv. 5, 7, 17), the thought that it is temporary. It is limited in time as well as extent.
114 τὸ πλήρωμα τῶν ἐθνῶν.
115 So Murray, “blessing for the Gentiles that is parallel and similar to the expansion of blessing for Israel denoted by their ‘fulness’ (vs. 12) and the ‘receiving’ (vs. 15).”
116 οὕτως.
117 It is probably this that allows BDF to see the expression as Hebraizing with the meaning “the whole of Israel” (275 [4]).
118 Parry puts it this way, “The idea is that Israel as a nation will have its part fully in the consummated kingdom of Christ (cf. 1 Cor. xv.) and in this final reconciliation S. Paul sees the fulfilment of the promises. What fate awaits those Israelites who fell away, he does not consider … this question of the ultimate salvation of individuals is as completely ignored at this point, as it has been throughout these chapters.”
119 Thus James P. Martin argues that the expression all Israel will be saved “belongs to the language of faith and apocalyptic mystery, not the language of historical necessity” (Interpretation, XXV [1971], p. 307). Käsemann sees “the apocalyptic expectation of the restitution of Israel and the associated pilgrimage of the nations to Zion” (p. 312).
120 The quotation is mostly as LXX except that ἕνεχεν Σιών (“for the sake of Zion”) has become ἐχ Σιών (“out of Zion”), which may derive from Ps. 14:7 (LXX 13:7), 53:6 (LXX 52:7); MT has “to Zion”. Paul may also have in mind Jer. 31:34.
Lenski R. C. H. Lenski: The Interpretation of St. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans (Minneapolis, n.d.)
Parry R. St John Parry: The Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Romans (Cambridge, 1912)
121 ἀσέβεια means “godlessness, impiety, in thought and act” (BAGD).
122 ἡ παρʼ ἐμοῦ διαθήχη. Chamberlain thinks παρά is used here of authorship, “the covenant from me” (p. 126).
123 ὅταν, “whenever”.
124 ἀφαιρέω in LXX translates 35 words in all (AS), so that plainly it is not easy to tie down narrowly.
125 χατά here means “with reference to”, “in relation to”.
Käsemann Ernst Käsemann: Commentary on Romans (Grand Rapids, 1980)
126 ἀμεταμέλητος is found in the New Testament again only in 2 Cor. 7:10, and it does not occur in LXX. It means “not to be regretted, without regret” and hence “irrevocable”, used “of someth. one does not take back” (BAGD).
127 χαρίσματα, the term employed (mostly by Paul) of the special gifts of the Spirit (1 Cor. 12:4, 9, 28, etc.). But here it does not seem to be used of the gifts in the technical sense; rather, it is wide enough to cover all God’s good gifts of grace.
128 Barrett points out that there is no contradiction with 9:6–13: “The underlying truth which connects the two apparently contradictory lines of thought is that, for God, freedom is freedom to act in grace, and that since he is ever the same he never regrets or revokes the acts of grace which he performs”.
129 Cranfield sets these forth in Greek.
130 ποτέ.
131 ἠπειθήσατε. The verb means “disobey”, but for the Christians the worst disobedience was the refusal to believe; thus there is some reason to hold that it can mean “disbelieve” (see the note on 2:8). That meaning is possible here, but we should probably take it as “disobey”.
132 τῇ τούτων ἀπειθείᾳ, which is probably a dative of cause as in v. 20 (so BDF 196). Turner thinks it is temporal, “at the time of their disbelief” (M, III, p. 243), but this is less likely.
133 Barrett sees more than either temporality or instrumentality and says of these two verses, “In each case, behind disobedience and mercy, stands the same sovereign divine activity”; he further says, “For Jew and Gentile alike, the end of the road is God’s mercy; and for each the road leads through disobedience.”
134 τῷ ὑμετέρῳ ἐλέει precedes ἵνα. But words may precede ἵνα and thus receive emphasis, as in 2 Cor. 2:4; Gal. 2:10. It seems that that is the way we should take the sentence here.
MSS Manuscripts
135 It is read by א B Dgr* boh etc. but is not found in P46vid Ab.c G etc. The decision is not easy, but the word should probably be read. A scribe would more likely omit it than insert it.
Barth Karl Barth: The Epistle to the Romans (Oxford, 1933)
136 συγχλείω means “shut together, enclose, shut in on all sides” (AS). It is used, e.g., of catching fish in a net (Luke 5:6) and of people confined to certain consequences (Ps. 31:8; 78:50; LXX 30:9; 77:50). Denney holds that σύν means “together” rather than “on all sides”, while Lenski takes the reverse position. Chamberlain sees it as perfective (p. 146). Such arguments are inconclusive, but usage indicates that we should think of something like imprisonment (cf. GNB, “prisoners of disobedience”). Michel remarks, “Paul seems quite clearly to have the figure of prison before him” (TDNT, VII, p. 746). Turner sees εἰς as causal and translates “because of disobedience” (M, III, p. 266).
137 τοὺς πάντας. τὰ πάντα has interesting, but perhaps not decisive attestation (principally P46vid D*); Cranfield thinks there may be assimilation to Gal. 3:22. The article should not be overlooked.
138 Cf. A. Schweitzer, “by ‘all’ is meant nothing more nor less than all the Elect” (The Mysticism of Paul the Apostle [New York, 1931], p. 185).
139 Cf. O’Neill, “God leaves no one outside his love and care and eventually all—or all who believe in one God—will be saved (11:25–32)”; he later says, the meaning is “God’s mercy would extend to all the Gentile members of the Church and all Jews.” Dodd says, “Whether or not … Paul himself drew the ‘universalist’ conclusion, it seems that we must draw it from his premisses.”
140 ἵνα means “in order that”.
141 Barclay finds back of all this “a philosophy of history. To Paul, God was in control. There was nothing which moved with aimless feet.” Scott concludes his treatment of this part of the letter this way: “Paul thus speaks the final word on what must always be the most baffling of all problems. He did not in some wilful mood invent the harsh doctrine of predestination, which now, in our more enlightened day, we can set aside. He was confronted with a fact, which we may call by various names, but which forces itself upon us in ever more terrible forms as we understand more of that mechanism of necessity in which man’s earthly life is involved. Questions arise to which there can be no other answer than this one which is offered by Paul. The ways of God are inscrutable, but we can trust His purpose, and since He is God, whose will is revealed to us in Christ, His purpose must be one of love” (p. 65).
a 33 Or riches and the wisdom and the
b 34 Isaiah 40:13
c 35 Job 41:11
142 ὤ here introduces an exclamation (ὤ) rather than an address (ὦ; Paul is not addressing the depth), the only place in the New Testament where the term is used in this way. It “leads up to the rhetorical questions in the quotation vv. 34f., and ends in the solemn ascription v. 36, introduces an act of adoration, thus excluding the possibility that an abstract quantity is being addressed” (BDF 146[2]).
143 Depth is used in Prov. 18:3 (βάθος χαχῶν) of “troubles to which there is no bottom”. Philo refers to “the depths of knowledge”(On the Posterity and Exile of Cain 130), another metaphorical usage. Clearly the term conveys the idea of impressive magnitude.
144 Trench notes that there have been “various attempts to divide to each its own proper sphere of meaning.” Though differing, they “have this in common, that in all σοφία is recognized as expressing the highest and noblest” (Synonyms, p. 281).
145 ἀνεξεραύνητος, here only in the New Testament, derives from alpha-privative, the preposition ἐχ, and ἐραυνάω, “that cannot be searched out”, “unsearchable”. ἀνεξιχνίαστος (again in the New Testament only in Eph. 3:8) similarly reflects alpha-privative, the preposition ἐξ, and ἴχνος, “a track”, “a footstep”, and thus points to what cannot be tracked. “The first of these terms describes something that cannot be found by searching for it, while the other suggests footprints that cannot be tracked down” (TH). The combination points to the complete impossibility of any of the human race penetrating the mind of God.
Brown John Brown: Analytical Exposition of the Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Romans (Grand Rapids, 1981 repr. of 1857 edn.)
146 σύμβουλος, here only in the New Testament.
147 This is one of the passages in which LXX has apparently misunderstood the Hebrew (or read a different text). Paul cites the words in a form closer to the Hebrew than is LXX; he may have made his own translation.
Manson T. W. Manson: “Romans” in Peake’s Commentary on the Bible, ed. Matthew Black and H. H. Rowley (London, 1980)
148 The verb προδίδωμι is found here only in the New Testament (but see Mark 14:10). Its meaning here is “give before”, “give in advance”.
149 Many commentators point out resemblances between these words and statements made by Hellenistic writers and think Paul has picked the expression up from one of them. We should bear in mind Barth’s point that Paul is “so much more original” than the postulated source. He says, “Whatever the truth may be about the method of his borrowing, Paul could not have provided the chapter with a more appropriate conclusion.”
150 τὰ πάντα.
151 εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας.
SH William Sanday and Arthur C. Headlam: A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans (Edinburgh, 1907)
Achtemeier Paul J. Achtemeier: Romans (Atlanta, 1985)
1 Foreman points out that Paul had not been to Rome and goes on, “But he knew that in Rome Christians met the same essential problems which they meet everywhere. That is one reason this chapter 12 appeals so strongly to all Christians; just because it is general it speaks to all sorts and conditions of men.”
2 οὖν. Curiously O’Neill says that the conjunction “is certainly not an indication that the saying follows on logically from the previous chapter”. But this is an isolated opinion. There is a similar οὖν in Eph. 4:1; Col. 3:1; 1 Thess. 4:1, and a similar break in Gal. 5:1; 2 Thess. 3:6.
3 παραχαλῶ.
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)
NEB The New English Bible
4 Griffith Thomas, arguing for “beseech”, says, “It is noteworthy that not once in the writings of St Paul do we find him ‘commanding’ his converts.” This will scarcely stand up, for Paul does issue commands; Meinert H. Grumm finds “about thirty-five” of them in this section of the epistle, though only five in chs. 1–11. Grumm extends “imperative” a little, for he finds, e.g., 22 participles with imperatival force. But even so it is clear that Paul does issue commands. Grumm’s point is that Paul grounds “all his ‘guideline’ imperatives in the impelling indicative of who and what they are in Christ by the act of God” (ET, 93 [1981–82], pp. 239–42).
NIV New International Version
5 διὰ τῶν οἰχτιρμῶν τοῦ θεοῦ. διά with the genitive commonly denotes “means, instrument, agency”, but here BAGD class it “in urgent requests” and translate “by the mercy of God”. Moule says “the dividing line between ‘accompaniment’ and ‘instrumentality’ is thin”, and suggests “in God’s mercies’ name” (IBNTG, pp. 57, 58). BDF say “Idiomatically with urgent questions = ‘by’ ” (223 [4]) and Turner also sees the meaning as “by” (M, III, p. 267).
6 οἰχτιρμῶν. In the New Testament the word is in the plural in four of its five occurrences, which may be meant to express the thought of many acts of mercy or may be due to nothing more than assimilation to the Hebrew רַחֲמִים. Paul has it four times, but no more than once in any one epistle.
7 Cf. Barrett, “ ‘the mercies of God’ forms a not inadequate summary of what is contained in chs. i–xi, and especially in chs. ix–xi”.
8 παρίστημι. The aorist infinitive points to decisive action.
9 Does any other religion put such an emphasis on the body? Cf. NBCR, “The Christian view of the body as sacred and as the servant of the soul is unique among the religions of the world, Judaism excepted.” Certainly the Greeks of the first century stressed the importance of the soul and regarded the body lightly. We see something of the same attitude in modern times when the excuse is offered for someone who has sinned with his body: “But his heart is in the right place!”
Moffatt James Moffatt: The New Testament: A New Translation
10 εὐάρεστος is used by Paul in eight of its nine New Testament occurrences. It always refers to what is pleasing to God (except in Tit. 2:9). Luther comments here: “He says this by way of criticizing the vainglory and pride that commonly undermine the good. For just as envy doggedly pursues someone else’s happiness, so pride and vainglory dog one’s own.”
11 λογιχός (again in the New Testament only in 1 Pet. 2:2) derives from λόγος and frequently has the meaning “rational”, “reasonable”. But Michel points out that it was often used in Hellenistic literature for the spiritual thanksgiving that replaced animal sacrifices. Bruce holds that there is a contrast here with “the externalities of Israel’s temple cult.” λατρεία may mean either “service” or “worship”; both are appropriate in response to the deity. It may be distinguished from δουλεία in that it is voluntary.
Phillips J. B. Phillips: Letters to Young Churches (Melbourne, 1952)
Leenhardt Franz J. Leenhardt: The Epistle to the Romans (London, 1961)
12 On the accusative case Moule comments, “When a word or phrase is flung loosely into apposition with a whole sentence it is (or, where the form is ambiguous, may be assumed to be) in the Accusative” (IBNTG, pp. 35–36).
13 Conform renders συσχηματίζεσθε and be transformed μεταμορφοῦσθε. The former is said to concern the σχῆμα, the outward form, and μορφή the essential being. Harrisville sees the difference this way: “ ‘Conform’ refers to a posture or attitude which may be changed at will, whereas ‘form’ at the heart of ‘transformed’ refers to what grows out of necessity from an inward condition.” Käsemann puts it neatly: “συσχηματίζεσθε is the adaptation while μεταμορφοῦσθαι … is the transformation” (p. 329). There is some textual evidence for the infinitive rather than the imperative, but both the MS evidence and the sense of the passage favor the imperative.
14 The strong adversative ἀλλά points to a real contrast.
Barrett C. K. Barrett: A Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans (London,1957)
15 αἰών. Parry comments on τῷ αἰῶνι τούτῳ, “The phrase always implies contrast to ὁ αἰὼν ὁ μέλλων, even when the latter is not expressed” (CGT). It is the present age in contrast with that to come.
16 Cf. J. Behm, “Redeemed by Christ, Christians no longer stand in this aeon but in the coming aeon (Gl. 1:4). In conduct, then, they must not follow the forms of life in this aeon but the very different form of life in the coming aeon” (TDNT, IV, p. 759).
17 ἀναχαίνωσις is “not quotable outside Christian lit.” (BAGD). In the New Testament it occurs again only in Tit. 3:5, referring to “the renewal of the Holy Spirit”. It may be significant that the word relates to χαινός rather than νέος. AS speaks of νέος as “the new primarily in reference to time, the young, recent; κ … the new primarily in reference to quality, the fresh, unworn“. Moule takes the dative as instrumental (IBNTG, p. 44).
18 Cf. J. Behm, νοῦς “expresses the inner orientation or moral attitude, whether of the natural man or of the Christian…. In the νοῦς of Christians, i.e., in the inner direction of their thought and will and the orientation of their moral consciousness, there should be constant renewal, R. 12:2“ (TDNT, IV, p. 958).
19 Parry contrasts the early Christians with their contemporaries: “The youthful joy and vigour of Christians was the constant wonder of observers. The word brings out vividly the contrast with the prevailing pessimism of contemporary thought. The effect of the Spirit is fresh vitality and a true direction of the mind” (CGT).
Cranfield C. E. B. Cranfield: A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans (Edinburgh, I [1975]; II [1979])
Lenski R. C. H. Lenski: The Interpretation of St. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans (Minneapolis, n.d.)
20 εἰς τό with infinitive; for this construction see the note on 1:20.
21 δοχιμάζω means first “test“, “prove“, but then “approve as a result of testing”.
22 τὸ θέλημα τοῦ θεοῦ, τὸ ἀγαθὸν χαὶ εὐάρεστον χαὶ τέλειον. It is better to see the three adjectives as forming an appositional expression than as directly qualifying θέλημα.
Nygren Anders Nygren: Commentary on Romans (London, 1952)
23 Cranfield reminds us that it does not necessarily mean “something manageable and achievable”.
Brown John Brown: Analytical Exposition of the Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Romans (Grand Rapids, 1981 repr. of 1857 edn.)
24 Cf. Hunter, “N.B. There is nothing ‘official’ here: all ministry is a function of membership in the Body, and each Christian has the function of ministry in some degree.”
25 γάρ links this to the preceding section as its consequence.
26 BAGD note the use of λέγω with dative of person and with a following infinitive in the sense “order, command, direct, enjoin, recommend more or less emphatically” (II.1.c).
27 διά is used in a different sense from that in v. 1, though we may still translate “by”: the meaning here is “by virtue of” (BDF 223[4]). The aorist δοθείσης seems to point to a definite, decisive gift rather than the continuing manifestation (though that, too, is a reality).
28 ὑπερφρονεῖν... φρονεῖν... φρονεῖν... σωφρονεῖν, “which might almost be called flowery” (BDF 488 [1b]).
29 Actually he says something a little stronger; it is more highly than one must (δεῖ). Paul sees humility not merely as desirable but as necessary for the true Christian. Shedd points out that “The pagan ethic is vitiated, even in its best form as seen in the Platonic philosophy, and still more in the Stoic, by egotism, or the disposition ὑπερφρονεῖν παρʼ ὃ δεῖ φρονεῖν. ”
30 εἰς τὸ σωφρονεῖν, where εἰς τό may be used to convey the idea of purpose (M, III, p. 143) or of result (MT, 411). Moule says, “perhaps to adopt an outlook which tends to sobriety” (IBNTG, p. 70). σωφρονέω means “be of sound mind”, which may refer to mental health (Mark 5:15) or to being sensible. U. Luck says that here Paul “is using the term in its classical sense: ‘to observe the proper measure,’ ‘not to transgress the set laws‘…. But Paul defines this measure as the μέτρον πίστεως which God gives and which is exhibited in integration into the community and concrete service within it” (TDNT, VII, p. 1102).
31 μέτρον means a measuring instrument or standard, not a measured quantity as many translations have it. Cranfield has a detailed examination of this passage (NTS, VIII [1961–62], pp. 345–51). He concludes that it means “a standard (by which to measure himself), namely (his) Christian faith” (p. 351).
32 χαθάπερ. See the note on 4:6.
33 πρᾶξις, from πράσσω = “do”. Paul uses the word three times (it is the word used in the title of the “The Acts of the Apostles”).
34 οὕτως.
GNB Good News Bible (Today’s English Version)
35 “The meaning of ‘we are one body in Christ’ appears to be that Christians owe their organic unity with one another to the fact that they are ‘in Christ’—incorporated in him. Thus, it is not, strictly speaking, that Christ is here identified with the body. Rather, Paul is saying that, if the congregation finds itself to be an organic unity like a well-coordinated living body, this is because of its connexion with Christ” (C. F. D. Moule, The Origin of Christology [Cambridge, 1977], p. 72).
36 τὸ δὲ χαθʼ εἷς is a curious expression. τὸ δέ (not ὁ δέ) “may be taken as an adverbial phrase: relatively to, or better, as a pronoun, in the sense: “and that, as members of of one another” (Godet). χατά appears to be an adverb rather than a preposition governing the nominative εἷς. It may be that χαθʼ εἷς comes from the distributive use of χατά and that the expression χαθʼ ἕνα ἕχαστον became fixed as χαθένα ἕχαστον, from which a corresponding nominative developed. “Yet not many examples of this vulgarism are found in the N.T.” (BDF 305; they give the meaning as “individually, with relation to each individual”). On the similar expression in Mark 14:10 Moule asks, “Is (this) an adverbial use, or sheer bad grammar?” (IBNTG, p. 60). See also M, I, p. 105; III, p. 198.
37 Käsemann makes the further point that “The gift is a charisma only as service to the brother” (p. 339).
38 This is supported (though not proved) by the use of δέ, which may well be the transition to a new sentence (so SH, Shedd).
RSV The Revised Standard Version
39 The word χάρισμα is used in Paul in 16 of its 17 New Testament occurrences. It is “a rare and late word” (H. Conzelmann, TDNT, IX, p. 402), and Paul may well have been the first to use it in the sense of the special gifts the Spirit gave to the church. See further the note on 1:11.
40 διάφορος can have the meaning “excelling, excellent”, but here it has rather the primary meaning of “different”.
41 The aorist δοθεῖσαν properly signifies a gift made at a point of time, perhaps at conversion.
42 εἴτε... εἴτε, “if … if”, or “whether … or”, is used by Paul without a verb again in 1 Cor. 3:22; 2 Cor. 5:10, etc. BDF see the sense of it as much the same as χαὶ... χαί (454 [3]).
43 Goodspeed translates “preaching”, but the term seems to mean more than that. Wilckens suggests “the gift of inspired preaching”, and alluding to 1 Cor. 14:3 he sees it as οἰχοδομή, παράχλησις, and παραμυθία.
44 Cf. Cranfield, “These verses indicate the unselfconscious, business-like, sober way in which Christians who do measure themselves by the standard which God has given them in their faith will give themselves to the fulfilment of the tasks apportioned to them by the χαρίσματα they have received”.
45 ἀναλογία, here only in the New Testament, means primarily “mathematical proportion” (LSJ). G. Kittel sees ἀνάλογος as “corresponding to λόγος.… Hence ἀναλογία, the ‘correspondence of a right relationship’ or ‘proportion’ ” (TDNT, I, p. 347).
Käsemann Ernst Käsemann: Commentary on Romans (Grand Rapids, 1980)
46 διαχονία was originally the service of a table waiter, but came to mean lowly service of any kind.
JB The Jerusalem Bible
47 Paul changes his construction from the nouns “prophecy” and “serving” to the participle “the teaching one”, “he who teaches”. SH suggest that “teaching” might refer to the one receiving instruction; the change in construction removes ambiguity.
48 ὁ παραχαλῶν.
Calvin John Calvin: The Epistles of Paul the Apostle to the Romans and to the Thessalonians (Edinburgh, 1961)
49 ἐν ἁπλότητι, where the noun means “singleness”, “simplicity”. Cranfield approves the view of Althaus, “the simplicity, which without ulterior motives is wholly directed toward the other person’s need”. Notice that from this point on the nouns following the participles lack the article “in a perhaps adverbial use” (IBNTG, p. 114).
50 ὁ προϊστάμενος, a verb which is used of leadership of many kinds.
51 RSV has “he who gives aid”, but this is surely the wrong sense.
52 σπουδή has the meanings “1. haste, 2. zeal, diligence, earnestness” (so AS). “Haste” is not suitable here, but any of the other meanings is possible.
53 The verb ἐλεέω occurs nine times in Romans, the most in any one book in the New Testament. Paul uses it 14 times altogether.
54 ἐν ἱλαρότητι, a noun found here only in the New Testament. We get our word “hilarity” from it.
55 Käsemann denies that vv. 9–21 should be “put under the theme of love” (p. 343); he thinks that rather “the manifold charismatic ministry of Christians is also described in vv. 9–21” (p. 344). This is an interesting view, but he fails to substantiate it. In contrast to the preceding nouns, ἀγάπη and the following nouns have the definite article “as virtues assumed to be well known” (BDF 258[1]). Moule detects “a remarkable series of articles” in vv. 10–13, but compares Heb. 12:18–24 for “an equally striking series of omissions” (IBNTG, p. 114).
56 For a fuller treatment of the Christian view of love may I refer to my Testaments of Love (Grand Rapids, 1981).
57 ἀνυπόχριτος. The word is used of love again in 2 Cor. 6:6, of brotherly love in 1 Pet. 1:22, of faith in 1 Tim. 1:5; 2 Tim. 1:5, and of wisdom in Jas. 3:17. Wilckens says, “In the NT ἀνυπόχριτος is a fixed attribute of ἀγάπη in the hortatory tradition of Hellenistic Christianity” (TDNT, VIII, p. 570). The word is not found often before the New Testament, and it appears very rarely in profane writers.
58 It is perhaps worth noticing that Ignatius, writing to the Roman church early in the second century, greeted the Romans as “preeminent in love”; the seed Paul sowed fell into good ground.
59 Moulton speaks of the papyri as establishing “beyond question” the use of the participle among “substitutes for imperative”; he sees us as “absolved from inventing an anacolouthon, or some other grammatical device when we come to such a passage as Rom. 12:9–19” (M, I, p. 180). Moule also takes the construction as an imperative use of the participle and regards the construction as Semitic (IBNTG, p. 179). So also BDF, “Paul considered the descriptive ptcp. to be the equivalent of the impera.” (468 [2]). Turner, however, says, “as ἐστέ (imperat.) never occurs in NT we must presume that it is understood as a copula with all these ptcs., which therefore do not constitute an anacolouthon” (M, III, p. 343). Robertson affirms that “the participle in itself is never imperative or indicative” (p. 1133). In view of Semitic usage, however, it seems that we should regard this as an imperative construction. In vv. 10–21 Parry notes “the remarkable coordination of participles, adjectives, infinitives (15), and imperatives. All should be translated by the imperative…. The participles are all durative in action, implying habits” (CGT).
60 ἀποστυγοῦντες. Chrysostom points out that the ἀπό is intensive, and SH comment, “the word expresses a strong feeling of horror; the ἀπο- by farther emphasizing the idea of separation gives an intensive force, which is heightened by contrast with χολλώμενοι. ”
61 χολλάω.
62 φιλαδελφία. This is the first of nine datives, each of which comes first in its clause with some emphasis, and has a meaning like “as regards”, “with respect to“.
TDNT Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, a translation by Geoffrey W. Bromiley of Theologisches Wörterbuch zum Neuen Testament (Grand Rapids, 1964–76)
63 “There are no examples of this more general use of φιλαδελφία and φιλάδελφος outside Christian writings”(H. F. von Soden, TDNT, I, p. 146). In other writings it refers to the love of physical brothers and sisters.
64 φιλόστοργοι. The word is a compound of φιλο-, “love”, and στοργή, “natural affection”, “family love”. It means the love that unites members of a family. It occurs here only in the New Testament.
65 It would be possible to understand ἐστέ here, but Moule notes “how simple adjectives are sometimes imperativally used”. He cites Ignatius Eph. 10:2 as well as Rom. 12:10, 11, and proceeds, “This is a usage closely akin to the use of the participle just illustrated” (IBNTG, p. 180). He thinks this may be a Semitism.
66 προηγέομαι means “go before and show the way τινός (to) someone”; the versions have the meaning “try to outdo one another in showing respect”, while another possibility is “as far as honor is concerned, let each one esteem the other more highly than himself” (BAGD). The difficulty is that while the first meaning suits the context here, the case is accusative, not genitive, whereas “esteeming the other more highly” is a meaning that does not seem well attested. BDF include the verb among those which “otherwise intransitive may be rendered transitive by a preposition in composition”; they see the meaning as “ ‘preferring’ (not ‘outdoing’)” (150).
TH Barclay M. Newman and Eugene A. Nida: A Translator’s Handbook on Paul’s Letter to the Romans (New York, 1973)
67 Hendriksen finds grounds for humility in the fact that “A Christian knows that his own motives are not always pure and holy (I Cor. 11:28, 31).” He goes on, “This is a kind of knowledge which at times causes him to utter the prayer, ‘O Lord, forgive my good deeds.’ On the other hand, the Christian has no right to regard as evil the motives of his brothers and sisters in the Lord.” The only other place in the New Testament where the word occurs is in several MSS of Phil. 2:3 where again Paul is counselling humility and esteem for fellow believers.
a Or willing to do menial work
68 σπουδή. We see haste in its use in Luke 1:39, diligence in v. 8 (where see note). Here G. Harder says, “What is meant is the ‘holy zeal’ which demands full dedication to serving the community” (TDNT, VII, p. 566).
69 The negative is μή, not οὐ. Moule compares a construction of which he says, “it is virtually participial since μὴ ὀντα χ.τ.λ. would give the meaning” (IBNTG, p. 156). Robertson comments, “in Ro. 12:11 μὴ ὀχνηροί is in the midst of participles used in an imperatival sense” (p. 1172).
70 The verb ζέω means “to boil”, though Oepke regards this as a secondary meaning, the basic sense being “to well up,” “to bubble”. Oepke also says, “The combination τῷ πνεύματι ζέειν seems to be peculiar to the NT and was perhaps coined by Paul.” He sees here the meaning “that it is their duty fully to develop their energy as Christians. In the first instance this is human energy. But then attention is drawn to the impelling power of God, i.e., to the Spirit” (TDNT, II, p. 876). The expression is used of Apollos (Acts 18:25).
71 δουλεύοντες.
72 Most MSS read χυρίῳ (as P46 א A B Db.c) but some have χαιρῷ (D* F G Or). There is no doubt that the weight of MSS evidence favors the first reading, but the second has transcriptional probability (why would a scribe alter “the Lord” to “the time”?), and some accept it as the more difficult reading. Its attestation is chiefly Western and seems insufficient to outweigh that of the other MSS.
Barclay William Barclay: The Letter to the Romans (Edinburgh, 1957)
73 Though Barth says it is “insipid” and regards it as “a quite intolerable generalization.” Luther accepts “serving the Lord” and acutely points out that people can be very busy in what they consider as a good work but “not ready to do whatever God wills unless they can choose what it shall be … among people of this kind there must also be numbered the princes who are constantly in church and the higher clergy who cannot absent themselves from court.”
74 BDF see the dative as meaning “ ‘by virtue of hope, in hope’, not ‘over hope’ ” (196).
75 ὑπομένω has the meaning “remain instead of fleeing … stand one’s ground, hold out, endure in trouble, affliction, persecution” (BAGD). This is Paul’s one use of the verb in Romans (he has it four times altogether). He uses the corresponding noun often (16 times out of 32 in the New Testament).
76 He uses προσευχή 14 times out of its 36 New Testament occurrences (three in Romans).
77 προσχαρτεροῦντες. It can mean “busy oneself with, be busily engaged in, be devoted to” (BAGD). It points to persistence in prayer, not the offering of an occasional petition.
Denney James Denney: "St. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans" in The Expositor’s Greek Testament, II (Grand Rapids, 1979 repr.)
78 Most MSS read χρείαις, but μνείαις is found in D* F G. This is usually taken as a variant that arose at a time subsequent to New Testament days when the invocation of the saints came into vogue in some places.
79 χοινωνέω means “1. share, have a share…. 2. give or contribute a share” (BAGD). This looks like an example of 2, but the lexicon classes it under a subdivision of 1: “Participation in someth. can reach such a degree that one claims a part in it for oneself, take an interest in, share”.
80 διώχω has meanings like “pursue”, “persecute”. It certainly is a strong term and one that looks for the expenditure of considerable effort in being hospitable. The accusative φιλοξενίαν after the verb replaces the datives that Paul has used so extensively up to this point.
81 Cf. Calvin, “Although there is hardly any who has made such advance in the law of the Lord that he fulfils this precept, no one can boast that he is a child of God, or glory in the name of a Christian, who has not partially undertaken this course, and does not struggle daily to resist the will to do the opposite.”
Moulton says that the infinitive used as an imperative “was familiar in Greek, especially in laws and in maxims.” He finds it in the papyri, and “We have therefore every reason to expect it in the NT, and its rarity there is the only matter for surprise” (M, I, pp. 179, 180). He finds an English parallel in the hymn
So now to watch, to work, to war,
And then to rest for ever! (ibid., p. 203).
BDF say, “The imperatival infinitive is extremely old and is especially common in Homer”, less frequent in Attic. They think a governing verb (of saying or χρή or δεῖ) can readily be supplied (389). Turner also thinks that such a verb “may perhaps be assumed” (M, III, p. 78), but Moule says, “At least a few passages in the N.T. exhibit Infinitives so independent of any verb of commanding or the like that one can only class them as Infinitives used in an imperatival sense” (IBNTG, p. 126).
83 David Daube thinks that Paul here is probably “dealing with relations between Christians and outsiders” (The New Testament and Rabbinic Judaism [London, 1956], p. 341). It seems more likely that Paul is applying this first of all to relations among Christians, though a further application to outsiders is not unlikely.
84 τὸ αὐτὸ εἰς ἀλλήλους φρονοῦντες (cf. 15:5; 2 Cor. 13:11; Phil. 2:2; 4:2). The present participle will point to the habitual bent.
85 μὴ τὰ ὑψηλὰ φρονοῦντες. ὑψηλός may be used of what is physically high, such as a mountain (Matt. 4:8), or of what is proud (11:20). BAGD give the meaning here as “strive after things that are (too) high, be too ambitious”.
86 ἀλλά is the strong adversative.
87 τοῖς ταπεινοῖς might be masculine or neuter. The adjective has meanings like “low: 1. of place low-lying … 2. of persons, humbled, abased in power … 3. of the spirits, downcast, dejected … 4. in moral sense, either bad, mean, base, abject … or good, lowly, humble [most examples are from the New Testament] … 5. of things, mean, low, poor” (LSJ). It is clear that the word was habitually used of unattractive qualities. It is another example of a term that Christianity ennobled, as it saw humility as a virtue. See further Turner, Christian Words, pp. 216–18.
88 Cf. Barrett, “it is impossible to feel confident that either translation is correct to the exclusion of the other. It is well to remember that Greek occasionally allows an ambiguity impossible in English; Paul may have been aware, and may have approved, of both ways of taking his words.”
89 συναπαγόμενοι.
90 φρόνιμος means “sensible”, “wise”, and this use of παρά is classed by BAGD under the heading “in the sight or judgment of someone”. Moule says the commonest use of παρά with the dative is the metaphorical sense “in the sight of”, here “wise in their own eyes” (IBNTG, p. 52). Cf. Prov. 3:7.
a 19 Deut. 32:35
b 20 Prov. 25:21, 22
91 μηδενί.
92 ἀποδίδωμι and ἀντί. Paul uses this verb eight times (out of 47 in the New Testament) and the preposition five times (out of 22), so neither can be said to be a favorite term.
93 προνοέω. Leenhardt thinks it “suggests foresight, providential careful thought; thought which precedes and controls action. Cf. 1 Tim. 5:8.”
94 χαλά. The word “properly refers to goodliness as manifested in form” (AS sub ἀγαθός); it is “the outward expression of an inward goodness” (Wuest).
95 Bengel brings this out: “A precious stone should not merely be a precious stone, but it should also be properly set in a ring, so that its splendour may meet the eye.”
96 Cf. Cranfield, “Christians are to take thought for, aim at, seek, in the sight of all men those things which (whether they recognize it or not) are good, the arbiter of what is good being not a moral communis sensus of mankind, but the gospel.”
97 Tertullian speaks of the heathen as saying, “A good man is Gaius Seius, only that he is a Christian” (Apol. iii). That is the kind of thing at which Paul is aiming.
98 For εἰ δυνατόν cf. Matt. 24:24; Mark 14:35; Acts 20:16; Gal. 4:15, etc.
99 τὸ ἐξ ὑμῶν. Moule sees this as an accusative of respect or reference “denoting that in respect of which some statement is made”, here “for your part, so far as it is in your power” (IBNTG, pp. 33–34; he also includes this among “striking and idiomatic” uses of nouns or neuter adjectives “employed as adverbs” [p. 160]).
100 Cf. Calvin, “We are not to strive to attain the favour of men in such a way that we refuse to incur the hatred of any for the sake of Christ, as often as this may be necessary…. The soldiers of Christ cannot have lasting peace with the world, which is ruled by Satan.”
101 Cf. Hodge, “Paul’s own example shows that he was far from thinking that either truth or principle was to be sacrificed for the preservation of peace.”
102 ἐχδιχέω means “to avenge”; there is the implication that a wrong has been done for which vengeance is now exacted.
103 Cragg comments that if we do try to take the law into our own hands, “We are inept bunglers in a region where we do not belong”.
CBSC The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
104 ἀλλά.
105 δότε τόπον, where δότε is the one aorist imperative in this list (cf. Eph. 4:27). Leenhardt gives the meaning as “give scope for an action by leaving the field free.”
M, J. H. Moulton: III, Syntax, by Nigel Turner (Edinburgh, 1963)
SBk H. L. Strack and P. Billerbeck: Kommentar zum Neuen Testament aus Talmud und Midrasch, 4 vols. (München, 1922–28)
106 G. Schrenk thinks of “a Gk. transl. not identical with the LXX” (TDNT, II, p. 446 n. 4). We may perhaps not be correct in speaking of “the” LXX. May there not have been a number of translations of which our LXX is for the most part the only one to have survived?
107 It translates ἀλλά, the strong adversative. This should probably be read (with א A B P etc.), though some MSS have ἐὰν οὖν, and some simply ἐάν.
108 ψωμίζω connects with ψωμίον, “a morsel”, and means “feed by putting little bits into the mouth, as nurses do to children” (LSJ). But clearly here there is no question of the manner in which food is given; it is simply a matter of feeding a hungry foe.
109 C. Spicq thinks that in Prov. 25 by heaping coals of fire “you will increase his culpability. In the Old Testament, live coals are invariably a symbol of divine anger, of punishment for the wicked, or of an evil passion. It would be very strange if St. Paul were to use the phrase in a favorable sense. Moreover, all the Greek fathers, as well as Estius, taking into consideration the way the words are ordinarily used, their context here, and their relation to ‘vengeance’ in verse 19, understand that kindnesses poured out on an enemy are so many glowing coals heaped over him, so many titles to divine punishment” (Agape in the New Testament, II [St. Louis and London, 1965], p. 208). Cf. Haldane, “The conduct recommended will have the effect of increasing the punishment of the enemies of God’s people”. Chrysostom is cited for this view.
110 V. P. Furnish draws attention to a number of writers including K. Stendahl who think that Paul, like the men of Qumran, sees leaving vengeance to God as a covert way of expressing hatred for one’s enemies. Furnish dissents, pointing out that these exhortations “stand under the general one to ‘let love be genuine,’ and the immediately preceding counsels (vss. 14–18) are clearly intended to show how love should treat outsiders and enemies” (The Love Command in the New Testament [Nashville and New York, 1972], p. 108).
111 NTS, IX (1962–63), p. 349.
112 μὴ νιχῶ. The negated present may be understood to mean “Stop being overcome”, but this should probably not be pressed. Turner classes it as a “Perfective Present” and says, “class. be a conqueror” (M, III, p. 62). His verb is in the singular, whereas he has mostly used the plural in this section. The singular will arise partly because it is used in the quotation and partly because it individualizes what Paul is saying. Each must take it as personal.
113 It is possible to take τοῦ χαχοῦ as masculine, “the evil one” (so Spencer Robertson, ET, LX [1948–49], p. 322). In either case Paul is urging the defeat of wrong.
114 Cf. Luther, “Men commonly regard as the victor the one who has the last word and can deal the last blow, whereas, as a matter of fact, he who is the last to inflict pain is the one who is worse off, for the evil remains with him while the other is done with it.” Boylan comments, “Evil only grows through being requited.”
[2]Morris, L. (1988). The Epistle to the Romans (431). Grand Rapids, Mich.; Leicester, England: W.B. Eerdmans; Inter-Varsity Press.
1 O’Neill says of the passage: “These seven verses have caused more unhappiness and misery in the Christian East and West than any other seven verses in the New Testament.” James Kallas is not so severe, but he finds the passage alien to the thought of Paul and argues that it is an interpolation (NTS, XI [1964–65], pp. 365–74).
Käsemann Ernst Käsemann: Commentary on Romans (Grand Rapids, 1980)
2 This attitude persisted, and we see something of it in Wis. 6:1–5, though that passage concerns the duties of rulers rather than those of subjects.
3 Marcus Borg argues along these lines (NTS, XIX [1972–73], pp. 205–18). He says of this passage that “it not only fits into its immediate context, but that it also has an intimate connection to Romans as a whole” (p. 214).
4 A. Schweitzer finds no parallel to these verses except among “the great Stoic Emperors, who felt themselves to be truly the servants of the State for the realisation of good” (The Mysticism of Paul the Apostle [New York, 1931], p. 315). These emperors, of course, were later and viewed the matter from the perspective of the ruler. “But from the point of view of the subject this ethical valuation of rulership was expressed by no other writer of antiquity, except the Jew, Paul. Neither Socrates, Plato, nor Aristotle carry the idea of obedience to authority so far. Not even Reitzenstein can discover any parallels in Hellenistic literature to Rom xiii.1–7” (ibid.).
5 Haldane argues that the passage demands unconditional obedience; rebellion is not lawful (p. 585). But Hunter seems closer to the mark when he says, “what Paul condemns in these verses is rebellion in the name of Christian freedom.”
6 This is clear in the Old Testament also. The king was “the Lord’s anointed” and as such to be treated with respect (1 Sam. 24:6 etc.). But the prophet Ahijah, speaking in the name of God, said that the bulk of the kingdom would be taken away from Rehoboam and given to the rebel Jeroboam (1 Kings 11:29–31).
7 Geoffrey W. Bromiley points out that civil authorities are “means by which God exercises his authority. Outside the sphere of revelation, rulers have only an indistinct and perverted apprehension of this truth. They thus tend to think in terms of absolute or inherent power or to confuse divine authorization with a transferred right to do all things at will. This can raise acute problems for the Church and can produce the clash of authority that brings tension, persecution, or compromise. Even where rulers are Christians and know clearly the source of their authority, they may still fail to see that this authority can be properly exercised only according to the Word of God and within the sovereign authority that God always reserves to himself” (W. Ward Gasque and William Sanford LaSor, eds., Scripture, Tradition, and Interpretation [Grand Rapids, 1978], p. 25).
8 See the detailed criticisms in Murray, Appendix C (pp. 252ff.), and Hendriksen, pp. 430–31.
NIV New International Version
9 πᾶσα allows of no exceptions. ψυχή is used by Paul 13 times out of its 101 occurrences, so it cannot be said to be a favorite word of his. It means “soul” but is sometimes used in the sense “living creature” as here.
10 ἐξουσίαις. This word first of all means “authority”, from which it easily comes to mean those who exercise authority. In the plural it often refers to “spirit authorities”, spirits exercising power in heavenly places (Eph. 3:10; 6:12; Col. 1:13, 16), but it is not easy to see the singular here as having that meaning. Cf. Morison, “The linguistic aspect of the problem illustrates the general frustration of the argument. The strong point of the affirmative, that the plural of exousia is consistently used by Paul to indicate the spiritual powers, is countered by the negative observation that everywhere except in Romans 13 the context supports the spiritual interpretation of the word. In Romans 13, however, the word appears to be defined by its singular meaning in a context which has to do only with civil government” (The Powers That Be, p. 57). Josephus uses the plural of the Roman authorities in Judea (Bell. ii.350).
11 ὑπερέχω is literally “to have over”, “to rise above”, sometimes “to excel”. Turner cites this as an example of the Hellenistic use of a transitive verb in an intransitive sense (M, III, p. 52). It may be used of “the higher ones”, i.e., the authorities (BAGD). NEB translates “the supreme authorities”, but the word does not mean “supreme”. “The higher authorities” is the meaning.
GNB Good News Bible (Today’s English Version)
12 The verb is ὑποτάσσω, which Paul uses 23 times out of its 38 New Testament occurrences. BAGD give the meaning as “subject, subordinate”. There may be occasions when this comes close to “obey”, but in the New Testament that idea is expressed by ὑπαχούω, πειθαρχέω, or πείθομαι; there seems no reason why ὑποτάσσω should be used for this significance.
13 Calvin well comments that even kings and governors “rule that they may serve” (on Gal. 5:21).
Wilson Geoffrey B. Wilson: Romans (Edinburgh, 1976)
14 With αἱ δὲ οὖσαι we must understand ἐξουσίαι, “the existent powers”, “the authorities that are”.
15 The perfect τεταγμέναι adds a touch of permanence. The state is to be marked by stability.
16 Cf. Bruce, “the state not only may but must be resisted when it demands the allegiance due to God alone” (on v. 2).
17 ὥστε is followed here by the indicative, a construction found three times in Matthew, twice in Mark, once in John, and 15 times in Paul (three in Romans, three in 1 Corinthians, and five in Galatians). It is thus much more typical of Paul than of the other writers. Moule lists this among “certain contexts” where ὥστε is “simply an inferential particle as if ὥς τε, meaning and so, accordingly, etc.” (IBNTG, p. 144).
TH Barclay M. Newman and Eugene A. Nida: A Translator’s Handbook on Paul’s Letter to the Romans (New York, 1973)
NEB The New English Bible
18 ἀντιτάσσω is the opposite of ὑποτάσσω in v. 1; over against “be in subjection” it sets the idea of “oppose, resist”. This is Paul’s one use of the verb. ἀνθίστημι, “to set against”, in the New Testament always has the middle sense, “to set oneself against”; Paul has it eight times out of 14 in the New Testament.
19 διαταγή, which means “ordinance, direction” (BAGD). Deissmann cites a second-century inscription which he thinks read τῶν θείων δια[ταγ]ῶν and meant “imperial ordinance”, “a most exact parallel to the celebrated passage in the Epistle to the Romans, which also refers to the Roman authorities” (LAE, pp. 90–91).
Manson T. W. Manson: “Romans” in Peake’s Commentary on the Bible, ed. Matthew Black and H. H. Rowley (London, 1980)
20 ἑαυτοῖς is not strictly needed after “will receive judgment”, but it puts some emphasis on the recipients.
21 ἄρχοντες, which Paul uses here only in Romans and four times in all out of 37 in the New Testament. It does not differ significantly in meaning from ἐξουσίαι in vv. 1 and 2.
22 φόβος may mean “the causing of fear…. Also concrete that which arouses fear, a terror” (BAGD). The word brings out the truth that a secular state operates with compulsion, the use of the police force, etc.
23 τῷ ἀγαθῷ ἔργῳ, which Turner takes as a generic singular (M, III, p. 22). Moffatt translates “an honest man”, which presupposes τῷ ἀγαθοεργῷ. For an argument that this should be accepted as the right reading despite its slight attestation in the MSS see W. L. Lorimer, NTS, XII (1965–66), pp. 389–90.
M, J. H. Moulton: III, Syntax, by Nigel Turner (Edinburgh, 1963)
24 BDF 471(3) see parataxis “in place of conditional subordination”.
25 διάχονος.
26 σοί, the dative of advantage (SH).
27 εἰς τὸ ἀγαθόν, where εἰς introduces intended result.
28 “In one fell swoop government is torn from its pedestal and made the servant of God for the Christian”(Harrisville). Calvin says of rulers, “Nor do they have unbridled power, but power that is restricted to the welfare of their subjects.”
29 ἐάν with the subjunctive makes the condition very general; there is no implication as to the fulfilment of the condition or otherwise.
30 εἰχῇ is Pauline in all five of its New Testament occurrences. It means “without cause, in vain”; here “to no purpose” (BAGD). φορέω means “bear (in contrast to φέρω) for a considerable time or regularly, hence wear” (BAGD).
31 See his Roman Society and Roman Law in the New Testament (Oxford, 1963), pp. 8–11; the quotation is from p. 10.
32 Agent translates ἔχδιχος, which more properly means “avenger”; the authority is there to bring appropriate punishment on those who do wrong. εἰς is rather “for”than “of”; it indicates purpose.
33 The present participle πράσσοντι points to habitual practice. Dodd accepts retribution as the meaning; he thinks that Paul sees civil government as “part of the natural moral order, of divine appointment, but lying outside the order of grace revealed in Christ.”
34 διό.
35 ἀνάγχη means “necessity, compulsion of any kind, outer or inner, brought about by the nature of things, a divine dispensation, some hoped-for advantage, custom, duty etc.” (BAGD). Turner points out with respect to ὑποτάσσεσθαι that the infinitive is often used where classical Greek would have the accusative and infinitive (M, III, p. 148).
36 Burton points out that in the New Testament οὐ (not μή) μόνον is regularly used with the infinitive (MT, 481).
RSV The Revised Standard Version
Leenhardt Franz J. Leenhardt: The Epistle to the Romans (London, 1961)
37 C. A. Pierce gives the meaning of the verse as “It is your duty to God to be subject to the power: to rebel is not only illegal therefore: it is also morally wrong. It is not simply punishment by society that awaits the rebel, and the fear of which should deter him: it is also, for the law can be broken on occasion with impunity, the more terrible and less avoidable—for it is within him—pain of conscience.” He goes on to say that this is the “internal counterpart” of the wrath of God (Conscience in the New Testament [London, 1955], p. 71).
38 Cf. C. Maurer, “συνείδησις is responsible awareness that the ultimate foundations both of one’s own being and also of the state are in God. Members of the community are to have neither a higher nor a lower estimation of the state than as a specific servant of God” (TDNT, VII, p. 916).
39 Cf. Käsemann, “There can then, here or elsewhere, be no question of interpreting Christian obedience in action as slavish passive obedience. Christian obedience is never blind; and, indeed, open-eyed obedience, directed by συνείδησις, must even be critical” (New Testament Questions of Today [London, 1969], p. 213).
40 διὰ τοῦτο establishes a causal relationship which is then strengthened by γάρ. The verb τελεῖτε is taken by NIV as an indicative, probably correctly. The form could be imperative, but it is not easy to relate this to the causal opening.
41 Paul’s word for “tax” here (φόρος) strictly means “tribute”. It was the tax a subject people paid to its conqueror (it is the word used in Luke 20:22) and was usually hated in consequence. Paul is probably using the word in a general sense for any kind of tax, but his choice of this word is interesting.
42 Cf. Bowen, “Rulers have a right to demand taxes from their subjects; but they also have a responsibility to use these taxes for the good of the whole country, and not to spend them on luxury living for themselves or on special privileges for certain groups.” Calvin also remarks, “all that they receive from the people is public property, and not a means of satisfying private lust and luxury.”
43 λειτουργός (it is from this root that we get our word “liturgy”) is not confined to priestly service, but in the New Testament, with the possible exception of Phil. 2:25, is always used of the service of God. It indicates service of a serious nature, even if we cannot say that it points to anything “liturgical”.
44 H. Strathmann says, “It may be that Paul, who does not use the term often, is conscious of an aura of solemnity deriving from the LXX, but one can hardly say that he intends it sacrally” (TDNT, IV, p. 231). In nonbiblical contexts the word is often used of public service, especially service carried out by wealthy citizens at their own expense.
45 εἰς ἀυτὸ τοῦτο. On this BDF 290(4) comment, “Paul frequently has αὐτὸ τοῦτο ‘just this (and nothing else)’ ”. Denney holds that we must take this with the preceding because προσχαρτερέω elsewhere is used with the dative. This verb is then used absolutely, emphasizing the thought that they do this continually.
46 The verb NIV renders as Give is ἀποδίδωμι; it has about it the idea of payment of what is due. Deissmann says that in the papyri borrowers used this verb in the “stereotyped formula” “I will repay” what has been borrowed (LAE, p. 331). It is the verb in Jesus’ words “Render to Caesar…” (Mark 12:17). The idea of what is due comes out also in ὀφειλάς, “debts”.
47 Denney comments that τῷ τὸν φόρον τὸν φόρον “is quite intelligible, but nothing can make it grammatical”. SH essays this task by understanding ἀπαιτοῦντι.
48 Michel cites Origen for the view that φόρος was tax on land and τέλος was tax on trade. Cranfield takes the two to refer to direct and indirect taxes.
49 The word is φόβος, “fear”, though “respect” is probably correct here.
a 9 Exodus 20:13–15, 17; Deut. 5:17–19, 21
b 9 Lev. 19:18
50 The form ὀφείλετε could be indicative. Brown understands it as a statement, “Ye owe no man anything…” (p. 494). But the negatives μηδενί, μηδέν point to the imperative, and in any case “Pay your taxes … You owe no man anything” would be a strange sequence. The double negative adds emphasis to the command. ὀφείλετε is striking after ὀφειλάς (v. 7).
51 εἰ μή introduces an exception. Some think the expression means “but” (e.g., Barrett, “Owe no man anything—but remember the debt of love…”), but “except” is a more usual meaning of the expression and is very well suitable here.
52 Cf. Robinson, “Love may satisfy every claim of the law, but nothing can satisfy the claims of love.” Haldane has a different thought: “The more they pay of this debt, the richer they will be in the thing that is paid.”
53 BDF 399(1) sees the nominative and accusative of the substantivized infinitive (which occurs sporadically in Matthew and Mark, somewhat more frequently in Paul, and rarely elsewhere) as usually anaphoric—referring to something previously mentioned or otherwise well known. Here it means “the well-known command.”
54 τὸν ἕτερον. Since this is immediately followed by νόμον, some think we should understand it as “the other law” (e.g., Leenhardt, who sees a reference to the law of Moses as well as Roman law). But, while grammmatically possible, this is most unlikely (Lenski considers it an “exegetical curiosity”). Parry points out that “the phrase would be strained, and the context (ἀλλήλους—τὸν πλησίον) is against it” (CGT). It is also true that there is no reference to “law” in the context, and in fact we must go back to 10:5 for the last mention of it.
GT A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, being Grimm’s Wilke’s Clavis Novi Testamenti, trans. and rev. J. H. Thayer (Edinburgh, 1888)
55 The τό with which he begins is classical (M, III, p. 182); it is the equivalent of our quotation marks. The order in which he cites the commandments differs from the Hebrew and LXX of Exod. 20:13ff.; Deut. 5:17ff., but agrees with that in the text of codex B in Deut. 5:17 (also in Luke 18:20; Jas. 2:11; Philo On the Decalogue 121ff.; Clement Alex. Strom. 6.16; not all have four commandments).
56 Turner points out that ἕτερος has lost the sense of duality (M, III, p. 197). It sometimes has the meaning “another of a different kind”; whether this is its meaning here or not, it excludes the possibility that any commandment not cited will not be covered by love. Love is all-embracing.
57 ἀναχεφαλαιόω is “rare in secular Gk. and unknown outside literary sources.” It means “to bring something to a χεφάλειον, ” “to sum up” (H. Schlier, TDNT, III, p. 681). It is found in the New Testament again only in Eph. 1:10.
58 λόγος is used of the ten commandments, as in Exod. 34:28.
59 πλησίον is the neuter of the adjective πλησίος (which is not used in the New Testament), used as an adverb meaning “near”. With the article ὁ πλησίον (ὤν) it means “the person who is near” and thus “the neighbor”. It is used widely of any other person than oneself.
Cranfield C. E. B. Cranfield: A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans (Edinburgh, I [1975]; II [1979])
60 Cf. Luther, “because of the defect of his nature, man loves himself above everything else”. Hendriksen remarks, “it is a certain thing that he will do so in spite of the fact that the self he loves has many faults.”
61 “Those who love humanity can be ‘horrid’ to the men and women whom they actually meet, while those who love their families and friends can be quite deaf to the cry of those beyond their circle”(Cragg).
62 Cf. Manson, “some of the worst mischief in the world can be caused by people who set out to do good to their neighbours but do not love them.” Bowen reminds us that love can take many forms: “Sometimes people are unwilling to receive gifts or teaching from people of another race or tribal group, but this is a wrong attitude, based on pride, which can only be broken down by love. Love is needed both by the ‘giver’, so that he may not adopt a superior or patronizing attitude, and by the ‘receiver’, so that he may be ready to take the lowly position which involves saying ‘Thank you’ ”.
a 14 Or the flesh
M, J. H. Moulton: A Grammar of New Testament Greek, I, Prolegomena (Edinburgh, 1906)
63 εἰδότες.
64 χαιρός (which Paul uses 30 times out of 85 in the New Testament) has sometimes been sharply differentiated from χρόνος (as by J. A. T. Robinson, In the End God [London, 1950]; J. Marsh, The Fulness of Time [London, 1952]). χρόνος on this view is merely chronological time, whereas χαιρός is meaningful time, the right time. J. Barr has sharply criticized such views (The Semantics of Biblical Language [Oxford, 1961]; Biblical Words for Time [London, 1962]). It seems clear that too much has been made of the difference between the two words, but it may be that Barr has made too much of their similarity. In a context like the present one χαιρός is the appropriate word; it is time as a significant era.
65 ἤδη.
66 There is no verb here, and NIV has inserted has come. BDF note the omission of ἐστίν in “impersonal constructions, especially those expressing possibility or necessity” (127 [2]). It is the necessity of the hour that is in mind here; there is no escaping it.
67 There is some MS support for ἡμᾶς (P46vid אc D). But ὑμᾶς is more likely (with א* A B etc.). ἡμᾶς was perhaps suggested by the end of the verse.
68 The infinitive ἐγερθῆναι is used, as in classical Greek (M, III, p. 139), after ὥρα to indicate the time to do something. The construction “implies a necessity” (MT, 378).
Thomas W. H. Griffith Thomas: Romans, 3 vols. (London, 1911–12)
69 NIV takes ἡμῶν with σωτηρία, but there seems more point in taking it with ἐγγύτερον (as Lagrange, Barrett, and Cranfield).
70 ἐπιστεύσαμεν is an ingressive aorist, “when we began to believe”, “became believers”.
71 προχόπτω means “to lengthen by hammering” (as a smith in forging metals) and thus “to forward,” “to go forward,” “advance” (GT). It is another example of a transitive verb used intransitively in Hellenistic Greek (M, III, p. 52). The aorist is unexpected, but it will give the idea of an accomplished fact.
72 The perfect ἤγγιχεν, which NIV renders is almost here.
73 οὖν, “therefore”.
74 ἀποτίθημι and ἐνδύω.
75 ἔργα.
76 Both “put off” and “put on” are aorist imperatives and point to decisive action.
77 ὅπλον means a tool or implement, but in the New Testament it is always plural and seems mostly to mean “arms”, “weapons”. Godet thinks that the meaning here is the garments of a workman, but most agree that it is more likely that the usual meaning of weapons should be understood, weapons which the light itself both demands and supplies (Althaus).
78 Some hold that Paul is thinking of people who, on getting up in the morning, put off their night clothes and put on their day garments, but it is countered that in the first-century Roman empire people did not have night clothes; they simply took off some of their outer clothing and slept in the rest (so Michel, p. 330 n. 2; Jerome Carcopino, Daily Life in Ancient Rome [Harmondsworth, 1962], pp. 171ff.). Chrysostom brings out the urgency of the coming day with a reminder of getting up at dawn that characterized most of the ancients: “as soon as it (night) is actually departing, we hasten one another, and say, It is day now! and we all set about the works of the day, dressing, and leaving our dreams, and shaking our sleep thoroughly off, that the day may find us ready, and we may not have to begin getting up, and stretching ourselves, when the sunlight is up.”
79 ὡς, used here with ellipsis of the participle (M, III, p. 158 n. 1; BDF 425[4] suggest ὡς ἡμέρας οὔσης). Käsemann sees the meaning as “as is actually the case” (p. 363).
80 BDF 337(1) take the aorist as ingressive: “with reference to the commencement of this way of life”.
81 This brings out something of the force of εὐσχημόνως (εὐ + σχῆμα).
82 χῶμος was “prop. a nocturnal and riotous procession of half-drunken and frolicsome fellows who after supper parade through the streets with torches and music in honor of Bacchus or some other deity, and sing and play before the houses of their male and female friends; hence used generally, of feasts and drinking-parties that are protracted till late at night and indulge in revelry” (GT). Clearly Paul is referring to a far from respectable practice. μέθαις is plural, indicating many examples of the practice.
83 χοίτη originally meant a place for lying down, a bed. It came to mean specifically a marriage bed, then sexual intercourse lawful or unlawful. Here it is clearly the latter.
84 Lagrange thinks the expressions too strong to be applied to the Roman Christians and holds that Paul is contrasting Christianity with the immoral life of pagans. If so, it is to warn them to hold such practices in horror.
85 This translates the strong adversative ἀλλά.
86 ἐνδύσασθε, where Paul “turns to the peremptory aorist imperative which is incisive and strong” (Lenski).
87 πρόνοια means “foresight”; when it is used with ποιέω the thought is of making provision for something. LB has “don’t make plans”.
[3]Morris, L. (1988). The Epistle to the Romans (457). Grand Rapids, Mich.; Leicester, England: W.B. Eerdmans; Inter-Varsity Press.
1 For an outline of the principal views see the Introduction, pp. 12ff. Cranfield outlines six possible ways of understanding the points at issue.
a 11 Isaiah 49:18; 45:23
2 “There are always brethren in every church who entertain imperfect conceptions of Christian truth combined usually with a certain doggedness for their defective creed”(NBCR).
3 NIV in common with most recent translations omits any equivalent of δέ, though NASB has “Now”. There is probably a weak adversative force. Paul has been speaking of the importance of being strong in the Lord; now he adds that this does not forbid a certain gentleness. The singular is, of course, generic (M, III, p. 22). The verb ἀσθενέω may be used of bodily weakness, but here, of course, it is more intellectual and spiritual.
TH Barclay M. Newman and Eugene A. Nida: A Translator’s Handbook on Paul’s Letter to the Romans (New York, 1973)
NIV New International Version
4 τὸν ἀσθενοῦντα τῇ πίστει. The similar expression in 4:19 refers to one whose faith is feeble (and cf. the weak conscience of 1 Cor. 8:7 etc.).
5 Barth reminds us of the important contribution of the “weak” (among whom he includes people like the devotees of Orpheus and Dionysus, the monks of the Middle Ages, the Baptists of the Reformation era, and modern total abstainers and vegetarians): “We cannot be blind to the deep earnestness which has brought and still brings into being such human endeavours. We are not ignorant of the great personal perplexity and disintegration, of the great courage and sacrifice, which lie behind them. We remember with genuine reverence the long succession of heroes and saints, martyrs and prophets. Without doubt, the noblest figures in history are marshalled behind the Roman eaters of vegetables.” People whose trust in Christ is strong but whose understanding of what that means in terms of liberty in daily living is weak have often been driven to do great things for Christ. Let us not despise the weak.
6 On προσλαμβάνω here G. Delling says, “As God (or Christ) has taken every member of the Church into fellowship with Himself, so incorporate each other into your Christian circle with no inner reservations” (TDNT, IV, p. 15).
7 διαχρίσεις διαλογισμῶν is difficult, for both words have more than one meaning. διάχρισις may mean “distinguishing, differentiation” or “dispute, quarrel” (see BAGD), while διαλογισμός may be used for “thought, opinion” or for “doubt, dispute” (BAGD). In the New Testament it is often used of evil thoughts.
NEB The New English Bible
JB The Jerusalem Bible
Moffatt James Moffatt: The New Testament: A New Translation
TDNT Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, a translation by Geoffrey W. Bromiley of Theologisches Wörterbuch zum Neuen Testament (Grand Rapids, 1964–76)
8 There is a change in the construction ὃς μὲν... ὁ δὲ ἀσθενῶν (“one man … but he that is weak”). Turner thinks the article is used with demonstrative force (M, III, p. 36). We should also notice the unusual πιστεύει φαγεῖν, on which Leenhardt comments, “a curious expression which may mean: he has the faith to eat … or else: ‘he believes he may eat’ (Lagrange).” πιστεύω + infinitive occurs also in Acts 15:11. On the construction BDF remark, “it does not mean ‘believe’ here, but ‘to have confidence to risk, to feel equal to’ ” (397 [2]).
9 λάχανον derives from λαχαίνω, “to dig”, and thus means what is grown on land that has been dug, garden plants as distinguished from wild plants, and thus vegetables.
10 For ἐσθίει some MSS read ἐσθιέτω (P46 D F G etc.), but the imperative should probably be rejected. Apart from the attestation Paul seems to be “stating the facts of the situation rather than recommending a course of action” (Barrett).
11 ἐξουθενέω is from οὐθέν, “nothing”, with the perfective prefix ἐξ, “to make absolutely nothing of”.
12 The verb is προσλαμβάνω (see on v. 1), which has the notion “welcome” (so Moffatt).
13 See the note on 2:1 for this construction.
14 οἰχέτης, here only in Paul.
15 The dative will be a dative of advantage or disadvantage and refer to the master in an earthly house; Paul is not here speaking of final judgment but using an illustration. For πίπτω in a moral sense cf. 11:11, 22, and for στήχω 1 Cor. 16:13; Phil. 1:27. They are contrasted in 1 Cor. 10:12. στήχω is a present formed from the perfect ἕστηχα; it is not found before the New Testament (BAGD) and is used by Paul in seven of its ten New Testament occurrences.
16 This reading should be accepted with P46 א A B C etc. rather than ὁ θεός with D F G etc.; the latter reading may well have been imported from v. 3.
17 The sentence begins with ὃς μέν, which this time has an answering ὃς δέ, giving the meaning “one … another”. The pronouns are used as demonstratives (IBNTG, p. 125). γάρ is read by some MSS (א* A P etc.) but is probably to be omitted (as P46 אc B D F etc.).
18 There is an interesting change of meaning in Paul’s use of χρίνω. He used it in the sense “condemn” in v. 4 whereas he uses it to mean something like “esteem” here. He follows it with παρʼ ἡμέραν, where παρά has the meaning “ ‘passing by’ and so ‘in preference to’ ” (SH). NIV understands this as more sacred than, but Paul says only “esteems one day more than a(nother) day.”
19 And other days. A pious Jew could ask, “Why is any day better than another, when all the daylight in the year is from the sun?” and answer, “By the Lord’s decision they were distinguished, and he appointed the different seasons and feasts” (Sir. 33:9).
Käsemann Ernst Käsemann: Commentary on Romans (Grand Rapids, 1980)
O’Neill J. C. O’Neill: Paul’s Letter to the Romans (Harmondsworth, 1975)
20 πληροφορέω means “fill (completely), fulfill” and is a synonym of πληρόω. But it can also mean “convince fully” (BAGD). Cf. its use of Abraham (4:21).
21 ἴδιος is important; the person must act according to his own mind, not that of someone else. And νοῦς is important; his intellect should be fully involved and he should not depend on some opinion (cf. Bengel).
22 Harrisville draws attention to another aspect: for Paul “ ‘indifferent things’ remain indifferent, but never the disputes they occasion.”
23 φρονέω means “to think” and is used in a variety of ways. One is “to set one’s mind on, be intent on”—here on “a particular day rather than others” (BAGD).
24 This is an unusual construction. BDF take it as the “dative of advantage and disadvantage” with the meaning “in honor of the Lord” (188 [2]; so M, III, p. 238).
25 Note his use of γάρ, for. Kertelge finds the hymnlike style of vv. 7–9 and the introduction of “we” in place of the third person to be possible indications of a liturgical text. Käsemann sees the passage as rather having the characteristics of a diatribe.
26 The dative is the dative of advantage and disadvantage, though BDF think that it here “expresses more the possessor” (188 [2]), pointing out that the series ends with τοῦ χυρίου ἐσμέν.
Phillips J. B. Phillips: Letters to Young Churches (Melbourne, 1952)
GNB Good News Bible (Today’s English Version)
27 V. P. Furnish sums up this section of the epistle by saying, “All these expressions refer to man’s release from the tyranny of a life turned in upon itself, preoccupied with its own ambitions and accomplishments, and thus alienated from its true destiny”; he cites 2 Cor. 5:15 (Theology and Ethics in Paul [Nashville, 1968], p. 181).
28 There is some textual uncertainty here, but it seems that we should read ἀποθνῄσχωμεν on the first and third occasion, but the indicative ἀποθνῄσχομεν on the second. The introduction of the substantive here is doubtless “a touch of edifying exhortation” (Cranfield).
29 εἰς τοῦτο signifies “to this end”, and γάρ gives the reason for the foregoing. The atoning work of Jesus was to establish his lordship.