6. Study and Exposition of Romans 2:17-29

A. Introduction

Hypocrisy—carefully presenting one appearance on the outside, while clinging to another on the inside—is declared by Jesus to be like a white washed tomb. Such houses for the dead look great, however, even impressive on the outside, but… and you know how the rest of that goes (cf. Matt 23:27). Two stories illustrate well the nature of hypocrisy and the pain that comes with it.

The first is related by Stuart Briscoe. He tells the story of the time he was in business and had to deal with a coworker who had embezzled a large sum of money from the bank for which they both worked. The reason for the embezzlement was that he had two wives and families and was trying to run two homes. When he was apprehended and fired, he stunned everyone by saying, “I am very sorry for what I have done, and I need to know whether I should fulfill my preaching commitments on Sunday in our local church!” Briscoe says that in the following weeks he spent much time mending the damage done by the man’s inconsistency. To Briscoe’s chagrin, he found that his fellow workers not only despised the man but also “were quick to dismiss the church he belonged to as a ‘bunch of hypocrites,’ the gospel he professed to believe as a ‘lot of hogwash,’ and the God he claimed to serve as ‘nonexistent.’”³³

The second story involves a saloon keeper who sold his tavern to a local church. The members tore out the bar, added some lights, gave the whole pale a fresh new coat of pain, and installed some pews. Somehow a parrot which belonged to the saloon keeper was left behind. On Sunday morning that colorful bird was watching from the rafters. When the minister appeared, he squawked, ‘New proprietor!’ When the men who were to lead in worship marched in, the bird piped, ‘New floor show!’ But when the bird looked out over the congregation, he screeched, ‘same old crowd!’³⁴

The church in the U.S. and Canada has a tremendous crisis of credibility. I realize that some non-Christians, especially those in the media, want to characterize Christians as hypocritical whenever the opportunity arises, but I wonder how much of what they say is true and deserved. Certainly not all of it is, but there are times when the gap between our preaching and our practice resembles a canyon rather than a ditch, and our critics are correct when they dutifully point this out. The immense problem of the current, low morality among Christians—and the obvious indictment regarding the powerlessness of our religion—I am convinced, constitutes the single most damaging blow to the cause of the gospel in America. Based on Christian testimony and lifestyle, it is difficult to see what, if any, difference the gospel really makes. No amount of rigorous apologetic for the faith—as important as that is—will supplant or squelch the consistent noise coming from the moral megaphone of our lives. That “consistent noise” is precisely that Christians are, by and large, “inconsistent.” They proclaim one ethic and live another. Or as one person quipped, “they traffic in unlived truth.” There is, at present, a great and lamentable distinction that needs to be drawn between Christian ethics and the ethics of Christians. The tide will change, however, when Christians repent and seek the living God who reigns from Monday to Sunday.

In Romans 2:17-29 Paul lands squarely on the issue of hypocrisy. Though he talks specifically about the Jews of his day, we would do well to pay close attention to what he says lest we fall into the same error of “claim without conduct.”

B. Translation of Passage in NET

2:17 But if you call yourself a Jew and rely on the law and boast of your relationship to God 2:18 and know his will and approve the superior things because you receive instruction from the law, 2:19 and if you are convinced that you yourself are a guide to the blind, a light to those who are in darkness, 2:20 an educator of the senseless, a teacher of little children, because you have in the law the essential features of knowledge and of the truth— 2:21 therefore you who teach someone else, do you not teach yourself? You who preach against stealing, do you steal? 2:22 You who tell others not to commit adultery, do you commit adultery? You who abhor idols, do you rob temples? 2:23 You who boast in the law dishonor God by transgressing the law! 2:24 For just as it is written, “the name of God is being blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you.” 2:25 For circumcision has its value if you practice the law; but if you break the law, your circumcision has become uncircumcision. 2:26 Therefore if the uncircumcised man keeps the righteous requirements of the law, will not his uncircumcision be regarded as circumcision? 2:27 And the physically uncircumcised man who keeps the law, will he not judge you, the one who, despite the written code and circumcision, transgresses the law? 2:28 For a person is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision something that is outward in the flesh, 2:29 but someone is a Jew who is one inwardly, and circumcision is of the heart by the Spirit and not by the written code. This person’s praise is not from people but from God.

C. Full Exegetical Outline

I. The Jew thinks that through his relationship to the Law he has the essential features of knowledge and truth and can guide and teach the Gentile (2:17-20).

A. Many Jews rely on the Law and boast in their relationship to YHWH and claim to know his will since they are instructed out of the Law (2:17-18).

1. Many Jews proudly call themselves Jews, rely on the Law, and boast in their relationship with God (2:17).

2. Many Jews know God’s will and approve of morally and spiritually superior things because they claim to have been instructed out of the Law (2:18).

B. Many Jews are convinced that since they have the essential features of knowledge and truth in the Law they are de facto able to carry on a mediatorial and pedagogical role in the world (2:19-20).

1. Many Jews are convinced that they are a guide to the blind (2:19).

2. Many Jews are convinced that they are a light to those in darkness (2:19).

3. Many Jews are convinced that they are an educator of the senseless (2:20).

4. Many Jews are convinced that they are a teacher of little children (2:20).

5. The Jews have in the Law the essential features of knowledge and truth (2:20).

II. But the Jew does not obey the teachings of the Law and as a result the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles (2:21-24).

A. The Jew who teaches, preaches, and tells others not to steal, commit adultery, and rob temples is himself guilty of the same sins (2:21-23).

1. Many Jews preach against stealing, yet they steal (2:21).

2. Many Jews tell others not to commit adultery, yet they commit adultery (2:22).

3. Many Jews abhor idols, yet they rob temples (2:22).

4. Many Jews boast in the Law, but they dishonor God by transgressing the Law (2:23).

B. The name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of the Jews’ disobedience (2:24).

III. The Jew cannot arrogantly appeal to the outward rite of circumcision since (1) the uncircumcised man who obeys the Law will be regarded as circumcised and he in turn will judge the disobedience of the circumcised Jew as uncircumcision, and (2) the true Jew who gets praise from God, not people, is the one who is circumcised by the Spirit inwardly, in the heart, and not by the letter (2:25-29).

A. Circumcision is as uncircumcision when a man continually breaks the Law (2:25).

B. The uncircumcised man who keeps the Law will be regarded as circumcised and he will judge the disobedience of the circumcised man as uncircumcision (2:26-27).

1. The uncircumcised man who keeps the Law will be regarded as circumcised (2:26)

2. The uncircumcised man will judge the disobedience of the circumcised man as uncircumcision (2:27).

C. The true Jew who gets praise from God, not people, is one who is not simply circumcised outwardly in the flesh, but one who has been circumcised inwardly, by the Spirit, and not the letter (2:28-29).

1. A true Jew is not one outwardly and circumcision is not something purely outward in the body (2:28).

2. A true Jew is one inwardly where the circumcision is of the heart by the Spirit, not by the letter (2:29).

3. A true Jew is one whose praise is not from people, but from God (2:29).

D. Simple Point Outline

I. The Claims of the Jew and His Role among the Gentiles (2:17-20)

A. The Claims of the Jew (2:17-18)

1. He Calls Himself a Jew (2:17)

2. He Relies on the Law (2 :17)

3. He Boasts in His Relationship with God (2:17)

4. He Knows God’s Will (2:18)

5. He Approves of Superior Things (2:18)

6. He Is Instructed out of the Law (2:18)

B. The Mediatorial Role of the Jew (2:19-20)

The Jew is convinced he…

1. Is a Guide to the Blind (2:19)

2. Is a Light to Those in Darkness (2:19)

3. Is an Educator of the Senseless (2:20)

4. Is a Teacher of Little Children (2:20)

5. Has Knowledge and Truth in the Law (2:20)

II. The Jews and Hypocrisy (2:21-24)

A. The Jews’ Hypocrisy (2:21-23)

1. The Jews and Stealing (2:21)

2. The Jews and Adultery (2:22)

3. The Jews and Robbing Temples (2:22)

4. The Jews’ Dishonoring of God (2:23)

B. The Result of Their Hypocrisy (2:24)

III. True Circumcision and the True Jew (2:25-29)

A. Circumcision and Disobedience (2:25)

B. The Uncircum. Man and Obedience (2:26-27)

1. His Obedience Is As Circumcision (2:26)

2. He Judges the Disobedience of “the Circumcision” as Uncircumcision (2:27)

C. The True Jew and True Circumcision (2:28-29)

1. The True Jew and Circumcision: General Statement (2:28)

2. The True Jew and Spiritual Circumcision: Specific Statement (2:29)

E. Exposition Proper

What Paul has been saying regarding the Jews, albeit somewhat obliquely in 2:1-16, comes into the full light of day in 2:17-29. The fact of their hypocrisy, alluded to in 2:1-3, is highlighted with full force in 2:17-29.

Romans 2:17-29 breaks down in three smaller units. In 2:17-20, Paul—through the use of a series of conditional statements which are never really formally completed—focuses on the particular claims of the Jew as one who was privileged and sustained a special mediatorial role to world in light of his possession of the Law of God. The emphasis falls on the Jews’ knowledge via the Law and their claim to be teachers of those without such moral and spiritual insight. In 2:21-24 Paul refers to the fact that although they had the Law, and claimed they could teach others, it was obvious that they had not taught themselves; they were committing the same sins for which they had the habit of rebuking the Gentiles. In 2:25-29 Paul focuses on the one thing in which the Jew prided himself as a covenant person—i.e., circumcision. Paul’s interpretation of circumcision, however, was that it was only a sign and that, if the reality was not present, the sign was of no value. We move now to consider the details of the passage.

2:17-18 Paul mentions five things about the Jew in 2:17-18, all of which are connected to the fact that as a Jew he had been instructed out of the very revealed Law of God. When a man referred to himself as a Jew it was done with pride since, as such, he did not commit the same sins as the lawless Gentile—or so he thought—and thus, in his mind, he accorded special favor with YHWH and was specially chosen by him. As a Jew he relied on the law, that is, he derived his sense of security with YHWH from his connection with, and obedience to, the Law. He was also one who supposedly, having obeyed the Law, could boast about his relationship with the true God whereas Gentiles who were guilty of such varied and awful sins could obviously make no such claim. All they could do is hope to be taught by a Jew!

That this is the Jews’ focus in boasting in God is clear from the next claim, i.e., that they know his will (γινώσκεις τὸ θέλημα, ginoskeis to thelēma). The term will refers primarily to that revealed in the Mosaic Law and includes spiritual and moral truth. The Jew supposedly knows right from wrong in matters of worship and ethics and claims that he can, therefore, teach others.

As someone who knew the will of God, the Jew could then rightly judge between what was proper, spiritually and morally speaking, and what was not. He was able to approve the superior things (δοκιμάζεις τὰ διαφέροντα, dokimazeis ta diapheronta), as Paul says, since he had been instructed out of the law (κατηχούμενος ἐκ του~ νόμου, katēchoumenos ek tou nomou). The Jew was to have learned how to discern the will of God through catechetical instruction based on the Law. In short, the Jew’s religion was a revealed religion—God making himself known to man—and as the special recipient of that revelation, he prided himself in his name, position, and knowledge.

2:19-20 Therefore, as someone who knew the will of God through Torah (i.e., the Law), he was confident (πέποιθας, pepoithas) that he fulfilled the chief mediatorial (for God) and pedagogical role in the world. First, he was a guide to the blind (ὁδηγὸν εἶναι τυφλῶν, hodēgon einai tuphlōn); he was supposed to lead those without Torah into a right relationship with YHWH. Second, and intimately related, he was supposed to be, again via his connection with YHWH and the Torah, a light to those who were in darkness (φῶς τῶν ἐν σκότει, phōs tōn en skotei). That is, he was to shine the light of YHWH’s truth upon those in darkness in order to bring salvation and forgiveness to them (Isa 49:6). Third, as someone with wisdom from the Law, he was to be an educator of the senseless (παιδευτὴν ἀφρόνων, paideutēn aphronōn), that is, as an obedient Jew he had knowledge to pass on that would render an otherwise futile existence worthwhile (cf. Prov 11:29; Luke 12:20). Fourth, he was to be a teacher of little children (διδάσκαλον νηπίων, didaskalon nēpiōn). In the eyes of the Jew, the Gentile was basically an infant needing the instruction of one more mature in the knowledge of faith.

While the Gentile had knowledge (1:28, 32; ἐπίγνωσις, epignōsis) of God, Paul says that the Jew had in the law a much clearer understanding of the essential features of knowledge and of the truth (τὴν μόρφωσιν τῆς γνώσεως καὶ τῆς ἀληθείας ἐν τῷ νόμῳ, ten morphōsin tēs gnōseōs kai tēs alētheias en tō nomō). What was written on the human heart and subsequently obscured through the fall and sin was made explicit in the Mosaic Law—and much more as well. In terms of revelation from God, the Jew was in a position of privilege for he not only had nature and conscience, he also had the Mosaic Law.

2:21-24 In 2:21-24, and indeed throughout the rest of the section, Paul begins to argue that although the Jew has been long on privilege, he’s been short on responsibility; in point of fact, he has not lived up to his calling and as a result the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles.

The Jews, though perhaps not to the same degree as some Gentiles, were guilty of committing the very things they taught, preached, and spoke against. They preached at others, but failed to listen to their own sermons! They were guilty of stealing (κλέπτεις, klepteis), adultery (not spiritual, as we have in Hosea, but literal; μοιχεύεις, moicheueis), and robbing temples, and not simply in thought (e.g., Matt 5:27-30)—as if Paul were appealing to the Law at the deeper level of sinful thoughts and attitudes only. On the contrary, there were Jews who were guilty of the acts themselves. Paul’s indictment against the Jew could hardly be expected to “stick” if this were not the case—i.e., if they had not really committed these acts.

The meaning of the last sin mentioned, namely, to rob temples (ἱεροσυλεῖς, hierosuleis), is difficult to determine precisely, but it seems to refer to stealing idols from pagan temples in order to use the materials from which they were made. Though the rabbis made numerous concessions, this was prohibited in Deuteronomy 7:25-26. Other commentators, however, have suggested that the term hierosuleis is more general and means “to commit sacrilege” against a temple, and in particular the Jerusalem temple.

In short, the very ones who boast in the Law dishonor God by transgressing the Law. The result of Jewish hypocrisy, as noted above, is that the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles (Isa 52:5 LXX; Ezek 36:20). Isaiah 52:5 in the MT (Hebrew Bible) does not have among the Gentiles and because of you but this wording is found in the Greek version (LXX) which Paul is chiefly indebted to in this case. The way Paul is using the Isaiah passage is similar to Ezekiel’s words in 36:20.

2:25-29 In 2:25-29 Paul further explains (note the “For” in 2:25) vv. 21-24 by way of the best example he can think of—circumcision. He explains why Gentiles blaspheme the name of God; it is because the Jews, even though circumcised, do not live up to their profession. But Paul also goes further than this in 2:25-29.

Paul says that circumcision (περιτομή, peritomē) is definitely not a “ticket” to the world to come. In short, it is of no value if not attended by faithful practice (πράσσῃς, prassēs) of the Law for which it was a sign. Indeed—and here’s where Paul begins to go further than just to explain the reason for Gentile blasphemy—it is as though the man is not even circumcised. This must mean that such a man is not a true member of the covenant community and is unregenerate, as 2:28-29 would seem to indicate.

Paul continues his argument by asking a rhetorical question that demands a positive answer, though not all Jews would have agreed. He asks: if the uncircumcised man (ἡ ἀκροβυστία, hē akrobustia) keeps the righteous requirements of the Law, will he, in contrast to the circumcised man who does not keep the Law, be regarded (λογισθήσεται, logisthēsetai) as circumcised, i.e., a member of the covenant community and heir of the promises of God? According to Paul, he will certainly be regarded as such.

Further, that very man who is uncircumcised by birth and yet keeps the Law, he will judge (κρινει~, krinei) the circumcised lawbreaker as though uncircumcised. And he will do this despite the fact that the man claims to have both the written code (γραμματος, grammatos), namely, the Mosaic Law and circumcision as the sign.

In vv. 28-29 Paul says there is a reason why circumcision by itself guarantees nothing. It is because true religion is first and foremost—and always—a matter of the heart (i.e., genuine faith) or the inner man. To be sure circumcision was a sign of membership in the covenant community of Israel, but it was only a sign. It could not create the reality of participation in the saved community, nor could it somehow replace the means of participation in the covenant community, i.e., by living faith (Rom 4). The true Jew, therefore, as one knowledgeable of what consitututes true religion should know this better than any one.

Thus a true Jew is not one who is merely circumcised outwardly (φανερῷ, phanerō), that is, in the flesh. The true Jew is one who is circumcised inwardly (κρυπτ῅, kruptō), a circumcision of the heart done by the Spirit and not by the written code (ἐν πνεύματι οὐ γράμματι, en pneumati ou grammati). The circumcision Paul intends here is in keeping with the promise of Jeremiah 31:31-33 and refers to a supernatural rebirth, the same thing about which Jesus spoke to Nicodemus (John 3:1ff). These verses here in Romans anticipate the larger discussion about the Spirit to come in 5:1-5 and 8:1-39 (see Titus 3:5; 1 Peter 1:23)

F. Homiletical Idea and Outline

Idea: Closing the Gap—Restoring the Marriage of Claims and Conduct

I. What Is Our Role in the World (2:17-20)?

A. Our Claims

B. Our Witness

II. Be Careful for Hypocrisy (2:21-24)!

A. What Are Our Areas of Weakness?

B. What Does the Watching World Say?

III. What Do You Cling To As A Sign of Your Christianity (2:25-29)?

A. The Need for Inward Transformation

B. The Centrality of God over Human Opinion

G. Contribution of Passage to Systematic Theology

This passage speaks strongly against hypocrisy and the futility of trusting in religious rites to sanctify or make one right with God. Thus it speaks directly to the area of personal sanctification as well as ecclesiology and the rite of baptism and the Lord’s Supper.

While baptism and the Lord’s Supper are necessary rites, they have no value in and of themselves to save or sanctify. They do not function ex opere operato. In the case of the former, it is an attempt through an outward symbol to capture the inward transformation which has already taken place through being joined to Christ by faith. In the case of the latter it is a memorial designed to proclaim a historical fact, that is, the death of Christ, and remind the church of the basis of her forgiveness before God (1 Cor 15:1-11).

Now, we said that in and of themselves these rites do not save or sanctify, but this does not mean that when the worshiper is right with God through Christ (s)he experiences no grace at all. On the contrary, in the performing of the rite, with a heart surrendered and fixed on God through Christ, God infuses sanctifying grace through His indwelling Spirit.

H. Contribution of Passage to Discipleship and Church Mission

The church, when it proclaims the truth about God and man’s sin, will almost always be hated by the world. But, there are unfortunately times when the church is ridiculed and her God blasphemed because of what she does and the way she does it. There are times when we fail to live up to our profession and the world looks on with a critical eye. Our response to this is not to condemn the world, whether they are right or wrong. Our response, rather, is twofold: (1) to love the world by continuing to serve and proclaim the truth, and (2) to examine ourselves and Scripture to see if the claims are true. If they are, we simply must seek God for forgiveness for dishonoring his name (1 John 1:9). Then let us repent and set out on new and fresh ways of living in the world—ways that honor God’s name and give the unbeliever no basis for accusation (1 Peter 2:11-12; Titus 2:5, 10; 3:8).

³³ R. Kent Hughes, 1001 Great Stories & Quotes (Wheaton, IL: Tyndale, 1998), 219.

³⁴ Michael Hodgin, 1001 More Humorous Illustrations for Public Speaking (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1998), 168.

7. Study and Exposition of Romans 3:1-8

A. Introduction

“Charles Darwin died in April 1882. He wished to be buried in his beloved village, but the sentiment of educated men demanded a place in Westminster Abbey beside Isaac Newton. As his coffin entered the vast building, the choir sang an anthem composed for the occasion. It’s text, from the book of Proverbs, may stand as the most fitting testimony to Darwin’s greatness: ‘Happy is the man that findeth wisdom, and getteth understanding. She is more precious than rubies, and all the things that thou canst desire are not to be compared to her.’”

So wrote Stephen Jay Gould, the eminent Harvard paleontologist, professor of geology, and ardent evolutionist in Discover magazine in 1982.

Darwin was not buried in Westminster Abbey because he was a staunch defender of the faith. While he was not a friend of the church, neither was he an atheist. Continues Gould, “He probably retained a belief in some kind of personal God—but he did not grant his deity a directly and continuously intervening role in the evolutionary process.”

Darwin was, however, buried at Westminster because of the profound contribution he made to science. Again, quoting Gould, “Educated men demanded” he be laid there.

All this is not to name Darwin as the lone culprit responsible for the crisis of faith precipitated by evolutionary science. It is merely an illustration full of ironies and one grand truth. It is ironic that his final tribute was a scriptural anthem. Likewise ironic is that his final wishes were not honored and he was buried within the church. Even the choice of Scripture in the anthem is ironic: Proverbs, and the pursuit of wisdom.

The Grand Truth, however, is that Scripture and God have the last word. Darwin’s burial inadvertently acknowledges that faith has the last say over men and their ideas.”³⁵

This is perhaps the central truth of Romans 3:1-8: “Let God be proven true!” Let God have the last word!

B. Translation of Passage in NET

3:1 Therefore what advantage does the Jew have, or what is the value of circumcision? 3:2 Actually, there are many advantages. First of all, the Jews were entrusted with the oracles of God. 3:3 What then? If some did not believe, does their unbelief nullify the faithfulness of God? 3:4 Absolutely not! Let God be proven true, and all mankind shown up as liars, just as it is written: “so that you will be justified in your words and will prevail when you are judged.” 3:5 But if our unrighteousness demonstrates the righteousness of God, what shall we say? The God who inflicts wrath is not unrighteous, is he? (I am speaking in human terms.) 3:6 Absolutely not! For otherwise how could God judge the world? 3:7 For if by my lie the truth of God enhances to his glory, why am I still actually being judged as a sinner? 3:8 And why not say, “Let us do evil so that good may come of it?” (as some who slander us allege that we say. Their condemnation is deserved!)

C. Full Exegetical Outline

Idea: Though there is advantage in being a Jew this does not mean that unfaithfulness and sin will render God unfaithful or that such behavior will not go unpunished, even if it does demonstrate the righteousness of God.

I. The fact that God does not automatically bless circumcision does not mean that there is no value in being a Jew for the Jews have indeed been blessed, having receiving the very oracles of God (3:1-2).

A. What advantage does the Jew have or what is the value of circumcision (3:1)?

B. There are many advantages to being a Jew including the fact that they have been entrusted with the oracles of God (3:2).

II. The unbelief of the Jews does not nullify God’s faithfulness, but rather God will be justified in his words and prevail when he judges, just as it says in Psalm 116:11 (3:3-4).

A. Will Jewish unbelief lead to God being unfaithful (3:3)?

B. God will be proven true and every man a liar (3:4).

C. God will be proven true and every man a liar for this is what Psalm 116:11 says (3:4).

III. The belief that God is unrighteous because he punishes us for sin—sin which enhances his truthfulness and glory—is false for it renders impossible the judgment of the world and leads to the just condemnation of those who argue: “Let us do evil that good may result” (3:5-8)!

A. Even if our sin demonstrates the righteousness of God, he is not unjust to inflict wrath on us (3:5-6)

1. What shall we say if our unrighteousness demonstrates the righteousness of God (3:5)?

2. God, who inflicts wrath, is not unrighteous, is he (3:5)?

3. If God were unrighteous, how could he judge the world (3:6)?

B. Those who think they can lie and do evil in order that God’s glory might be enhanced and good may result deserve condemnation (3:7-8).

1. Why am I still judged as a sinner when my lie enhances the glory of God (3:7)?

2. Those who say, as they have about Paul, “let us do evil that good may result,” deserve condemnation (3:8).

D. Simple Point Outline

Idea: Privilege and Responsibility—Twin Pillars Undergirding a Healthy Christian Perspective

I. There Is Advantage and Value in Being a Jew (3:1-2)

A. Being A Jew (3:1)

B. The Oracles of God (3:2)

II. God’s Faithfulness in the Midst of Jewish Unfaithfulness (3:3-4)

A. God Is Faithful and True No Matter What (3:3)

B. The Use of Psalm 116:11 (3:4)

III. God Righteousness Enhanced by Sin (3:5-8)

A. Yet He Justly Inflicts Wrath (3:5-6)

B. Yet He Justly Condemns (3:7-8)

E. Exposition Proper

Since the Jew is just as guilty as the Gentile (2:1-5; 17-23) and cannot simply appeal to the token of circumcision to secure immunity from judgment (2:24-29), the question might reasonably be asked—with the intention of impugning God’s character and plan—what advantage is there, then, in being a Jew or what is the value of circumcision? After all, it seems as if Paul just got finished saying in 2:1-29 that there is no advantage whatsoever. Paul answers this question and other related ones in 3:1-8 by saying that there is great advantage in being a Jew but it does not lie in a de facto exemption from judgment—even if that sin magnifies God’s righteousness.

The implication in the above argument is that Paul is still dealing with the Jews in 3:1-8. Some, however, argue that the Jews are in view only through verse 4a. But the most likely and natural antecedent for the pronouns “our” (3:5), “we” (3:5), and “my” (3:7) is the Jews of 3:1-4. Further, the accusation that Paul’s “law-free” gospel leads to greater sinfulness in 3:8 undoubtedly came from Jews who clung to the Law of Moses. Finally, the logic of the paragraph as a whole develops in keeping with the questions asked in 3:1-2—questions which revolve around being a Jew. Therefore, we regard 3:1-8 as dealing with Jews.

3:1-2 In 2:1-29 Paul criticizes the Jew for his misunderstanding of circumcision and for his arrogant hypocrisy. With such a negative analysis, one wonders whether there ever was any advantage in being a Jew. Lest certain people conclude incorrectly, however, Paul turns his attention to this urgent question in 3:1-8. In short, though his denuinciation was severe in 2:1-29, the apostle nonetheless says that there are benefits for those who are God’s chosen people; there is value (ἡ ὠφέλεια, hē ōpheleia; cf. 2:25) to circumcision.

The expression there are many advantages (πολὺ κατὰ πάντα τρόπον, polu kata panta tropon) literally reads “much according to every way.” This does not mean that the Jew had advantages in every way without exception, since this interpretation would practically render 2:1-29 and the criticism there obsolete. The point that Paul is making, rather, is that the Jew had advantages in many different kinds of ways. For example, the apostle says, of first (πρῶτον, prōton) importance, they have been entrusted with the oracles of God (ἐπιστεύθησαν τὰ λόγια τοῦ θεοῦ, episteuthēsan ta logia tou theou). God considered it a trust and took the risk to give Israel a revelation of himself and his purposes.

The oracles of God refer to God’s self-revelation in the Old Testament and may have a particular focus on God’s statements about how he chose Israel to be his people (Exod 19:3-6) and the promises he made, especially those to Abraham (Gen 12:1-3; 15; 17; 11:1) and David (2 Sam 7:8-16; Ps 89; Isa 55:3; Rom 1:3-4; 15:12). The expression might also include the Law of Moses which would place Paul in agreement with the Jew who says that in the law “we have the essential features of knowledge and truth” (2:20).

3:3 Paul now asks a question: If some Jews did not believe, will their unbelief nullify God’s faithfulness? Note the ironic contrast between God entrusting (ἐπιστεύθησαν, episteuthēsan) oracles to the Jews and some of them not believing, i.e., trusting the God of those oracles (ἠπίστησαν, ēpistēsan).

The question is, what in particular did they not believe? The straight forward answer is, “they did not believe the oracles.” But the oracles are not ends in themselves, but rather they speak to the promises and purposes of God. This may indicate an oblique reference to Christ. Thus, it is entirely reasonable to argue that the Jews’ failure to believe the oracles of God is particularly evident in their failure to accept Christ—the Ultimate fulfillment of the promises contained in the oracles (Rom 10:4; 15:12).

But notice that Paul says only some (τινες, tines) did not believe. In light of passages like 11:25 and the dismal overall reaction of the Jews to Christ, we may say that Paul is being gracious here by deliberately understating the case. Indeed, most did not believe God. In any event, there is a believing Jewish remnant at the present time for which Paul is thankful and to which the early chapters of the book of Acts testifies (11:5; Acts 2:41, 47; 4:4).

3:4 The answer to Paul’s question in v. 3 comes in v. 4: it is an emphatic “absolutely not.” There is no way possible for the unbelief of the Jews to nullify or render inoperative the faithfulness of God. God will be true to what he has said. This will be demonstrated in the final judgment.

The purview in v. 4 does not exclude judgment in the present, but the focus is on the final judgment when God will be shown to have been true all along and every man, particularly the Jew, shown to have been faithless and a liar. Paul says that the Jew talked a better game than he ever played, thus he will be shown to have been a liar. The term true (ἀληθής, alēthēs) means that God will act consistently with what he has said he will do. This includes blessing Israel as well as judging her, as the subsequent quotation from Ps 51:4 indicates (Ps 51:6 MT).

The quotation from Ps 51:4 is taken almost verbatim from the Greek OT (Ps 50:6 LXX), with only minor modifications. In Psalm 51 David humbly cries out to God for forgiveness because of his sin with Bathsheba. The point of v. 4 is that David admits he is a sinner against God and therefore God is proved right when he speaks and justified when he judges. Paul says that even the king of Israel, David himself, who enjoyed an excellent overall reputation in first century Judaism, had to be judged for his sin. Thus God is true to bless and to punish no matter who the offending party is. The Jew, then, who thinks that God is unjust and unfaithful when he makes promises to his people on the one hand, and then judges them for sin on the other, is sadly mistaken. In fact, this state of affairs actually proves that God is true and that men are liars.

3:5-6 In 3:5 Paul anticipates what one of his Jewish friends might say and frames the objection in light of a purely human argument, that is, an argument that sounds typical of the kinds of things men say in general. Someone might try to argue that “if our unrighteousness demonstrates the righteousness of God, why is he still just when he inflicts wrath on us?” The obvious answer to this argument—an emphatic denial of its conclusion—comes forcefully in v. 6.

Paul refers here to the righteousness of God (θεου~ δικαιωσύνην, theou dikaiōsunēn). It is unlikely in this context that he is referring to God’s saving activity which formed part of the meaning in 1:17. Neither is he referring to forensic justification or the status of those whom God saves by the power of the gospel. The context is entirely too negative for such interpretations. The best understanding of the expression here in 3:5 is as a reference to the perfect moral character of God, his perfect holiness. The point Paul is making, then, is that man’s sin only serves, by way of sharp contrast, to demonstrate the blinding holiness of God. This means that God is in no way unrighteous (ἄδικος, adikos) when he inflicts wrath (ἐπιφέρων τὴν ὀργήν, epipherōn tēn orgēn). Ultimately, on the day of wrath, when he calls all men to give an account, the truth of his righteous character will become universally known (Rom 14:10; Heb 4:13).

3:7 The hypothetical argument laid out in 3:5 is repeated in a slightly different form and with greater emphasis in 3:7. Here the point is not simply that God’s righteousness is demonstrated by my unrighteousness, but rather that my lying or falsehood enhances (ἐπερίσσευσεν, eperisseusen; lit. “overflows” “abounds”) the truth to his glory. The implication is that the glory of his righteousness is realized in ways it otherwise would not be. But while Paul says that it is true that our unrighteousness magnifies and makes visible the sterling character of God, it does not follow in any way, shape, or form, that we should not therefore be judged as a sinner. We most certainly should be, and indeed we will be.

3:8 The punctuation in this verse is difficult to establish with certainty, but the NET Bible has admirably captured what is perhaps the best rendering.

The overall point of the verse, though the Greek is somewhat tangled seems fairly clear enough. The first part of the verse is a rejoinder to the objection outlined in the previous verse. In other words, if a person is going to argue that their sin enhances God’s glory, then why not do more evil so that good (τὰ ἀγαθά, ta agatha; i.e., the realization of God’s glory) may be even more abundant? Such an argument in God's moral universe is absurd to say the least.

Nonetheless, there were certain Jews who had accused Paul of actually teaching this doctrine. This is undoubtedly due to his treatment of the Law and the feeling that if one does away with the Law—like Paul had supposedly done—then sin will run rampant. But Paul never taught the unqualified removal of the Law, only a different understanding of its role in salvation and sanctification (cf. Rom 3:21; 7:6, 12; 13:8-10).

Paul's final comment about such “human” arguments is unambiguous: the condemnation (κρίμα, krima) of those who argue that we should commit sin so that good may come is deserved (ἔνδικον, endikon; cf. Heb 2:2).

F. Homiletical Idea and Outline

Idea: Be Careful How You Think about Sin!

I. Understand The Blessing of Being a Christian (3:1-2)

A. You Bear the Name Christian (3:1)

B. You Have Received the Word of God (3:2)

II. But Also Understand God’s Faithfulness and How He Judges Unbelief and Sin (3:3-8)

A. Lest We Think God Is Unfaithful When He Judges Unbelief (3:3-4)

B. Lest We Think Our Sin Is in Any Way Profitable Before God (3:5-8)

1. For God Is A Just Judge (3:5-6)

a. The Argument (3:5)

b. The Verdict (3:6)

2. For God Will Judge People as Sinners (3:7-8)

a. The Argument (3:7-8a)

b. The Verdict (3:8b)

G. Contribution of Passage to Systematic Theology

Romans 3:1-8 contributes to our understanding of sin (hamartiology) and how God will deal with it. We are not to think for one minute that even though our sin demonstrates the infinite righteousness of our perfect God that we are therefore excused in some way from judgment or have thus been given license to sin. Paul reserves strong language for those who follow this train of reasoning. No matter how much glory God receives as a result of our sin, sin will always be punished and God will always remain just.

We need to briefly spell out, however, a more integrated view of the Pauline concept of judgment. First, the deciding factor in judgment concerning our eternal destiny is our relationship to Christ and his saving work. If we have trusted in him (3:21-26) we are saved and saved eternally (Rom 8:38-39). God will, however, discipline us for our sin in the here and now, and we will lose reward at the final judgment (1 Cor 11:30; cf. Heb 12:1-11).

If, on the other hand, we have not trusted in Christ and have no personal relationship with him, we will be judged for our sin with eternal consequences (2 Thess 1:8-9; cf. John 5:28-29). Hell is a reality which eternally demonstrates God's holy justice and which is created for those who just can't stomach having to think about God (so C. S. Lewis; cf. Rom 1:18-20).

H. Contribution of Passage to Discipleship and Church Mission

In our churches we need to ensure that we are not excusing sin under the pretense of grace. This does not entail the idea of “running around” looking for others’ sin, but it does mean staying close to the Lord and keeping a clean slate before him, both in the church and in the world (Ephesians 5:3; 1 Peter 3:15-16)! It also entails the idea of leaders carrying out church discipline in a loving and impartial way.

³⁵ R. Kent Hughes, 1001 Great Stories and Quotes (Wheaton, IL: Tyndale, 1998), 239-40.

8. Study and Exposition of Romans 3:9-20

A. Introduction

Many years ago there was a famous correspondence in The Times under the subject “What is wrong with the world today?” The best letter of all was also the shortest, and read—“Dear Sir, I am. Yours faithfully, G. K. Chesterton.” That devastating declaration showed a profound insight into man’s universal malaise, and I believe that it can teach us a deeply challenging lesson. I am convinced that throughout the Christian church there are problems, difficulties and frustrations that would begin to dissolve immediately if only some Christians would be honest enough to answer the question—“What’s wrong?” with the words “I am!”³⁶

This is precisely Paul’s point in Romans 3:9-20. In this passage we are faced with the reality of our sin against God and other people. In short, we are the problem; I am the problem. I cannot escape; the apostle makes it clear—with a litany of OT citations carrying the full authority of “thus says the Lord.” The passage as a whole stands as a fitting climax to this entire section which began in 1:18. Paul says that men are sinners—all of us—and held accountable to God. Here we stand, guilty and convicted. The somber weight of this passage should not be missed. Do not run to the peace of the gospel too quickly, lest you cheapen its message. First, take a good and prayerful look in the mirror of scripture and see if you are not there. Then, look to God for mercy. Then may he give us the same attitude we see in Copernicus: “I do not ask for the grace thou didst give to St. Paul; nor can I dare ask for the grace which thou didst grant to St. Peter; but, the mercy which thou didst show to the Dying Robber, that mercy, show to me.” Having come to see ourselves against the infinite holiness of God and his immutable law in 1:18-3:20, we may then be eager to welcome the message of grace preached in 3:21-31.

B. Translation of Passage in NET

3:9 What then? Are we better off? Certainly not, for we have already charged that Jews and Greeks alike are all under sin, 3:10 just as it is written: “There is no one righteous, not even one, 3:11 there is no one who understands, there is no one who seeks God. 3:12 All have turned away, together they have become worthless; there is no one who shows kindness, not even one.” 3:13 “Their throats are open graves, they deceive with their tongues, the poison of asps is under their lips.” 3:14 “Their mouths are full of cursing and bitterness.” 3:15 “Their feet are swift to shed blood, 3:16 ruin and misery are in their paths, 3:17 and the way of peace they have not known.” 3:18 “There is no fear of God before their eyes.” 3:19 Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be silenced and the whole world may be held accountable to God. 3:20 For no one is declared righteous before him by the works of the law, for through the law comes the knowledge of sin.

C. Full Exegetical Outline

Idea: All men, Jew and Gentile alike, are sinners and will not be declared righteous, i.e., attain a right standing with God, through works of the law.

I. The Jews are no better off than the Gentiles because all alike under sin (3:9).

II. There is no one who has any standing before God on their own, for there is no one who is righteous, understands or seeks God, or shows kindness; together all have become worthless (3:10-12).

A. There is no one who is righteous (3:10).

B. There is no one who understands (3:11).

C. There is no one who seeks God (3:11).

D. All have turned away and become useless (3:12).

E. There is no one who shows kindness (3:12).

III. There is no one who has any standing before God on their own, for their sin with the tongue is evident, deceitful, deadly, and brutal (3:13-14).

A. Their throats are open graves (3:13).

B. They deceive with their tongues (3:13).

C. The poison of asps is on their lips (3:13)

D. Their mouths are full of cursing and bitterness (3:14).

IV. There is no one who has any standing before God on their own, for violence marks their lives, the way of peace they have not known, and all this because they have no fear of God (3:15-18).

A. Their feet are swift to shed blood (3:15).

B. Ruin and misery are in their paths (3:16).

C. They have not known the way of peace (3:17).

D. They have no fear of God (3:18).

V. No one, not even the Jew, can be declared righteous by works of the law for the law cannot declare righteous, but only bring the knowledge of sin (3:19-20).

A. The law speaks to the Jew (3:19).

B. Every mouth will be silenced (3:19).

C. The whole world will be held accountable to God (3:19).

D. No one is declared righteous by works of the law (3:20).

E. Through the law comes the knowledge of sin (3:20).

D. Simple Point Outline and Homiletical Outline

Idea: We are all sinners, incapable of achieving righteousness on our own.

I. All Are under Sin (3:9)

II. We Sin against God (3:10-12)

A. We Are Unrighteous (3:10)

B. We Do not Understand (3:11)

C. We Do not Seek God (3:11)

D. We Have Turned Away and Become Useless (3:12)

III. We Sin against People with Our Tongues (3:13-14)

A. Our Throats Are Open Graves (3:13)

B. We Deceive with Our Tongues (3:13)

C. The Poison of Asps Is on Our Lips (3:13)

D. We Curse and Are Bitter (3:14)

IV. We Sin against People with Violence (3:15-18)

A. Our Feet Are Swift To Shed Blood (3:15)

B. Ruin and Misery Mark Our Paths (3:16)

C. We Have not Known the Way of Peace (3:17)

D. We Have no Fear of God (3:18)

V. We Cannot Be Declared Righteous by Our Works (3:19-20)

A. We Are Accountable to God (3:19)

B. Our Works of the Law Cannot Declare Us Righteous (3:20)

E. Exposition Proper

The point of this section, made explicit in 3:19-20, is twofold. First, Paul wants to drive home and yet bring to a conclusion his accusations of Gentile (1:18-32) and Jewish (2:1-3:8) sinfulness. His argument is that all men alike are under sin, equally meriting God’s wrath, and that neither has an out of any sort, not even ignorance in the case of the Gentile, or supposed obedience to the Law in the case of the Jew. The use of the many OT quotations is meant to heighten the thesis of the universality of human sinfulness and the repetition of these passages, one on top of the other, in a coherent fashion, is meant to drive the point home with vigor and power. This is a sermon, if you will, not an impassioned comment!

The second purpose Paul wishes to establish with this section, having summarized human sinfulness and guilt, is to introduce his readers to the next specific topic on the agenda, namely, the gospel (3:21-32), as well as to hint generally at other topics to come—topics such as “righteousness,” “works of the law,” and “the knowledge of sin and the law.”

3:9 The punctuation and precise meaning of the first part of this verse is difficult. The introductory question what then (τὶ οὖν, ti oun) is identical with that beginning 3:1. It asks a question in light of the discussion in 3:1-8, and in particular the discussion in 3:1-3. We may understand it as follows: “Since there is value in being a Jew, as far as having received the oracles of God is concerned, “what then” is the benefit in terms of my standing as a Jew before God? This is the point of the next question Paul asks.

Paul follows the question, “what then,” with another question, which, on the surface, appears to be an attempt to clarify what is meant by “what then.” The question, which is simply one word in the Greek text (προεχόμεθα, proechometha), seems to be asking, Are we [Jews] any better off? The answer is, certainly not (οὐ πάντως, ou pantōs). In other words, whatever benefit the Jew obtained through being the recipient of divine oracles, it was not of the sort that placed God in his debt. On the contrary, only the reverse is true. The reason for this, Paul says, is that Jews and Greeks alike are all under sin (᾿Ιουδαιους τε καὶ ῞Ελληνας πάντας ὑφ ᾿ ἁμαρτίαν εἶναι, Ioudaious te kai Ellēnas pantas huph hamartian).

Paul rarely uses sin (ἁμαρτία, hamartia) in the plural to denote sinful acts (1 Cor 15:3), but rather in the singular to refer to the principle of sin. He uses it approximately 48 times in Romans to describe the human condition as inextricably and helplessly (though not innocently) under the power or ruling force of sin and intentionally personifies it as a “lord” or “master” in 6:14. For Paul, sin is a dominating force which has captured all men and which, apart from the intervention of God in Christ, leads to physical as well as eternal death (Rom 6:23).

3:10 In 3:10-18 Paul uses several passages from the OT to demonstrate the thesis that all people are under sin. The expression just as it is written (καθὼς γέγραπται ὅτι, kathōs gegraptai hoti) indicates that what follows involves citations from the OT. It also shows Paul’s deep conviction that the OT scriptures correspond to reality as it is found in human experience. He did not need to mention the latest human sin to demonstrate his point; he need only refer to passages from the OT. The OT, for Paul, had as much authority in defining and explaining human experience as it did in outlining human history (1:2-4; 9:1-11:32; 15:12). We might well take a lesson from Paul on this point.

What follows in 3:10b-18 is a series of passages from the OT. It was common practice in the Judaism of Paul’s day for the rabbis to string together many passages in support of an argument. Often these verses were only joined verbally through the use of a similar word of phrase (cf. Acts 2:25-36). In this case Paul cites five texts from the Psalms, one from Ecclesiastes, and one from Isaiah. What holds them together is, of course, the common theme of human sinfulness, as well as the repetition of the phrase “there is no…” (6x). There is also a logical development within the verses as Paul accuses men of sin against God (10-12), sins of the tongue (13-14) and crimes of violence against other human beings (15-17). The fact that there is a focus on God first (10-12), and then, a focus on man (13-17), may reflect a conscience dependence on the two part division of the decalogue (cf. Exod 20:1-11 with Exod 20:12-17).

But why is man so bent on sinning against God and his fellow man? Answer: there is no fear of God. So, just as the fear of God played an important role in the giving of the law, so here men are accused by the apostle of having no proper fear of God. Thus the final structural marker which holds the passage together and which provides an interpretive framework for the sinfulness described therein is Paul’s reference to men having no fear of God. The apostle begins with God and ends with God.

Now that we understand the structure of the passage, let’s begin to look at the details. Paul’s first citation, with certain modifications, is found in Psalm 14:1 (Ps 13:1 LXX; cf. Eccl 7:20). It establishes the general point of man’s undesirable condition before God. There is no one who is righteous (δίκαιος, dikaios), not even one (οὐδὲ εἷς, oude heis)! Every human being who has ever lived or ever will live has been a slave to sin, under its ruling power, and in no way merits in themselves, either through their good works or the right internal character, a secure standing with God. Jesus Christ is the only exception to this.

3:11-12 In 3:11 and 12 Paul carries on with an excerpt from Psalm 14:2-3. He says that there is no one who understands (οὐκ ἔστιν ὁ συνίων, ouk estin ho suniōn). People do not understand God, neither his character, nor his ways. By willingly suppressing the truth about God they become corrupt and unable to remember anything accurate about him (1:18-21). Thus they downplay the one thing they do know, namely, that they will be held accountable for their sin (1:32; 2:14-15).

Further, there is no one who seeks (ἐκζητῶν, ekzētōn) God. The fact that we have become worthless (ἠχρεώθησαν, ēchreōthēsan) indicates that we have become so morally reprobate by our own doing (and God's judgment) that it is impossible on our own to do anything meriting God’s favor.

Thus with the repetition of “there is no one…” in 3:10-12 the point about the universality of sin is made once again.

3:13-14 The progression from throats (λάρυγξ, larugx), to tongues (γλῶσσαι, glōssai), to lips (χείλη, cheilē), to mouths (στόμα, stoma), probably indicates the natural way in which sounds are uttered by a person (cf. Ps 5:9; 139:4; 140:3). The point is to emphasize that the very process of speaking can be sinful.

The reference to their tongues as open graves (τάφος ἀνεῳγμένος, taphos aneōgmenos) stands first in the clause for greater emphasis and evokes vivid images of the stark reality surrounding death and decay. That the grave is open probably means that through the use of the tongue we are able to see the rot going on beneath the surface (i.e., in the heart)—rot that would otherwise be obscured from our vision (cf. Mark 7:14-15).

People intentionally deceive (ἐδολιοῦσαν, edoliousan) others with their tongues by obscuring their intentions to do harm, and as Paul says, the poison of asps is under their lips (ἰὸς ἀσπίδων ὑπὸ τὰ χείλη αὐτῶν, ios aspidōn hupo ta cheilē autōn). The asp, which was probably the Egyptian cobra, was found in both the desert and in fields, and was extremely poisonous. One can scarcely think of a more graphic way in which to express the pain and suffering caused by vindictive and unjust words (cf. Matt 12:36-37; Eph 4:29).

Finally, in 3:14 Paul says their mouths are full of cursing (ἀρᾶς, aras) and bitterness (πικρίας, pikrias). Paul uses a phrase from Psalm 9:28 to again express the vile nature of sinful human speech. The “cursing” probably expresses the actual manner of speaking, with hints of violence, while the term “bitterness” reflects the condition of the heart. Out of the bitterness of the heart flows the cursing of the mouth.

3:15-17 Paul moves on in vv. 15-17 with a citation dependent for the most part on Isaiah 59:7-8 (cf. Prov 1:16). He leaves the sins involving the mouth and moves forward to enumerate sins involving the imagery of feet. People are swift (ὀξεῖς, oxeis) to shed blood, to commit acts of violence against others. Indeed, ruin and misery are in their paths (ὁδοῖς, hodois); the landscape behind them is littered with the remains of their violence. Everywhere they go people suffer. They have not known the way of peace (ὁδὸν εἰρήνης, hodon eirēnēs), that is, the way of salvation in which God would lead them if they were willing.

In the Isaianic context, the prophet mourns the covenant unfaithfulness of Israel whose sin was so great that justice was said to stand at a distance and to be driven back (Isa 59:9, 14). Paul’s use of this passage probably implies that the Jews of his day were in the same position as those to whom Isaiah originally spoke; they were also in desperate need of the salvation only YHWH’s arm could work (Isa 59:16).

The repeated references to “bodily parts” in this catena of OT quotations reinforce Paul’s understanding of sin as expressing itself through the bodily members (Rom 6:12-13). It is also interesting to note that in this section the passages that refer to the Gentiles in the OT are being equally applied to the Jews. While the rabbis would have agreed that sin is sin, they would not have taken kindly to the notion that they were guilty in the same way and to the same degree as the Gentiles.

3:18 Paul concludes his practical discussion of the sins of humanity with a citation from Psalm 36:1. A lack of the fear of God is at once the root problem for sin and a great sin itself leading to much folly and corruption. Men commit sins because they hold God in contempt and simply have no fear of his awesomeness. But as Nahum declared to Ninevah and the Assyrians, God is not to be trifled with. He is a divine warrior who exacts punishment on his enemies, and does so without mercy. For Christians, one of the most significant revelations of the New Testament is the fact that God is our personal heavenly father (Matt 6:9; Gal 4:6). This wonderful and comforting truth must not be minimized, but it must not be permitted to denigrate into mere sentimentality for we are also commanded to fear and reverence our Father (1 Peter 1:17-19).

3:19 Paul expresses his great confidence in God’s revealed word in the OT for he says that whatever (ὅσα, hosa) the law says…. In other words, whatever the entire Old Testament says, it is right!

Further, whatever the law says, it says it to those who are under the law (ὅσα ὁ νόμος λέγει τοῖς ἐν τῷ νόμῳ λαλεῖ, hosa ho nomos legei tois en tō nomō lalei). Two things must be mentioned about this translation. First, there are two different Greek words, both of which we have translated, “says.” In actuality there is probably a different nuance intended so that the translation might also be rendered: “whatsoever the law says, it speaks [this] to those under the law.” Paul implies that there are many Jews who know what the law says (legei), but not many who hear it speaking (lalei) directly to them: "he who has ears, let him hear what the law says…."

The second point concerns the translation “under the law.” This is not the same kind of thought we had in 3:9 where Paul refers to the entire world as “under sin.” Literally, 3:19 says, “those in (ἐν, en) the law,” though this English translation is a bit difficult to understand. The point Paul seems to be making is that “those who possess or live in relationship to the OT revelation of God,” are those in the law. In other words, the apostle is referring to Jews as they view themselves in relationship to the Mosaic Law or God's covenant in general (cf. 3:20).

But, if Paul is referring primarily to the Jews in 3:19 (even though the citations in 3:10-18 indict all humanity), how can the whole world be said to be held accountable? The answer seems to be that if the best of humanity (i.e., the Jew) is indicted by God’s words and unable to be saved by works of the law (cf. 3:20), then certainly the rest of humanity doesn’t stand a chance. In an a fortiori argument, it is a foregone conclusion that if the Jew fails, so does everyone else. After all, they had the most opportunity.

3:20 The emphasis on no one (οὐ…πᾶσα σάρξ, ou...pasa sarx) picks up the Jewish element inherent in “those under the law” in 3:19 and broadens it to include all men. “No one” will be declared righteous (δικαιωθήσεται, dikaiōthēsetai), that is, absolutely no one will achieve a right standing with God on the basis of their own works.

The prepositional phrase by works of the law (ἐξ ἔργων νόμου, ex ergōn nomou) stands first in its clause for added emphasis (cf. Rom 3:28; 4:2; Gal 2:16). What are these “works of the law” to which Paul refers? While they undoubtedly include any works done in obedience to the Mosaic law, it seems that Paul primarily intends circumcision because of what it represents to the Jewish mind, i.e., covenantal faithfulness and inclusion (3:28-30; 4:2, 6, 9-10). Some commentators have suggested that ergōn nomou refers to dietary laws, but this is highly unlikely. Paul is not referring to dietary laws, but to the moral law of God which brings knowledge of sin (3:20). Also, it is almost impossible to see how Paul—if he were referring to dietary laws—could ever have made the point that all men are guilty of sin, both Jew and Gentile. Gentiles were never responsible to keep Israel's dietary laws.

The reason (γάρ, gar) works of the law cannot not justify a person is because the function of the law is not to justify and our works, no matter what their apparent merit, can never measure up to the standard set out in the law. The law was never intended to justifiy a person; indeed, it is powerless to aid a person in such a feat. On the contrary, it condemns the entire race, for it reveals both the fact of our sin as well as its heinous and condemnatory character (5:20-21; 7:7-9). In short, it is when we juxtapose our lives and the holy law of God that we gain personal, first-hand, and meaningful knowledge of our sin (ἐπίγνωσις ἁμαρτίας, epignōsis hamartias). To use "obedience to the law" as a catapult into fellowship with God is to fail to grasp our complete fallenness in God's eyes. This is, in large measure, Paul's point in 1:18-3:20.

F. Contribution of Passage to Systematic Theology

This passage contributes to the doctrine of the depravity concerning the entire human race and that no person has escaped the grip of sin. Further, no amount of good works, done in accordance with the highest ethical norms, can result in our being declared righteous. The situation is hopeless as far as we are concerned. Our entire heart, mind, and will is enslaved to the power of sin and we stand under the just wrath of God.

G. Contribution of Passage to Discipleship and Church Mission

When we preach the gospel we must help people understand that our first and ultimate problem as fallen human beings is not that we do not have what we need or want, but that we are in rebellion against God and are in need of forgiveness, righteousness, and reconciliation. We are under condemnation without Christ. Make no mistake about it and do not allow His profound patience to make a practical atheist out of you. Also, be wary of those who suggest that God will solve all your problems in the here-and-now or that He wants to make you a financial success. This is not the gospel, but a cheap substitute, which is really no gospel at all. To be sure, our Father does provide for his children, and there is coming a day when he will glorify his name by doing away with all our pain, grief, and struggles. But that day is not now. Our present experience is "life between the times." We live in the period of the inauguration of his kingdom, but we must wait patiently for the consummation to come at his return. Thus our present experience, while rooted in deep joy, is not without sorrow, pain, and suffering. We must take up the cross as our master taught us (Luke 9:23).

³⁶ John Blanchard, The Truth for Life (West Sussex, England: H. E. Walter, 1982), 263.

9. Study and Exposition of Romans 3:21-31

A. Introduction

Romans 1:18-3:20 speaks profoundly and frankly into the issue of human sin and responsibility. The night is very black indeed throughout these chapters; there is a deathly chill in the air between God and his creatures and the frightening darkness is looking more permanent with each stroke of the apostle’s pen. But a marked change occurs here in 3:21-31. For the first time (apart from 1:17) we receive hope for daylight, and not just a glimmer of the sun and the enjoyment of its heat, but the expectation of a bright, sunny day—such as one would experience at noonday. But even here we will have to wait for the full light of the sun; that will come in chapters 6-8. For now, it is enough to behold the sunrise—and a beautiful one it is! While sin has left us a glorious ruin, wretched vice-regents as it were, and condemned to death, grace is about to change all that.

“Back in the eighteenth century, a young boy was born into a Christian home. For the first six years of his life, he heard the truths of the gospel and he was loved. Sadly, though, his parents died. The orphaned boy went to live with his relatives. There he was mistreated and abused and ridiculed for his faith in Christ.

The boy couldn’t tolerate that situation, and he fled and joined the Royal Navy. In the navy, the boy’s life went downhill. He became known as a brawler, was whipped many times, and participated in some of his comrades’ being keel-hauled. Finally, while he was still young, he deserted the Royal Navy and fled to Africa, where he attached himself to a Portuguese slave trader. There, his life reached its lowest point. There were times when he actually ate off the floor on his hands and knees. He escaped and then became attached to another slave trader as the first mate on his ship. But the young man’s pattern of life had become so depraved, he couldn’t stay out of trouble. As the story goes, he stole the ship’s whiskey and got so drunk that he fell overboard. He was close to drowning when one of his shipmates harpooned him and brought him back on board. As a result, the young man had a huge scar in his side for the rest of his life. After that escapade, he couldn’t get much lower. In the midst of a great storm off the coast of Scotland, when days and days were filled with pumping water out of the boat, the young man began to reflect on the Scripture verses he had heard as a child. He was marvelously converted. The new life John Newton found is reflected in his own heartfelt words, familiar to millions now:

Amazing grace! How sweet the sound—
That saved a wretch like me!
I once was lost but now am found,
Was blind but now I see.”³⁷

Newton’s experience put into words: the ultimate point of Romans 3:21-31.

B. Translation of Passage in NET

3:21 But now apart from the law the righteousness of God (which is attested by the law and the prophets) has been disclosed—3:22 namely, the righteousness of God through the faithfulness of Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction, 3:23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. 3:24 But they are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus. 3:25 God publicly displayed him as a satisfaction for sin by his blood through faith. This was to demonstrate his righteousness, because God in his forbearance had passed over the sins previously committed. 3:26 This was also to demonstrate his righteousness in the present time, so that he would be just and the justifier of the one who lives because of Jesus’ faithfulness.

3:27 Where, then, is boasting? It is excluded! By what principle? Of works? No, but by the principle of faith! 3:28 For we consider that a person is declared righteous by faith apart from the works of the law. 3:29 Or is God the God of the Jews only? Is he not the God of the Gentiles too? Yes, of the Gentiles too! 3:30 Since God is one, he will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through that same faith. 3:31 Do we, therefore, nullify the law through this faith? Absolutely not! Instead we uphold the law.

C. Full Exegetical Outline

Idea: The way in which God freely and graciously justifies any sinner, Jew or Gentile, as testified to in the Law and the Prophets, is not by works of the Law, but by faith in Christ's atoning sacrifice—a sacrifice which demonstrates God's justice in dealing with sin and at the same time excludes all human boasting.

I. The way in which God freely and graciously justifies any sinner, Jew or Gentile, as testified to in the Law and the Prophets, is not by works of the Law, but by faith in Christ's atoning sacrifice—a sacrifice which demonstrates God's judstice in dealing with sin (3:21-26).

A. The righteousness of God has been revealed through Christ’s faithfulness and is available to all by grace, through faith, apart from works (3:21-24).

1. The righteousness of God has been revealed apart from the law and the prophets (3:21).

2. The law and the prophets testify to the righteousness of God (3:21).

3. The righteousness of God was disclosed through the faithfulness of Christ for all who believe (3:22).

4. There is no distinction between Jew and Gentile because all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God (3:23).

5. All men are justified freely through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus (3:24).

B. The fact that God publicly displayed Christ as a satisfaction for sin was to demonstrate his justice in terms of sins committed beforehand as well as to be the justifier of the one who lives because of Jesus’ faithfulness (3:25-26).

1. God publicly displayed Christ as a satisfaction for sin by his blood through faith (3:25).

2. Christ’s death publicly displays the righteousness of God in dealing with sins committed beforehand (3:25).

3. God is just and at the same time justifies the one who lives by the faithfulness of Jesus (3:26).

II. The reason boasting is excluded from justification is because justification is by faith, apart from works of the law (for both Jew and Gentile), though it does uphold the demands of the law (3:27-31).

A. Boasting is excluded in justification since justification is by faith apart from works (3:27-28).

1. Boasting is excluded on the basis of faith not works (3:27).

2. A person is declared righteous by faith apart from works of the law (3:28).

B. Since God is one, he is the God of both Jew and Gentile and justifies both of them in precisely the same way, i.e., by faith (3:29-30).

1. God is the God of both Jew and Gentile (3:29).

2. Since God is one, he will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised by that same faith (3:30).

C. Faith does not nullify the law, rather it upholds the law (3:31).

D. Simple Point Outline

Idea: The Righteousness of God: It's Availablility and Impact on Human Arrogance

I. The Way God Made His Righteousness Available Was…(3:21-26).

A. Through Christ (3:21-24)

1. Apart from the Law and Prophets (3:21)

2. His Faithfulness (3:22)

3. To All Men (3:23)

4. By Grace (3:24)

B. Without Compromising His Justice (3:25-26)

1. Christ Satisfies God’s Wrath against Sin (3:25)

2. God’s Justice and Justification (3:26)

II. The Role of Boasting, Faith, and the Law (3:27-31)

A. Boasting: It Is Excluded (3:27-28)

B. Faith: All Are Justified By Faith (3:29-30)

C. The Law: Faith Upholds the Law (3:31)

E. Exposition Proper

3:21 The phrase But now (Νυνὶ δὲ, nuni de) is extremely significant in Romans and marks off the “post-Christ’s coming” era—including the ministry of the Spirit—as a new development in the salvation historical plan of God. Now, Paul says, is the eschatological time of fulfillment in Christ (7:6). So then, νυνι δε is not simply a logical connector, as if Paul were saying, “since no one will be declared righteous through works of the law (3:20-21), therefore, righteousness must come by faith” (3:21-26). Rather, νυνι δε indicates that Paul is thinking in salvation-historical terms, i.e., the time before Christ's coming and the “now time” (3:26) after his coming and the inauguration of the reign of grace in the kingdom (cf. 5:20-21; 14:17).

But the realization of this time of fulfillment has come apart from the law (χωρὶς νόμου, chōris nomou)—the law refers to the Mosaic legislation enmeshed with any current rabbinic legal interpretation which prescribes works on that basis. It is apart from such a works-based-righteousness that the “righteousness of God” has been revealed.

The righteousness of God (δικαιοσύνη θεοῦ, dikaiosunē theou) refers to the status of those who have been declared righteous by God through no merit of their own. They are declared righteous on the basis of their redemption in Christ.

But while this legal standing before God is given apart from the Law, that does not mean there is absolutely no connection between his righteousness and the Law. On the contrary, the connection is prophetic, for the righteousness of God is attested (μαρτυρουμένη, marturoumenē) by the law and the prophets. As Paul has already stated in 1:2-4, the antecedents of the gospel (i.e., the good news about God’s righteousness given to the believer through Christ), go back deep into OT promise.

Paul uses the verb disclosed (πεφανέρωται, pephanrōtai) twenty-two times, often in connection with the coming of Christ as the definitive revelation of God’s plan. Compare Romans 16:26.

3:22-23 In vv. 22-23 Paul explains further what he means by the “righteousness of God.” It comes through faith, not works, and is available on that basis not to Jews only, but to all who believe (εἰς πάντας τοὺς πιστεύοντας, eis pantas tous pisteuontas). It is available to the one who is the most vial idolater and sexually perverse (1:18-32) and it is available on the same basis to the Jew who claimed to live according to the law of God (2:1-3:9). In fact, as far as the righteousness of God is concerned, including the manner in which it is received, there is no distinction (διαστολή, diastolē) between Gentile and Jew. The reason for this is simple: since all are sinners and together have fallen short of God’s moral and spiritual perfection (i.e., his glory), all are equally in need of his righteousness and all receive it on the same basis (3:9-20).

This righteousness is made available through the faithfulness of Jesus Christ (διὰ πίστεως ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ, dia pisteōs Iēsou christou). The text literally reads, “through the faith of Jesus Christ.” An interpretive question immediately presents itself: “What does Paul mean by “the faith of Jesus Christ”? Some argue that the “of” phrase (a genitive construction in Greek) should be understood as indicating possession, i.e., Jesus’ faith. We are then saved through imitating Jesus’ faith. This has little grammatical or biblical/theological support.

A second interpretation is to take the genitive “of” phrase to mean “faith in Jesus.” This is often referred to as the objective genitive interpretation where Iēsou is taken as the object of the verbal noun “pisteōs” (i.e., “faith”). This has been the traditional interpretation and has much to commend it biblically and grammatically speaking.

There is, however, a third interpretation which has been recently advanced and is the one adopted in the NET Bible. In this interpretation, Iēsou is taken as the subject of the verbal noun pisteōs. This indicates that Jesus’ faithfulness is in view and that the righteousness of God has been made known through the faithfulness of Christ (i.e., his obedience to the Father in life and death) and is available to all who believe.

Now it must be said that both Paul and the rest of the NT endorse both these latter two options. This is not a discussion, then, about which idea is heretical and which is orthodox, but rather about the truth to which Romans 3:22 (26) refers.

There are those who suggest, along with other arguments, that an objective genitive is unlikely since the following phrase, “for all who believe,” is rendered superfluous in this interpretation. But this need not be the case at all, for the accent in this phrase is not so much on faith as it is on “all;” it is an emphatic statement on the universality of the offer of salvation.

Nonetheless, it does appear that the subjective genitive is to be preferred—though neither interpretation is without its difficulties. First, the passage focuses on the revelation (cf. phaneroō) of God’s righteousness publicly (3:25). This fits well with the cross obedience of Jesus which itself argues for the subjective genitive. It is difficult to see how the righteousness of God is revealed through our faith in Jesus, but it is not difficult to see how it is revealed by Jesus’ obedience to the Father. Second, when “faith” (pistis) is followed by a personal noun in the genitive case, it is almost never an objective genitive (cf. Matt 9:2, 22, 29; Mark 2:5; 5:34; 10:52; Luke 5:20; 7:50; 8:25, 48; 17:19; 18:42; 22:32; Rom 1:8; 12; 3:3; 4:5, 12, 16; 1 Cor 2:5; 15:14, 17; 2 Cor 10:15; Phil 2:17; Col 1:4; 2:5; 1 Thess 1:8; 3:2, 5, 10; 2 Thess 1:3; Titus 1:1; Phlm 6; 1 Pet 1:9, 21; 2 Pet 1:5).

3:24 Though all men without distinction are sinners, they may be justified (δικαιούμενοι, dikaioumenoi), that is, declared righteous and freed from all charges in connection with their sin (Rom 5:1). This is not a reference to being made righteous in any ethical or spiritual sense, but rather to a genuine legal pronouncement involving acquittal (cf. Rom 3:8). And God pronounces a person justified freely (δωρεάν, dōrean) by his grace. The idea of “freely” reaches back to Paul’s comment in 3:21 about the righteousness of God being revealed apart from the law (i.e., apart from works of the law). We cannot do, nor are we required to do—in fact we are forbidden to do—good works in the hope of earning salvation (Eph 2:8-9). Salvation is a gift and is given by God's grace (χάρις, charis).It is given according to his undeserved, completely and utterly, unmerited favor (cf. Rom 4:1-25). While we all fit somewhere in the description of 1:18-3:20, we can nevertheless be freely forgiven and justified through Christ by faith.

Every thought Paul has is focused on the person and work of Jesus Christ in the “now” time of salvation history (cf. the “now” in 3:21). The term redemption (ἀπολυτρώσεως, apolutrōseōs) means to “to buy back” and probably has as its background the manumission of slaves. In our context here in Romans, it is likely that Paul intends the idea that through Christ’s death—the fully paid ransom price—sinners are purchased for God from the enslaving power of sin (cf. Rom 3:9; Mark 10:45; Eph 1:7; 1 Cor 6:20).

3:25a God publicly displayed Christ as the satisfaction for sin. The term publicly displayed (προέθετο, proetheto) is in the middle voice and could be rendered “purposed” or “publicly displayed” (Rom 1:13; Eph 1:9). Both are definitely true, but for a number of reasons the second option seems better in this case: (1) Paul has argued that the righteousness of God has been disclosed, that is, “brought to light.” This accords well with a public event; (2) by his blood (ἐν τῷ αὐτοῦ αἵματι, en tō autou haimati) focuses on the cross which was a public event; (3) the term demonstrate (εἰς ἔνδειξιν, eis endeixin) argues well for a public presentation; (4) the faithfulness of Jesus Christ refers primarily, then, to his cross obedience which was public; (5) the focus on the present time (ἐν τῷ νῦν καιρῷ, en tō nun kairō) in 3:26 refers to the present time in light of Christ’s coming, death, and resurrection which was all public; (6) it is connected to the term satisfaction which has as its focus the physical reality of the cross, and is, therefore, external and public in focus; (7) the use of the accusative object complement, i.e., “God publicly displayed him a satisfaction for sin” fits better with the translation “publicly displayed” rather than "purposed."³⁸

There has also been no little discussion over the meaning of satisfaction (ἱλαστήριον, hilastērion). It has been argued that since the term is used twenty-one out of twenty-seven times in the Septuagint to refer to the mercy seat, that this is its meaning here too. Further, the only other NT usage of the term in Hebrews 9:5 suggests that this is its meaning in Romans 3:25. There it describes the altar in the most holy place (holy of holies) where the blood was sprinkled in the OT ritual on the Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur). Thus Paul it appears that Paul is saying that God displayed Jesus as the “mercy seat,” the place where propitiation was accomplished. Thus Christ is the fulfillment or antitype of the OT image. The fact that the definite article is not used with hilastērion is not a serious objection to this view. The contention that such an interpretation requires too much knowledge of the OT cultus is not damaging either. We may be well assured that in a church with both Jew and Gentile, where the LXX was undoubtedly taught, knowledge of Leviticus 16 and the "Day of Atonement" ritual was well known.

Further, some (e.g., Dodd) have contended that all meaning of “just wrath” is absent from hilastērion, but in a context dealing specifically with the wrath of God, i.e., 1:18-3:20, this is most unlikely. The term is best understood, then, to bring together twin aspects of God relationship to sinners, that is, expiation and propitiation. Respectively, God has removed our sin (expiation) and his anger is satiated against us (i.e., he is propitiated toward us).

3:25a-26 Paul says that there was a reason God accomplished propitiation in Christ on the cross. It was to demonstrate his righteousness because up to this point he had not dealt eternally with the question of man’s sin and guilt—he had passed over sins previously committed (τὴν πάρεσιν τῶν προγεγονότων ἁμαρτημάτων, tēn paresin tōn progegonotōn hamartēmatōn). The cross, however, is the answer, publicly given, to the accusation that God himself is sinful since he had not openly dealt with sin.

But in the process of demonstrating his deep seated, eternal hatred for sin—i.e., his holiness and justice, he is at once the one who condemns sin as well as the one who justifies the person who lives because of the faithfulness of Christ. The phrase just and the justifier (δίκαιον καὶ δικαιοῦντα, dikaion kai dikaiounta) might also be rendered, “just, even when he justifies.…”

3:27 Paul’s point in v. 27 follows naturally from 3:21-26 and indeed from all the previous material commencing in 1:18. When the apostle asks where then is boasting (Ποῦ οὖν ἡ καύχησις, pou oun hē kauchēsis)—a question particularly addressed to the Jews—the answer is rather obvious. Wherever it is, it is not included in salvation. Indeed, it is excluded (ἐξεκλείσθη, exekleisthē), “shut out,” “eliminated,” as it were. There is absolutely no room in one’s salvation for boasting since salvation is, from beginning to end, a work of God on behalf of depraved, lawless people (Eph 2:8-9). The principle of faith (πιστίς, pistis), that is, having to place sheer trust in God, as opposed to my own efforts (cf. 4:1ff), by the very nature of the case, excludes boasting in human achievement.

3:28 Again Paul hammers home his point. A person is declared righteous by faith apart from works of the law (δικαιοῦσθαι πίστει ἄνθρωπον χωρὶς ἔργων νόμου, dikaiousthai pistei anthrōpon chōris ergōn nomou). This statement, along with vv. 29-30, brings to a conclusion what Paul has been arguing thus far and prepares the reader for the OT example of Abraham to come in chapter 4.

3:29-30 Since God is the God of the Gentiles as well as the Jews, it follows that justification for all men must come apart from the law which was given solely to the Jews.

The oneness of God was a belief properly basic to Judaism and proclaimed by every devout Jew each day (cf. Deut 6:4). Here Paul appeals to this doctrine, claiming that since God is one (εἷς ὁ θεὸς, eis ho theos), he must have the same salvific concern for the Gentile as he does for the Jew. The Judaism of Paul’s day, however, did not draw the same conclusion from God’s essential unity. The only way a Gentile could be rightly related to God was to become a proselyte to Judaism, including coming under the yoke of the Law. And even then, Gentiles were always Gentiles, never quite up to the level of Jews by birth; in the eyes of the Jew, they had no natural claim on God. Paul says, however, that God is interested in the Gentiles apart from the Law and that contrary to certain Jewish expectations, the Gentiles are saved through the same faith that saves a Jew.

3:31 It is true that salvation is by grace through faith apart from the Law, but this does not mean that it has no essential relationship to the Law. Verse 31, due to the ambiguous nature of the comment, has given rise to various interpretations and modifications within similar interpretations. Two important questions are: (1) what is its relationship to 4:1ff and (2) what is the meaning of “law,” “nullify” and “uphold”? We will treat these questions in reverse order.

First, what is the meaning of “law,” “nullify” and “uphold”? Some argue that what Paul means by “law” is the OT as a whole in that it generally points or testifies to his doctrine of “righteousness by faith apart from the works of the law.” The primary support for this idea is that Paul says as much in 3:21. The problem with this view, here in v. 31, however, is that the term law (νόμος, nomos) stands alone and is not combined with “prophets” (as it is in 3:21) Also, the contrast between “upholding” the law versus “nullifying” it is not well established on this meaning. Further, this interpretation does not seem to give proper weight to the contrast between “works of the law” and “faith” in its understanding of the function of “law” (as “testifying”) in v. 31. Finally, the text does not say, “the law is upheld by this faith,” it says “we uphold” [the law by this faith]. This makes it unlikely that Paul intends here that our righteousness by faith was testified to in the OT. This may be true, but here in Romans 3:31 something other than the prophetic witness of the OT seems to be in mind.

Others argue that faith upholds the law in the sense that since the law condemns us all, as Paul argued in 3:19-20, faith alone is the only means of salvation. This is what the law was meant to teach us and to assert that salvation is by faith alone is not to nullify the law in its condemnatory role, but it is indeed to establish the truthfulness of the law in its evaluation of mankind. This, of course, is similar to what Paul teaches in Galatians 3:19-21, 24. But, it is difficult to see how “nullifying” the law and “upholding” it make much sense in this view.

We have said that the “righteousness of God” refers to a perfect legal standing with God (3:21-25). But Paul has argued that this perfect legal standing with God is not earned by works, rather it is received by faith. But, this doctrine—i.e., that justification comes by faith, not by works of the Law—has led to many Jews indicting Paul for antinomianism, that is, accusing him of a complete disregard for the Law and performing its works. It is to this accusation that verse 31 is ultimately directed. In verse 31 Paul is saying that justification by faith does not nullify obedience to the demands of God expressed in the Law, rather it upholds those righteous demands and is the only way they can truly be met. This interpretation is based on taking Law in v. 31 as referring to the demand of the law not to its prophetic witness to the present age of salvation nor to its role in exposing sin.

Verse 31, then, brings a conclusion to 3:27-31 and does not lead one directly into 4:1ff. The transition to 4:1ff came in 3:27-30. The truth of verse 31, that faith really upholds the demands of the law, is ambiguous and will be further unpacked in light of the ministry of the Spirit in 8:4ff and expressed in the context of the new community in 13:9-10.

F. Homiletical Idea and Outline

Idea: God’s Righteousness Given to Us by Faith…

I. Is Apart from Any Works We Could Do (3:21)

A. Apart from the Law

B. The Law and the Prophets

II. Is through the Faithfulness of Christ (3:22a)

III. Is for All of Us (3:22b-23)

A. For All Who Believe (3:22b-c)

B. There Is no Distinction (3:22c-23)

IV. Is Freely Given via Christ’s Redemptive Act (3:24)

A. By Grace (3:24)

B. Through the Redemption in Christ (3:24)

V. Is Rooted in God’s Justice (3:25-26)

A. Christ as the Satisfaction for Sin (3:25a)

B. God’s Justice Is not Compromised (3:25b-26)

VI. Excludes Any Boasting (3:27-30)

A. Because Justification Is by Faith (3:27-28)

B. All Men Are Justified by Faith (3:39-30)

VII. Upholds the Law (3:31)

G. Contribution of Passage to Systematic Theology

This passage stands at the very heart of Romans 1:18-15:13 and indeed Paul’s entire doctrine of soteriology (i.e., salvation). First, justification is the act of declaring a sinner righteous and acquitting him/her of all charges and condemnation. Second, the passage clearly affirms that justification is received by faith apart from works of any kind. Third, God justifies sinners by grace on the basis of the redemptive work of Jesus Christ. Fourth, God’s wrath against sinners has been totally satiated through Christ’s sacrifice. Fifth, in the act of justifying sinners God’s justice has in no way been compromised, for the total just payment for sin has been met in Christ. Sixth, salvation theology and the universal offer of the gospel rest on God’s essential unity and His position as creator of all men; we must never divorce proper creation theology from salvation theology. To do so is to bring an end to biblical Christianity. Seventh, faith does not nullify the righteous demands of the law. Rather, it is through faith that the holy demands of the law are upheld.

H. Contribution of Passage to Discipleship and Church Mission

This passage contributes in numerous ways to discipleship and church mission. We will mention three. First, we must be sure to continue to teach new Christians (all Christians for that matter) that justification is not something people earn, but something that is credited to their account when they believe in Christ apart from works. Once a person has been declared righteous by God, such a declaration forms the basis or foundation upon which God can approach him/her freely and forever. The question of their sin and falling short (3:23) has been forever answered. Therefore, it is spiritually damaging to people to suggest that once God has declared them righteous they can somehow lose that freely given status, i.e., lose our salvation (which involves more than "losing the Holy Spirit"). We were sinners when we received God’s free offer—sinful enough to require a cross as the solution—and we will be sinners (albeit redeemed) until we are with him in glory.

Second, we must also teach our people that true faith does not nullify the holy demands of the law as if to say that trusting in Christ/God leads to lawlessness or a spirit that takes lightly either sin or holiness. On the contrary, as we trust deeply in Christ the demands of the law are met in us who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit (8:4).

Third, the gospel is available to all men; it is “for everyone who believes.” We must give careful thought to reaching out to our neighbors with the gospel as well as pouring God-given time, energy, and resources into foreign missions.³⁹

³⁷ See R. Kent Hughes, 1001 Great Stories & Quotes (Wheaton, IL: Tyndale, 1998), 191-92.

³⁸ The translation "purposed" is not impossible on the object-complement construction, but does not seem to fit as well.

³⁹ The American church as a whole is in bad need of reformulating not only it's mission and structures, but more basically, it's theology of itself and its basic nature. See Craig Van Gelder, The Essence of the Church: A Community Created by the Spirit (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2000).

10. Study and Exposition of Romans 4:1-12

A. Introduction

James Montgomery Boice comments on a Bible tract prepared by some atheists: “Quite a few years ago a society for the spread of atheism prepared a tract containing half a dozen sketches of Old Testament characters combined with a lurid description of their misdeeds. No efforts were spared in describing their sin. One figure was Abraham. The leaflet pointed out that he was willing to sacrifice his wife's honor to save his own life. Yet he was called “the friend of God.” The atheists asked what kind of God this is who would have a friend like Abraham. Another figure was Jacob. He was described as a cheat and a liar. Yet God called himself “the God of Jacob.” Moses was portrayed as a murderer and a fugitive from justice, which he was. David was shown to be an adulterer who compounded the crime of adultery with the murder of the woman's husband. Yet David was called a man after God's own heart.” The atheists asked what kind of God he must be who could be pleased with David.

Remarkably this tract had hit on something which even God acknowledges. God calls himself just and holy. Yet for centuries he had been refusing to condemn and instead had actually been justifying men and women such as these. We might say that for these long centuries there had been a blot on God's name. As Paul says, he had indeed been passing over former sins. Is God unjust? No. In the death of Christ God's name and purposes are vindicated. It is now seen that on the basis of that death, God had justified and continues to justify the ungodly.”⁴⁰

Boice has rightly noted that justification involves God's declaration of acquittal of the ungodly on the basis of Christ's death. At the core of justification is a new legal standing, wherein the righteousness of Christ is imputed to the sinner's account and she/he has been permanently forgiven. This is, in miniature form, the theme of Romans 4:1-12.

B. Translation of Passage in NET

4:1 What then shall we say that Abraham, our ancestor according to the flesh, has discovered regarding this matter? 4:2 For if Abraham was declared righteous by the works of the law, he has something to boast about (but not before God). 4:3 For what does the scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness.” 4:4 Now to the one who works, his pay is not credited due to grace but due to obligation. 4:5 But to the one who does not work, but believes in the one who declares the ungodly righteous, his faith is credited as righteousness. 4:6 So even David himself speaks regarding the blessedness of the man to whom God credits righteousness apart from works:

4:7 “Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven, and whose sins are covered; 4:8 blessed is the one against whom the Lord does not count sin.”

4:9 Is this blessedness then for the circumcision or also for the uncircumcision? For we say, “faith was credited to Abraham as righteousness.” 4:10 How then was it credited to him? Was he circumcised at the time, or not? No, he was not circumcised but uncircumcised! 4:11 And he received the sign of circumcision as a seal of the righteousness that he had by faith while he was still uncircumcised, so that he would become the father of all those who believe but have never been circumcised, that they too could have righteousness credited to them. 4:12 And he is also the father of the circumcised, who are not only circumcised, but who also walk in the footsteps of the faith that our father Abraham possessed when he was still uncircumcised.

C. Full Exegetical Outline

Idea: The way in which God declared Abraham righteous (as an example to us) was by faith, apart from works and circumcision, in order that he might be the spiritual father of the Gentiles who believe as well as Jews who believe.

I. The way in which Abraham was declared righteous was by believing God, apart from works, as David also testifies (4:1-8).

A. Abraham was declared righteous by believing God, apart from works, just as Genesis 15:6 says (4:1-3).

1. If Abraham was declared righteous by works he has a boast, but not before God (4:1-2).

2. Genesis 15:6 says that Abraham was justified by believing God (4:3).

B. Righteousness is credited as a gift, apart from works, otherwise it would be as an obligation (4:4-5).

1. The one who works receives pay, does so not according to grace, but according to obligation (4:4).

2. The one who does not work, but believes in the one who declares the ungodly righteous, his faith is credited as righteousness (4:5).

C. David agrees that righteousness is a gift, apart from works, and that it includes complete and irreversible forgiveness (4:6-8).

1. David speaks about righteousness apart from works (4:6).

2. Blessed are those whose lawless deeds are forgiven, and whose sins are covered (4:7).

3. Blessed is the one against whom the Lord will never count sin (4:8).

II. Since Abraham was justified before he was circumcised he can stand as the father of both the uncircumcised (i.e., Gentiles) who have faith as well as the circumcised (i.e., Jews) who also have faith (4:9-12).

A. Abraham was declared righteous before he was circumcised (4:9-10).

B. Abraham received the sign of circumcision as a seal of the righteousness he already had by faith with the result that he became the father of everyone who has faith whether they are uncircumcised or circumcised (4:11-12).

1. Abraham received the sign of circumcision as a seal of the righteousness that he already had by faith (4:11a).

2. Abraham is the father of all those who have faith yet have never been circumcised (4:11b).

3. Abraham is the father of all the circumcised who also walk in the footsteps of his faith before he was circumcised (4:12).

D. Simple Point Outline

Idea: Justification Is Apart from Works and Circumcision

I. Justification Is Apart from Works (4:1-8)

A. The Citation of Genesis 15:6 (4:1-3)

B. The Nature of “Crediting” (4:4-5)

C. The Citation of Psalm 31:1-2a LXX (4:6-8)

II. Justification Is Apart from Circumcision (4:9-12)

A. Abraham’s Circumcumcision after Genesis 15:6 (4:9-10)

B. Abraham, the Father of Gentile Believers (4:11)

C. Abraham, the Father of Jewish Believers (4:12)

E. Exposition Proper

Paul has just argued in 3:21-31 that justification is by faith and is available to all men. And, since it is apart from any works of the law, all boasting is excluded (cf. esp. 3:27-28). In 4:1-12 he will buttress this argument with proof from the OT and the experience of Abraham and David.

4:1 Paul now turns to the example of Abraham. He asks the question: “What did Abraham find with regard to the manner in which God justifies a person? Was it by faith or by works? Abraham found that it was by faith, not by works.

The use of the perfect tense verb has discovered (εὑρηκέναι, heurēkenai) points to the declaration of righteousness in Genesis 15:6 and the fact that such a declaration formed the lasting foundation of Abraham’s relationship with YHWH.

When Paul says our (ἡμων, hēmōn) father Abraham he is not just referring to the Jews, but is including the Gentiles as well—everyone in the church at Rome.

4:2 Paul says, “let’s see what Abraham found, because if he found that he was justified by works (ἐξ ἔργων ἐδικαιώθη, ex ergōn edikaiōthē), then he has a boast, but not before God.” If Abraham earned a legal declaration of righteousness—which itself involves acquittal from any and all sins, as well as the positive imputation of Christ's righteousness—on the basis of his own (meritorious) works, he can boast, but even then, not before God.

But Paul's argument here seems to put him in conflict with James in 2:24: “You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone.” The obvious answer to this apparent dilemma is that Paul refers to the initial legal justification of a person while James refers to the final vindication of the same person who has claimed throughout his/her life to have faith. Thus the two are using the term "justify" in different, though related senses. In short, there is no real contradiction.

4:3 Picking up on the question of whether Abraham was justified by works (which some Jews held), Paul says: this is not what the scripture teaches. It teaches in Genesis 15:6 that Abraham believed God and it was credited to him as righteousness (ἐπίστευσεν δὲ ᾿Αβραὰμ τῷ θεῷ καὶ ἐλογίσθη αὐτῷ εἰς δικαιοσύνην, episteusen de Abraam tō theō elogisthē autō eis dikaiosunē). In other words, Abraham was declared righteous by believing God concerning the promise for many descendants (i.e., as numerous as the stars). He was not declared righteous on the basis of any works he had performed.

What Paul is saying here flies directly in the face of much of what his contemporaries believed about Abraham. Abraham was held in high esteem in Paul's day, and not necessarily needing God’s grace—that is, grace which was reserved for sinners. He was regarded as the father of the Jewish nation and one who obeyed God implicitly in absolutely everything (Ant 1. 225; Jub. 17:18). Indeed, it was because of his obedience that he received the promise of posterity, not because of his faith apart from works (cf. Gen 26:4-5).

In the Jewish intertestamental book of Sirach, the following is said of Abraham:

19Abraham was the great father of a multitude of nations, and no one has been found like him in glory.20 He kept the law of the Most High, and entered into a covenant with him; he certified the covenant in his flesh, and when he was tested he proved faithful.21 Therefore the Lord assured him with an oath that the nations would be blessed through his offspring; that he would make him as numerous as the dust of the earth, and exalt his offspring like the stars, and give them an inheritance from sea to sea and from the Euphrates to the ends of the earth (44:19-21; NRSV).

But Paul understands the OT traditions about Abraham to say something quite different regarding the particular question of his salvation and justification. The words it was credited (ἐλογίσθη, elogisthē) translate only one verb in the Greek text. The verb is functioning as a divine passive, meaning that God was the one who did the crediting, not Abraham. Abraham did not earn righteousness by works, rather Gdo credited righteousness to his account by faith. The Greek term elogisthe is used eleven times in 4:1-25 and may also be translated: “to impute,” “to reckon” or “to calculate.”

Now the fact that elogisthe is used eleven times in 4:1-25 (nine in 4:1-12) suggests that the rest of this section is a developed commentary on the meaning and application of the term as understood from Genesis 15:6. Paul also cites Ps 32:1-2 (in 4:7-8) which is related to Genesis 15:6 verbally through the use of the same term, i.e., logisētai. Some scholars, therefore, suggest that Paul’s exegesis is a fine example of Jewish midrash. But while it is quite likely that Paul is following similar Jewish exegetical practices (i.e., joining passages together on the basis of similar catchwords), his use of Genesis 15:6 and Ps 32:1-2 is much more in keeping with their canonical contexts and, therefore, distinct from much of the way texts were handled by the rabbis in their endless discussions. Further, to label Paul’s handling of these OT texts as midrash is really not helpful in the final analysis since the term “midrash” is ambiguous; some relate it to an interpretive method, some to a psychology or mindset involved in the interpretive process, and some to the end product of such methods.

4:4 In vv. 4-5 Paul will take a moment to explain further what he means by the phrase it was credited in 4:3. Then he will confirm his understanding of the term (elogisthe) by citing David’s words on the matter.

The point of v. 4 is that righteousness is not credited like the earnings a person receives when he/she works a job. In this case, the earnings are legally due to the worker as an obligation (ὀφείλημα, opheilēma). This means that they are not freely given according to grace (χάρις, charis), but rather they are earned through hard effort. Indeed, if they were credited according to works, the term “credited” would mean nothing and neither would the term “grace.”

4:5 In v. 5 Paul is not espousing laziness (cf. 1 Thess 4:11-12), but instead argues that righteousness is not credited to the person who trusts in his law-works to save himself, but [is credited to the person who] believes in the one who declares the ungodly righteous (πιστεύοντι δὲ ἐπὶ τὸν δικαιοῦντα τὸν ἀσεβῆ, pisteuonti de epi ton dikaiounta ton asebē). This person’s faith is credited as righteousness (λογίζεται ἡ πίστις αὐτοῦ εἰς δικαιοσύνην, logizetai hē pistis autou eis dikaiosunēn). That is, it is through this kind of faith that God declares the person righteous and views them with the righteousness of Christ himself.

4:6-8 The truth about God justifying the ungodly apart from works—a state of blessing (μακαρισμός, makarismos) according to David—is found even in David’s own writings, namely, Psalm 32:1-2a in the MT and Ps 31:1-2a in LXX. The quotation functions at two very important levels: (1) it is another witness from scripture, but this time outside the Pentateuch (the five books of Moses); (2) the term logisētai in Ps 31:2a (in 4:8) connects the Psalm to elogisthē in Genesis 15:6 (cited in 4:3) and underscores the forensic or legal aspects of justification in terms of acquittal. Indeed, these verses serve to accentuate the close relationship in Paul’s mind between justification and forgiveness for lawless deeds (αἱ ἀνομίαι, hai anomiai) and sins (αἱ ἁμαρτίαι, hai hamartiai). This justification, about which Paul speaks, then, is available to those in 1:18-32 and those in 2:1-3:8; it means that God has declared them righteous and will never credit their sin to them so as to overturn his verdict of acquittal.

Now this idea of God justifying the ungodly seems at first glance to oppose explicit statements to the contrary in the OT—the very source from which Paul is trying to prove his doctrine. It would have also been quite repugnant to many strands of first century Judaism. Exodus 23:7 (NET) says: “Keep your distance from a false charge—do not kill the innocent and the righteous, for I do not justify the wicked.” Proverbs 17:15 (NET) says: “Justifying the wicked and condemning the righteous—both of them are an abomination to the LORD” (cf. Isa 5:23). The primary difference, however, between Paul's argument and these OT citations is the issue of justice. Justice has been satisfied in the case of the gospel (i.e., through the death of Christ), but it has not been met in the case of the OT examples cited.

4:9-10 There are those who argue that v. 9 begins a new paragraph, but this is unlikely since the themes of “blessing,” “crediting,” and “faith” are simply worked out in a little greater detail.

Now a Jew might respond to Paul’s argument by claiming that justification is possible, but only for the Jew as the texts cited from the OT were given to and applied to Jews only. After all, Abraham is their father, and David was their king; indeed most of David's enemies were Gentiles!

The argument of vv. 9-10 is that since Abraham was justified before he was circumcised (29 years by rabbinic calculations), circumcision and being a biological descendant of Abraham (or any manner of inclusion in the nation of Israel) is not the issue as far as receiving the blessing of justification is concerned. What is at issue is expressed in vv. 11-12.

4:11 Abraham received (ἔλαβεν, elaben)—he did not “earn”—the sign of circumcision (σημεῖον…περιτομῆς, sēmeion…peritomēs), that is, the sign which is circumcision. In contrast to rabbinic thinking, Paul argues that circumcision functioned as a sign which pointed toward the superior reality of a righteousness received through faith. It functioned as a seal (σφραγῖδα, sphragida), that is, it was an external confirmation of the righteous standing Abraham had already received by faith (τῆς πίστεως, tēs pisteōs) almost thirty years earlier. Abraham did not receive circumcision as a result of his obedience to the Torah, nor is genuine membership in the people of God based on works, religious rites, or inclusion in the nation of Israel.

Abraham was declared righteous by faith before he was circumcised. The result is that he can be, and indeed is, the spiritual father of every Gentile who believes but has never been circumcised. Note also that Paul mentions the fact that Abraham was the spiritual father of the Gentiles (v. 11) before he mentions that the Patriarch was the spiritual father of those of the circumcision. That Abraham was the spiritual father of the Gentiles, before he was the spiritual father of the Jews, would have fallen on hard times among Paul’s Jewish contemporaries, but it opens up the reality of the universality of God’s offer of righteousness to all men (cf. Acts 13:34, 47).

4:12 Abraham is not only the father of Gentile believers (in a spiritual sense), but also the father of the Jewish nation (physical and spiritual). In this final verse Paul has only one group in mind—Jews who believe. His argument is that Abraham is not the spiritual father of any Jew who is circumcised, and yet has no faith. Rather, he is the spiritual father of every Jew who has faith—the kind of faith, that is, that Abraham had while he was still uncircumcised.

This final comment about “the faith our father Abraham possessed when he was still uncircumcised” emphasizes a faith that has no desire to rest on the rite of circumcision or any other foundation (e.g., works) other than God’s grace and mercy.

F. Homiletical Idea and Outline

Idea: Accept God’s Gift of Righteousness by Faith Alone

I. By Trusting in God and not Your Works (4:1-8)

A. God Doesn’t Justify People by Works (4:1-3)

B. God Justifies the Ungodly by Faith (4:4-8)

II. By Trusting in God and not Religious Rites (4:9-12)

G. Contribution of Passage to Systematic Theology

Romans 4:1-12 teaches us several things. First, the use of Genesis 15:6 to demonstrate an essential NT doctrine, i.e., justification by faith apart from works demonstrates the essential, salvific unity between the testaments. While the content of the revelation is in many respects different in the NT, the object of faith, namely, God, and the primacy of faith over works, has not changed. In Romans 4:1-12, the presupposition is that the essential prophetic continuity of scripture is affected through promise—the promise to Abraham. Thus the OT can be read with profit by any Christian—a fact Paul appeals to later in Romans 15:4.

Second, and in keeping with the overarching theme of promise, is that justification is by grace through faith involving no merit of our own. This passage affirms that we are unable to save ourselves and that grace is our only hope. This being the case, the observance of religious rites, such as circumcision—or baptism, for that matter—is of no value in securing a relationship with God.

Third, this passage, through the use of Abrahamic traditions, affirms the offer of salvation beyond the confines of Israel. Those who become Christians by faith participate in the Abrahamic promise and are children of Abraham.

Fourth, this passage teaches that an essential element of justification involves the forgiveness of sins.

H. Contribution of Passage to Discipleship and Church Mission

This passage is another reminder in Romans that the gospel is for all men, not just the Jews, nor solely for those who are religious or upright. It is for all men and it is the responsibility of the church to proclaim it to all men. It is by this gospel alone that men enter into a permanent relationship with God in which they can know the complete and eternal forgiveness of sins.

“The wonder of forgiveness has become a banality. It can be the death of our faith if we forget that it is literally a miracle”—Helmut Thielicke

“What I envy most about you Christians is your forgiveness; I have nobody to forgive me”—Marghanita Laski, secular humanist and novelist, before her death in 1988.

⁴⁰ James Montgomery Boice, Awakening to God, Foundations for Christian Faith, vol. 3 (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1979), 76-77.

11. Study and Exposition of Romans 4:13-22

A. Introduction

R. Kent Hughes relays a story he once heard from Dr. Bruce Waltke: Apparently, some time ago, there was a man who wanted to cross the frozen St. Lawrence River in Canada. Now the man had his doubts about whether the ice could hold him, so he decided to first test it by placing his hand firmly upon it. Afterwards, having mustered up a modicum of faith, he got down on his knees and began to shuffle—albeit gingerly—across the ice. When he got to the middle of the frozen river, where he was trembling with fear, he heard a certain, familiar noise behind him. When he turned around he saw a team of horses pulling a carriage and making their way down to the river. And upon reaching the river, the horses, with carriage in tow, didn’t stop, but bolted right onto the ice, and past him, while he remained there on all fours, turning a deep crimson.⁴¹

So is the faith of many Christians; it is weak and timid. But the problem is not that Christianity has been tried and found wanting, but rather that it has never been tried. Where is the man or woman of faith who will take God at his word, trusting in his promises of strength, guidance, wisdom, and provision? Who will cross the ice, so to speak, not on their hands and knees in fear of the bottom falling out underneath them—that is, with little apparent faith in God’s holy faithfulness—but rather with humble confidence, taking a team of horses, a carriage, and passengers as well?

Abraham was such a person and we may be too, by following his example. There was little, if anything, in Abraham’s experience that might lead him to believe that he would be the father of many nations. Yet the aged patriarch trusted in God and committed himself to the promises YHWH had made (Gen 12:1-3; 15; 17). Here is real faith responding to the revealed will of God. The result was his justification and the fulfillment of God’s wonderful promises through him.

The same can be said of you. If you have not trusted Christ as your Lord and Savior, know for certain that attaining salvation by your own merits and energies is futile. It is just as futile as Abraham trying to become a great nation when he could no longer father a child and Sarah his wife was barren. You must not trust in yourself for salvation, but rather look to the Lord who promises to save all those who call upon him (Rom 10:13).

If, on the other hand, you have already realized your spiritual bankruptcy and have not sought to manufacture idols to make your life work, but rather have trusted personally in Christ, you need to know that the “faith” through which you were saved is the same faith through which you will be sanctified. There are not two kinds of genuine faith, only different degrees of genuine faith. By following the example of Abraham, and drawing near to God through his promises (cf. 2 Peter 1:3-4) you can experience deliverance from sin, strength in the Christian life, and by the grace of God carry out great exploits for his name. May God make it so. Let us now listen and learn from the example of Abraham in Romans 4:13-22. “He who has hears to hear, let him hear!”

B. Translation of Passage in NET

4:13 For the promise to Abraham or to his descendants that he would inherit the world was not fulfilled through the law, but through the righteousness that comes by faith. 4:14 For if they become heirs by the law, faith is empty and the promise is nullified. 4:15 For the law brings wrath, because where there is no law there is no transgression either. 4:16 For this reason it is by faith so that it may be by grace, with the result that the promise may be certain to all the descendants—not only to those who are under the law, but also to those who have the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all 4:17 (as it is written, “I have made you the father of many nations”). He is our father in the presence of God whom he believed—the God who makes the dead alive and summons the things that do not yet exist as though they already do. 4:18 Against hope Abraham believed in hope with the result that he became the father of many nations according to the pronouncement, “so will your descendants be.” 4:19 Without being weak in faith, he considered his own body as dead (because he was about one hundred years old) and the deadness of Sarah’s womb. 4:20 He did not waver in unbelief about the promise of God but was strengthened in faith, giving glory to God. 4:21 He was fully convinced that what God promised he was also able to do. 4:22 So indeed it was credited to Abraham as righteousness.

C. Full Exegetical Outline

Idea: The reason the promise to Abraham (or all his descendents)—that he would inherit the world—was fulfilled not through the law, but through Abraham’s sheer faith, in spite of the fact that both he and Sarah were unable to produce children, is because the law works wrath, empties faith, and nullifies the promise, whereas faith is in keeping with grace which alone makes the promise certain to all Abraham’s descendents.

I. The reason the promise to Abraham (or to all his descendents)—that he would inherit the world—was fulfilled not through the law, but through faith, is because the law works wrath, empties faith, nullifies the promise, but faith is in keeping with grace and makes the promise certain to all his descendants (4:13-18).

A. The reason the promise to Abraham (or to all his descendents)—that he would inherit the world—was fulfilled not through the law, but through faith, is because the law works wrath, empties faith, and nullifies the promise (4:13-15).

1. The promise to Abraham and all his descendents was not fulfilled through the law, but rather through the righteousness that comes by faith (4:13).

2. If Abraham’s descendents become heirs by law, faith is empty and the promise nullified (4:14).

3. Law brings wrath and where there is no law, there is no wrath (4:15).

B. The reason the promise to Abraham, our father before God, was fulfilled not through the law, but through faith, is because faith is in keeping with grace, which itself makes the promise certain to all his descendants (4:16-18).

1. Faith is in keeping with grace, which itself makes the promise certain to all Abraham’s descendents (4:16a).

2. Abraham is the father of us all in the sight of God in whom he believed (4:16b-17a)

3. God summons things that do not yet exist as if they already do (4:17b).

II. The nature of Abraham’s faith in the promise of God regarding many nations, despite the hopelessness of both he and Sarah’s barrenness, was such that God credited it to him as righteousness (4:18-22).

A. Abraham believed against hope with the result that he became the father of many nations (4:18).

B. Abraham’s faith did not waver through unbelief regarding the promise of God but was actually strengthened and gave glory to God (4:19-21).

C. God credited Abraham’s faith to him as righteousness (4:22).

D. Simple Point Outline

Idea: The Promise Comes not through the Law, But through Faith, as Abraham’s Experience Demonstrates

I. The Promise: Comes not through the Law, but through Faith (4:13-17)

A. The Law Empties Faith, Nullifies the Promise, and Brings Wrath (4:13-15)

1. The Law Empties Faith (4:13-14)

2. The Law Nullifies the Promise (4:14)

3. The Law Brings Wrath (4:15)

B. The Promise Is according to Grace and Therefore by Faith (4:16-17)

1. The Promise Rests on Grace and Is Certain to All the Seed of Abraham (4:16a)

2. The Promise Involves the Fatherhood of Abraham (4:16b-17a)

3. The Promise Requires God’s Creative Power (4:17b)

II. The Example: Abraham’s Faith (4:18-22)

A. He Believed against Hope (4:18)

B. He Did not Waver through Unbelief (4:19-21)

1. The Circumstance: Barrenness (4:19)

2. The Response: Faith (4:20-21)

a. No Wavering (4:20)

b. Strengthened in Faith (4:20)

c. Giving Glory to God (4:20)

d. Fully Convinced (4:21)

C. He Was Credited with Righteousness (4:22)

E. Exposition Proper

Paul has argued in 1:18-3:20 that all men are sinners and that no man will be justified before God on the basis of his own works. He carries on in 3:21-31 to argue that the only way a man can be justified before God is through faith in Christ whom God presented publicly as a “satisfaction” for sin (3:21-31). In 4:1-12 Paul argues that the truth of “justification by faith apart from works,” is evident even in the experience of Abraham, whom most of Jewry held to be justified by works. Yet the justification of Abraham came apart from works and before he was circumcised. In 4:13-22 Paul develops the theme of the promise made to Abraham and argues that the realization of the promise comes about by the righteousness that comes by faith, not through the law.

4:13 Paul begins 4:13 with the term For (γάρ, gar). The reason Abraham can be the father of the uncircumcised as well as the circumcised is because the promise was not given through the law and, therefore, it is not restricted to those who had the law, i.e., the Jews.

The law (νόμος, nomos) in 4:13 refers to obedience to the Mosaic law, that is, attempting to secure the fulfillment of the promise by carrying out works prescribed in the law.

Paul says that the promise to Abraham was that he would inherit the world (τὸ κληρονόμον αὐτὸν εἶναι κόσμου, to klēronomon auton einai kosmou). Though the promise is never spoken as such in the OT, it is clear that this is Paul’s way of summarizing all the aspects of the promise including the land, seed, Abraham’s great name, and universal blessing (cf. Gen 12:1-3; 15). The covenant established with Abraham had far reaching consequences and became the controlling covenant throughout history. The Davidic (2 Sam 7:8-16; Ps 89) and the New covenants (Jer 31:31-33; Luke 22:15-20) are organically related to the Abrahamic as developments of the seed and blessing aspects, respectively. The establishment of the millennial kingdom at Christ’s second advent is the final great fulfillment of this covenant in human history. At that time (and indeed on into the eternal state), one will be able to say that our father Abraham has become the heir of the world.

At the end of v. 13 Paul says emphatically, so as to once again remind his readers, that this will come about not through the law, but through the righteousness that comes by faith (ἀλλὰ διὰ δικαιοσύνης πίστεως, dia dikaiosunēs pisteōs).

This paragraph, namely, 4:13-22, may be broken down into two parts. The first part, 4:13-17, gives an explanation of “not through the law. The second part, 4:18-22, gives an explanation of “but through the righteousness that comes by faith.” The concluding paragraph in 4:23-25 applies these truths to the readers.

4:14 In verse 14 Paul explains why Abraham and his descendents will become heirs through faith and not through obedience to the law. It is because if they become heirs by obedience to the law, then faith is empty and the promise is nullified (κεκένωται ἡ πίστις καὶ κατήργηται ἡ ἐπαγγελία, kekenōtai hē pistis kai katērgētai hē epaggelia). What does Paul mean by this expression? Some argue that if obedience to the law is necessary for the realization of the promise then there is no room for faith, since faith and works of the law are mutually exclusive as the controlling or most basic orientation in religion. Further, an emphasis on works nullifies or renders inoperative the promise because faith and promise are correlative; they work together.

This interpretation certainly has much to commend it and as a theological comment it is certainly accurate, but it may not be exactly what the apostle means here. There is, however, another solution.

The focus in this text is on the method or means for the realization of the promise. This colors the passage with a forward looking hue. Given that this is true, it seems better to understand the phrase “faith is empty” and “the promise is nullified” to mean that both faith and the promise do not accomplish their goal of making us heirs of the Abrahamic promise, that is, so long as we make works the method of achieving the blessing we will not inherit the blessings outlined in the promise.

4:15 In 4:15 Paul gives another reason why Abraham and his descendents will not become heirs by obedience to the law. It is because the law brings wrath (ὁ γὰρ νόμος ὀργὴν κατεργάζεται, ho gar nomos orgēn katergazetai). The only thing the law can do is to reveal sin. It cannot help a person overcome sin and thus avoid the wrath of God.

Paul makes it clear that the law of God incites the wrath of God. But he continues on in this verse to say that where there is no law, there is no transgression (παράβασις, parabasis). The best way to understand this comment is in light of 5:13. There he says: “for before the law was given, sin was in the world, but there is no accounting for sin when there is no law.” What Paul means then, in 4:15, is that the explicit commands of the Mosaic law reveal sin to a much greater degree than is otherwise known and understood by men. When sin is exposed as such, the wrath of God is aroused. But, where the Mosaic law is not in force or is not known, there is no knowledge of specific sin among people, at least not to the same degree (cf. Rom 1:19-21, 32).

But why does Paul make this point here? Because he is trying to show why it is futile to attempt through the law to obtain God’s blessing. It only winds up in wrath. The law only reveals what great sinners we really are and obliges the wrath of God to flare up against us.

So then, Abraham and his descendents become heirs of the world, not through obedience to the law, for the law empties faith, nullifies the promise, and brings wrath. Instead, Abraham and his descendents become heirs through the righteousness that comes by faith.

4:16 The expression for this reason (Διὰ τοῦτο, dia touto) does not look back to the previous verse and the law, but ahead to the purpose clause “so that it may be by grace.” Although many refer it backwards, the following “so that” clause reads quite awkwardly on this interpretation and it is difficult to say what the term “it” in “it is by faith” refers to. In short, we may paraphrase the logic of this verse: God has determined that man’s response shall be by faith (ἐκ πίστεως, ek pisteōs)…so that his response can be according to grace. God’s grace (χάρις, charis) is his undeserved, unmerited favor by which He secures a righteous standing through Christ for the sinner who believes (5:1-2).

The result of the promise being according to grace and not works is that it is certain (βεβαίαν, bebaion) to all the descendents (παντὶ τῷ σπέρματι, panti tō spermati), whether Jew or Gentile. The term “certain” means “firm,” “dependable,” “unmovable,” and is used in connection with the function of an anchor in Hebrews 6:19. If the promise were according to the law, a person could only be certain of one thing, its non-fulfillment.

4:17 The citation of Genesis 17:5 serves to underscore the previous comment in v. 16 about Abraham being the father of us all. God had sovereignly placed the patriarch in this role—a role which includes fatherhood over the Jewish nation, but also fatherhood over Gentile nations as well.

The sense of the term “father,” however, may not be exactly what was meant in Genesis 17:5 where biological fathering is foremost. Here, in Romans 4:17, Abraham is the father of us all in the presence of God (κατέναντι οὗ, katenanti hou) which indicates that he is the spiritual father of all people who believe, Jew and Gentile.

Now we said that the emphasis in Genesis 17:5 is primarily physical (cf. kings will come from you” in Gen 17:6), but this does not mean that in Genesis 17 or within the Abrahamic covenant as a whole, the idea of spiritual fatherhood is not at least implied. It is. It is said that through Abraham “all the nations of the earth will be blessed” (Gen 12:3). This implies some spiritual connection between Abraham and the people who are so blessed.

Abraham believed God’s promise for many nations even though he could not as yet see them and even though he and Sarah were unable to have children. He nonetheless believed in a God who makes dead things alive, i.e., Sarah’s womb and the bringing back of Isaac if need be (Gen 22). Paul, as he reflects on Abraham’s experience here, may also have in mind the resurrection—the calling to life of the one who had died.

For Abraham, God could summon those promised nations into existence for he speaks to them as if they already do exist.

4:18 Verse 18 begins the second part of this paragraph in which Paul will lay great stress on the nature of Abraham’s faith. There was no hope—i.e., it was against [all] hope (παρ᾿ ἐλπίδα, par elpida) on a human level—of the fulfillment of the promise God gave to Abraham. But the patriarch’s hope was not in himself or his wife or anything human; it was in God and his power. Abraham believed in hope (ἐπ ᾿ ἐλπίδι ἐπίστευσεν, ep elpidi episteusen) with the result that the promise was fulfilled and he became the father of many nations.

The words “so will your descendents be” are from Genesis 15:5. You will recall that Paul has spent the earlier part of this chapter explaining Genesis 15:6 (4:3ff). The effect of citing Genesis 15:5 here in 4:18, then, is to link the promise for many nations with “justification by faith” from Genesis 15:6. In this way the point is clear: Abraham was justified and the promised fulfilled by faith and not works of the law. This will be clear in 4:22 as well.

4:19 In vv. 19-21 Paul explains what he meant when he said that Abraham, against hope, believed in hope. The fact that Abraham was about 100 years old and that Sarah’s womb was dead indicates that against hope really was against all human hope of any kind. There was no way this couple was going to have one child, let alone that many nations would come from them. It was not going to happen without God’s intervention, without hope from God via a promise only he could fulfill.

The mention of Abraham’s body as dead (νενεκρωμένον, nenekrōmenon) and the deadness (νέκρωσιν, nekrōsin) of Sarah’s womb recalls the use of the same word, dead (νεκροὺς, nekrous), in v. 17. Thus, the idea that this hope is totally from God is strongly emphasized, for he alone is the one who “makes the dead alive;” he alone is the one who can bring life from the deadness of Abraham’s body and Sarah’s womb.

4:20-21 Paul says that Abraham did not doubt or waver in unbelief (τῇ ἀπιστίᾳ, apistia) about the promise of God, but in contrast, was strengthened in faith (τῇ πίστει, tē pistei). This comment seems to be at odds, however, with the scene depicted in Genesis 17:17:

Then Abraham fell on his face and laughed; and he said in his heart, “Can a son be born to one who is a hundred years old? or Sarah, can she bear a child at the age of ninety?” 17:18 And Abraham said to God, “O that Ishmael might live before you.”

This OT passage indicates that Abraham did doubt and did waver in unbelief, or so it would seem. The question arises, then, since Paul was obviously cognizant of this OT passage, how do we reconcile his statement with this account in Genesis. Calvin argued that Abraham’s reaction was simply an expression of wonder which later contemplated the power of God. But there does seem to be some doubt—not just wonder—in Abraham’s words, for in the next verse, he says, “O that Ishmael might live before you.”

Others argue that Paul is simply focusing on the time from the initial giving of the promise in Genesis 12 to the point that Abraham was justified by faith in Genesis 15:6. At that time, when God appeared to him and reiterated the promise, Abraham did not waver in unbelief. This suggestion has more to commend it, for in Genesis 15 Abraham genuinely believes that God is able to do what he promised and God declares him righteous for his faith. Further, Romans 4:22 focuses again on Genesis 15:6, a fact which makes this suggestion all the more likely.

We may also note that given the positive picture of Abraham in first century Judaism, Paul probably intends in these words an overall appraisal of his life as well. Abraham was faithful and trusted God all his life, even though there were episodes of struggle. Struggle is not exclusive of faith. Indeed, it was the very promise itself that gave rise to certain tensions within the patriarch (cf. Gen 15:1-3).

Abraham gave glory to God, that is, he praised God for his power and faithfulness. He reached a point where he had become fully convinced (πληροφορηθεὶς, plērophorētheis) that God was capable of doing that which he had promised. Abraham realized by faith—since his circumstances afforded no visible confirmation—that God does not make promises he cannot live up to.

4:22 In v. 22, with another citation from Genesis 15:6 (albeit partial) Paul brings to a conclusion both this section regarding the nature of Abraham’s faith (vv. 18-22) as well as the entire paragraph (4:13-22). But, in broader perspective, it is likely that v. 22 is also intended to bring a conclusion to all that has been said up to this point beginning in 1:18: Man is a sinner and he will not be justified by works of the law, but by faith. Abraham is the classic example of this truth and he stands as the father of all those who so believe. In 4:23-25 Paul will apply this truth to his readers.

F. Homiletical Idea and Outline

Idea: A Right Relationship with God…

I. Comes about not by Works, But by Faith (4:13-17)

A. The Peril of Works (4:13-15)

B. The Primacy of Faith (4:16-17)

II. The Kind of Faith We Need Is One That…(4:18-22)

A. Holds Up against All Odds and Is Characterized by…

1. Understanding the Circumstances (4:18-19)

2. Not Wavering (4:20)

3. Being Strengthened (4:20)

4. Giving Glory to God (4:20)

5. Full Confidence in God’s Power (4:21)

B. Leads to the Crediting of Righteousness (4:22)

G. Contribution of Passage to Systematic Theology

This passage contributes greatly to our bibliology or doctrine of the bible and in particular the relationship of the testaments, Old and New. Since Paul uses the example of Abraham, the means through which they were saved in the OT has not changed in the new; it is by faith apart from works. This demonstrates that the demand for righteousness is the same in both eras and that man has always been unable on his own to meet that demand. He must rely on God and His provision. There is, then, an essential soteriological connection between the Old and New Testament. People were not saved in the OT by obeying the Mosaic law any more than we are saved in the New Testament era by our good deeds.

This passage implies that the promise to Abraham is fulfilled (4:13) and that it is fulfilled in Abraham’s spiritual seed, both Jew and Gentile in the church. But the nature of this fulfillment, according to Romans 11:25-32; 15:12, must in the nature of the case be inaugural. There is more to come en route to becoming heirs of the world.

H. Contribution of Passage to Discipleship and Church Mission

There are many principles that could be gleaned from this passage for discipleship and church mission. We will mention only one: the idea of a deep, abiding faith in God. The kind of faith that pleases God is a faith that takes him at his word and trusts in his promises without question (Heb 11:6). Abraham did not have any human assurance that what God promised was actually going to happen. He didn’t have the assurance of an inscripturated revelation—a record of saints from bygone eras and how they walked with God (cf. Heb 11). He didn’t have the assurance of knowing his wife could conceive either, or that he was able to father a child for that matter. He had no earthly hope whatsoever, and yet he trusted in God. Indeed, as Paul says, he was strengthened in faith and gave glory to God. Here, indeed, is an example for us to follow. Often times there is little in this world that directly helps us perceive the ways of God and trust in him more completely. But, we must trust the promises of God whether there is any visual cue as to their means of fulfillment or not. Habakkuk said it best:

3:17 When the fig tree does not bud, and there are no grapes on the vines, when the olive trees do not produce, and the fields yield no crops, when the sheep disappear from the pen, and there are no cattle in the stalls, 3:18 I will rejoice because of the LORD, I will be happy because of the God who delivers me. 3:19 The sovereign LORD is my source of strength. He gives me the agility of a deer, he enables me to negotiate the rugged terrain. (NET)

⁴¹ R. Kent Hughes, 1001 Great Stories and Quotes (Wheaton: Tyndale, 1988), 155.

12. Study and Exposition of Romans 4:23-25

A. Introduction

Fritz Kreisler (1875-1962), the world-famous violinist, earned a fortune with his concerts and compositions, but he generously gave most of it away. So, when he discovered an exquisite violin on one of his trips, he wasn’t able to buy it. Later, having raised enough money to meet the asking price, he returned to the seller, hoping to purchase that beautiful instrument. But to his great dismay it had been sold to a collector. Kreisler made his way to the new owner’s home and offered to buy the violin. The collector said it had become his prized possession and he would not sell it. Keenly disappointed, Kreisler was about to leave when he had an idea. “Could I play the instrument once more before it is consigned to silence?” he asked. Permission was granted, and the great virtuoso filled the room with such heart-moving music that the collector’s emotions were deeply stirred. “I have no right to keep that to myself,” he exclaimed. “It’s yours, Mr. Kreisler. Take it into the world, and let people hear it.”

So it is with the gospel of God’s saving love in Jesus Christ. It is a message for the entire world, for as Paul says here in Romans 4:23-25, the gospel as found in the life of Abraham, was not just for the patriarch, but for all those who trust in God who raised our Lord Jesus from the dead. The whole world needs to hear God’s “violin”!

A.B. Simpson is reported to have said that the gospel “tells rebellious men that God is reconciled, that justice is satisfied, that sin has been atoned for, that the judgment of the guilty may be revoked, the condemnation of the sinner canceled, the curse of the Law blotted out, the gates of hell closed, the portals of heaven opened wide, the power of sin subdued, the guilty conscience healed, the broken heart comforted, the sorrow and misery of the Fall undone.”⁴² As Paul himself preaches: “he was given over because of our transgressions and was raised for the sake of our justification.”

B. Translation of Passage in NET

4:23 But the statement it was credited to him was not written only for Abraham’s sake, 4:24 but also for our sake, to whom it will be credited, those who believe in the one who raised Jesus our Lord from the dead. 4:25 He was given over because of our transgressions and was raised for the sake of our justification.

C. Full Exegetical Outline

Idea: God will credit righteousness to us who believe—as it says in Genesis 15:6—on the basis of Christ’s death and resurrection.

I. The words it was credited to him were not written for Abraham alone, but also for us who believe in God who raised Jesus from the dead (4:23-24).

A. The words it was credited to him were not written for Abraham’s sake alone (4:23).

B. The words it was credited to him were written for our sakes, to those whom God will credit righteousness, those who trust in God who raised Jesus from the dead (4:24).

1. The words it was credited to him were written for our sakes (4:24a).

2. God will credit righteousness to us (4:24b).

3. We are those who trust in God who raised Jesus from the dead (4:24c).

II. Jesus was given over for our transgressions and was raised for the sake of our justification (4:25).

A. Jesus was given over for our transgressions (4:25a).

B. Jesus was raised for the sake of our justification (4:25b).

D. Simple Point Outline

Idea: God Credits Righteousness to Those Who Believe.

I. Genesis 15:6 and Us (4:23-24)

A. Written not for Abraham’s Sake Alone (4:23)

B. Written for Our Sake Too! (4:24)

II. Jesus’ Death and Resurrection (4:25)

A. The Cause of Jesus’ Death (4:25a)

B. The Purpose for Jesus’ Resurrection (4:25b)

E. Exposition Proper

In this short, but important paragraph, Paul now applies the truth of “justification by faith” (the lesson from the experience of Abraham) to his readers. No command to do anything is given. Rather, the passage is a description of how God’s method of justification applies to the Christians in Rome and to us today. The final comment in v. 25 about Christ’s resurrection for our justification leads naturally into the issues of chapter five and beyond.

4:23-24 The argument that Paul will make in 15:4 rests on the fact that the OT is relevant to the believer and a source of encouragement, strength, and hope. It has been this premise of the present applicability of the OT (rightly understood) which underlies his entire discussion throughout chapter four and indeed further back into 2:1-3:20. In the case of the method of Abraham’s justification, namely, by faith apart from works, the OT speaks directly. Since man has always been a sinner and God has always been holy, the promise of justification has always been realized by faith apart from works. But, as the promise was fulfilled in Christ and in the church (and some day in the millennium) it became clear that the basis for God’s justification was the work of Christ on the cross and his subsequent resurrection and exaltation. In terms of the realization of the promise, then: the means has always been faith, the object of faith has always been God, and the basis the shed blood of Christ. The content of our faith and the specificity of the promise, however, have been developed as progressive revelation has been added by the Lord (Rom 1:2-4; 16:25-26; Gal 3:23; Heb 1:1-3).

This does not mean that everything in the OT is directly applicable to us as it is in the case of the method of Abraham’s justification (cf. Rom 13:8-10). Most of the application of the OT will come about indirectly as we come to understand God’s holy, loving, and faithful character, and as we learn lessons from the stories, poetry, and prophecy about human relationships and responsibilities.

The bottom line of vv. 23-24 is that since the great saint Abraham himself was justified by faith apart from works, we also are justified by faith apart from works. Now the content of our faith, however, is not in the promise that God will make a great nation from us, but rather faith in the God who raised Jesus from the dead. The implication in v. 13, however, is that someday we will share in the complete realization of the promise when Abraham and his descendents “inherit the world” completely.

We must also note briefly the connection of this verse with v. 17 though the use of the same word dead (νεκρός, nekros). This explicit connection indicates that when Paul is thinking in v. 17 about the God who “gives life to the dead” he is thinking not only of Sarah’s womb (and perhaps Isaac in Gen 22), but also of the resurrection of Jesus. This also helps demonstrate that the essential nature of Abraham’s faith is the same as ours.

4:25 In v. 25 Paul gives the basis for God’s justification and forgiveness. The passage as a whole, with its obvious symmetry, may well be a traditional saying in the early church which Paul conscripts here for his own service. In any case, it is extremely likely that the wording comes at least partly from Isaiah 53:11-12 and perhaps represents a summary of the entire chapter. What may have triggered the idea in Paul’s mind is the repeated use of logizomai in Isaiah 53 LXX (vv. 3, 4, 12) since Romans 4 has really been an interpretation of this term as it appears in Genesis 15:6.

The expression he was given over (παρεδόθη, paredothē) is a divine passive indicating that God was the one who ultimately gave Christ over. He did this because of our transgressions (διὰ τὰ παραπτώματα ἡμῶν, dia ta paraptōma hēmōn), that is, he did it in order to secure the forgiveness for the transgressions we had committed and of which we were guilty. Remember that forgiveness is an element of justification (cf. 4:6-8).

But Christ was raised for the sake of our justification (ἠγέρθη διὰ τὴν δικαίωσιν ἡμῶν, ēgerthē dia tēn dikaiōsin hēmōn). Notice in this clause that the preposition dia (“for the sake of”) is the same term as in the first clause of the verse. We can lay the clauses out so that this can be seen:

paredothē	*dia* ta paraptōma	hēmōn
ēgerthē	*dia* tēn dikaiōsin	hēmōn

This is one element in the symmetry of the verse, but it does not necessarily mean that the preposition has to be translated the same way both times. Indeed, this would make little sense and would make our justification the cause of the resurrection. The best way to understand the second dia clause is “for the sake of” or “for the purpose of.” Jesus was raised for the purpose of securing our justification.

F. Homiletical Idea and Outline

Idea: How can I be righteous before a holy God?

I. The Means: Faith in God who Raised Jesus (4:23-24)

A. The Paradigm: Abraham’s Justification (4:23)

B. The Application: Our Justification (4:24)

II. The Basis: Christ’s Death and Resurrection (4:25)

A. The Death of Christ and Our Sin (4:25a)

B. The Resurrection of Christ and Our Justification (4:25b)

⁴² G. Michael Cocoris, Evangelism, A Biblical Approach (Chicago: Moody, 1984), 29.

13. Study and Exposition of Romans 5:1-11

A. Introduction

In a certain correspondence with philosopher Bertrand Russell, author Joseph Conrad lamented the following: “I have never been able to find in any man’s book or in any man’s talk anything convincing enough to stand up for a moment against my defeated sense of fatality governing this man-inhabited world…The only remedy for Chinamen [referring to the problems in China] and for the rest of us is the change of hearts. But looking at the last 2,000 years there is not much reason to expect that thing, even if man has taken to flying…Man doesn’t fly like an eagle, he flies like a beetle.”⁴³ On the other hand, Gloria Steinem confidently hoped that by the year 2,000 men and women would raise their children to believe in human potential, not in God.

Both of these positions cannot be true in the same way at the same time. Why would anyone want to raise their kids to believe in human potential, if as Conrad says, there really isn’t any or that what potential exists is really potential for greater evil (to accompany whatever good might follow)? Yet both these thinkers capture something of the truth about hope. Conrad realizes that something is seriously wrong with man, while Steinem recognizes that there is something seriously unique about man and we must maintain hope on this basis. We seem hopelessly trapped between brutal realism and sheltered naiveté, childish gullibility.

But this is precisely the problem. These moderns are unable to hold the two in tension and thus the ground for their hope is either lost, as in the case of Conrad, or totally misplaced (and therefore false) as in the case of Steinem. One would think that Steinem would simply give up the modernistic delusion about man’s abilities—after all, this is the twentieth century with all its world-wars and bloodshed—but if Conrad’s answer is the only other option, well then Steinem’s hope seems to be better than that shared by Conrad and Russell.

But, in short, there is another solution that maintains the truth in both positions. Man is depraved and it is simply foolish, on the basis of the evidence of thousands of years, to place any hope in him—as if, he, by himself, will build a brave, new peaceful world. Yet by the redemption which is granted through the man Christ Jesus there is hope for the future (for a person as well as people corporately together), not just potential for good, but the actualizing of the good over and against evil. The apostle Paul recognizes the depravity of man (Rom 1:18-3:20), yet because of what Christ has done, he maintains great hope for those connected to Christ by faith. Indeed, he argues that people can be justified from their sin, enter into a right relationship with God, and experience the hope of heaven now—even if their circumstances are unfavorable and they’re suffering, for even our suffering deepens our experience of hope. To sum up, reconciliation with God leads to hope for the present life as well as the next because we possess the Holy Spirit; we have something akin to (greater than) the changed hearts Conrad was looking for. This, in part, is the burden of Romans 5:1-11.

B. Translation of Passage in NET

5:1 Therefore, since we have been declared righteous by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, 5:2 through whom we have also obtained access by faith into this grace in which we stand, and we rejoice in the hope of God’s glory. 5:3 Not only this, but we also rejoice in sufferings, knowing that suffering produces endurance; 5:4 and endurance, character; and character, hope. 5:5 And hope does not disappoint, because the love of God has been poured out in our hearts through the Holy Spirit who was given to us.

5:6 For while we were still helpless, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly. 5:7 (For rarely will anyone die for a righteous person, though for a good person perhaps someone might possibly dare to die.) 5:8 But God demonstrates his own love for us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. 5:9 Much more then, because we have now been declared righteous by his blood, we will be saved through him from God’s wrath. 5:10 For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of his son, how much more, since we have been reconciled, will we be saved by his life? 5:11 Not only this, but we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received this reconciliation.

C. Full Exegetical Outline

Idea: The benefits of justification based on Christ’s death include a present peace with God, that is, reconciliation, and deliverance from future wrath, as well as a hope that is certain in the midst of life’s sufferings and does not disappoint because the love of God has been poured out in our hearts through the Holy Spirit who was given to us.

I. The benefits of justification include peace with God and a firm position in the grace of God so that life’s sufferings ultimately develop hope—a hope that is certain because it is confirmed by the Holy Spirit who has poured out the love of God in our hearts (5:1-5).

A. Since the Christian has been declared righteous by faith, he has peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ through whom he has obtained access into this grace of justification and peace (5:1-2a).

1. The Christian, having been declared righteous, has peace with God through Christ (5:1)

2. The Christian has gained access by faith into this grace of in which he stands (5:2a)

B. The Christian rejoices in the hope of God’s glory and the sufferings in this life actually give rise to a stronger hope which will not disappoint because the Holy Spirit confirms it by pouring out the love of God into our hearts (5:2b-5)

1. The Christian rejoices not only in the hope of God’s glory but he also rejoices in his sufferings since sufferings produce endurance, endurance, character, and character, hope (5:2b-4).

2. Hope does not disappoint because the Holy Spirit confirms our hope by pouring out the love of God in our hearts (5:5).

II. The love of God, in contrast to fickle human love, was demonstrated for us in that while people will not generally die for a righteous or good person, Christ died for us at just the right time, while we were still helpless and ungodly (5:6-8).

A. Christ died for us at just the right time, when we were still helpless and ungodly (5:6).

B. Rarely will a person die for a righteous man, though for a good man someone might possibly dare to die (5:7).

C. God demonstrates his own love for us in that while we were still sinners Christ died for us (5:8).

III. Since reconciliation to God is a present reality, affected through the death of God’s son, the Christian should rejoice and know that he/she will be delivered from any future wrath and will enjoy spiritual life (5:9-11).

A. Having been declared righteous by Christ’s blood, Christians will certainly be saved from God’s wrath through him (5:9).

1. Christians have been declared righteous by Christ’s blood (5:9a).

2. Christians will be saved from God’s wrath through him (5:9b)

B. If Christians were reconciled to God while they were still enemies, how much more will they be saved by his life (5:10)?

1. Christians were reconciled to God while they were enemies (5:10a).

2. Christians will be saved by his life (5:10b).

C. Christians should rejoice in God through Christ since they are now reconciled to God (5:11).

1. Christians should now rejoice in God (5:11a).

2. Christians are reconciled to God (5:11b).

D. Simple Point Outline

Idea: The Benefits of Justification⁴⁴

I. The Benefits of Justification: Eternal (5:1-5)

A. Peace with God (5:1-2a)

B. A Sure Hope (5:2b-5)

II. The Basis of Justification: A Contrast (5:6-8)

A. Human Love: Fickle (5:7)

B. God’s Love: Sacrificial (5:6, 8)

III. Justification, Salvation, and Reconciliation: The Relationship (5:9-11)

A. Future Salvation from God’s Wrath (5:9)

B. Future Salvation by Christ’s Life (5:10)

C. Present Rejoicing in God (5:11)

E. Exposition Proper

There is a question among commentators as to the precise relationship of chapter 5 to the preceding and following material. Does it go with the chapters before, i.e., 1:18-4:25 or with the chapters that follow in 5:12-8:39? You will note in the argument section above (under “Background Material and Argument of the Book”) that we have taken the chapter as maintaining stronger ties to what precedes than to what follows. But this is exactly the point. We are not saying by this that there is no connection to what follows, only that the passage seems more integrally connected to what comes before. Indeed, Paul’s ideas of justification, faith, boasting, wrath, and hope have all been introduced earlier (and will be later as well). But we note as well that his reference to ideas such as the indwelling of the Spirit and reconciliation have not explicitly been cited yet and must await further comment. Therefore, the function of the passage is most likely to summarize and conclude chapters 1:18-4:25 as well as to introduce material soon to be developed in 5:12-8:39. It thus functions, as many commentators have said, as a bridge: it joins land dealing with justification and land dealing with sanctification.

5:1 The expression Therefore, since we have been declared righteous by faith (Δικαιωθέντες οὖν ἐκ πίστεως, dikaiōthentes oun ek pisteōs) sums up all that has been said from 1:18-4:25. Sinful man is declared legally righteous or justified by faith (and not by works). The expression “declared righteous” is an aorist, passive participle in the Greek text. The aorist tense is well suited to express the once-for-all nature of justification as a verdict which is pronounced over the sinner in light of his faith in Christ.

Justification, Paul says, leads to peace (εἰρήνην, eirēnēn) with God. This is not the subjective apprehension of God’s peace we as believers enjoy as a result of the Spirit’s ministry (cf. Phil. 4:6-7). Rather, it refers to the “state of the union,” so to speak, between God and the Christian; they are no longer at war and have been brought together in relationship (cf. 5:10). The background for Paul’s idea of peace is likely to be found in the OT and particularly the prophetic vision of a day of salvation which would be characterized by shalom or peace between God and man. It is that state or condition to which Paul speaks—the state or condition anticipated by the OT prophets and brought to inaugural realization through the propitiatory sacrifice of Christ (see notes on 3:25ff). Christ inaugurated this era of salvation peace by appeasing God’s wrath on the cross. Objectively, then, there is peace between God and the believer (3:25). Later in Romans 5:1-11 Paul will develop the idea of peace along the lines of reconciliation (5:10-11).

As with all of God’s blessings they are realized through…Christ (διὰ…Χριστοῦ, dia Christou), having already been decreed through him according to the unconquerable plan of God (Eph 1:3-14). Paul is never at a loss to tie things together in Christ.

5:2 The believer not only has peace with God, but also through Christ has obtained access (τὴν προσαγωγὴν ἐσχήκαμεν, tēn prosagōgēn eschēkamen) into this position of grace (τὴν χάριν ταύτην, tēn charin tautēn), where grace refers to the unalterable state of peace resulting from justification.

The particular focus and background of the noun prosagōgē is interesting. It is used in two distinct, yet related ways in the NT. It can refer to one’s “introduction” into a relationship or it can refer to “ongoing access” in an existing relationship. Paul’s use of the same term in Ephesians 2:18; 3:12 seems to suggest that what is in view in Romans 5:2 is continued access to God, and not so much on the initial introduction into the relationship. But the use of the aorist past tense “declared righteous” stresses a past event and the perfect “have…obtained” fits well with a past event (or present). 1 Peter 3:18 uses the verb in the sense of “introducing” believers to God for the first time. On the whole, however, it is difficult to make a decision in this case and we may certainly conclude that Paul would affirm both and that both may well be intended here (Rom 5:10).

The background of the term may involve images of access into God’s presence in the sanctuary or it may involve access into the presence of the king and royalty. Given its use here in connection with God’s grace, it certainly has connotations of privilege and honor for the believer. As those who have faith in our Lord Jesus Christ we stand (ἑστήκαμεν, hestēkamen) in the place of God’s grace.

Paul says that we also rejoice in the hope of the glory of God (καυχώμεθα ἐπ ᾿ ἐλπίδι τῆς δόξης τοῦ θεοῦ, kauchōmetha ep elpidi tēs doxēs tou theou). The term “rejoice” can also be translated as “boast” and so, in contrast to the world which boasts in its accomplishments or to the Jew who boasts in his obedience to the torah (2:23; 3:27; 4:2; 1 Cor 1:31; 2 Cor 4:5; 10:17), the Christian boasts in God alone, specifically in the hope of His glory. By “hope” Paul does not mean what the world means when it uses that term. Rather, his is a confident expectation because it is grounded in the fact that the future has broken into the present and the Christian now possesses the Spirit (5:5; Phil 1:19-20). Thus, even though Christians are constantly in a struggle and suffering (5:3-5), their firm assurance is that someday, the glory that was lost through sin (3:23) will be restored to them and they will be like Jesus (1 John 3:2-3). Included in this hope is the confident expectation to be delivered from God’s wrath through Christ.

5:3-4 But, Paul says, we not only rejoice or boast in the hope of our incredible future, we also boast in our present experience. And there is no way the present can overturn the certainty of the future (8:38-39), for we possess the Spirit (5:5). Therefore, we rejoice in sufferings (ται`ς θλίψεσιν, tais thlipsesin) and we do so knowing suffering produces endurance (εἰδότες ὅτι ἡ θλῖψις ὑπομονὴν κατεργάζεται, eidotes hoti hē thlipsis hupomonēn katergazetai). It is strange that Paul should move from the brightness of our future hope to the darkness which so often envelopes our present circumstances. But he may have done this in order to counteract Jewish antagonists who denied that Christians enjoyed the justified life now since they are still struggling with suffering and problems. Paul contradicts this thesis by showing that the present in no way jeopardizes the future (5:5).

Whatever the particular reason was that Paul decided to talk about our present experience, one should not fail to see the implied comparison with Abraham in 4:19-21 and his hope in the midst of hopeless circumstances. Even though we as Christians are in the midst of enormous trials, and we believe in hope against hope, as it were, we like Abraham will overcome and we will see the promise of our glorification realized (Rom 8:30).

But we should rejoice in these trials and sufferings because they produce endurance, and endurance, character, and character, hope. Thus, the Divine design, in this life, is to fit us for the next by enlarging our present spiritual capacity for hope! Our sufferings, if responded to like Abraham—not wavering, but being strengthened in the faith—lead to endurance (ὑπομονὴ, hupomonē), that is, the ability to hold up and not fold up; to joyfully keep trusting God in the face of opposition to his promises (2 Cor 8:2). This resolve, in turn, gives rise to character (δοκιμή, dokimē) which has been tested and is without defect, like gold in a fire (James 1:2-3; 2 Pet 1:8). When we endure in suffering, we develop character. It is in the development of this character that our capacity for hope (ἐλπὶς, elpis) is increased and our present experience of the future deepened (through the Spirit).

5:5 The hope about which Paul speaks does not disappoint (οὐ καταισχύνει, ou kataischunei), because like Abraham’s hope, it is derived from God (through the Spirit), not from our circumstances (4:19-21). Those who trust in Christ will in no way end up embarrassed or disappointed for so having committed themselves to him. Paul’s words recall the prayer of the psalmist and his earnest expectation that he would in no way be disappointed (Ps 22:5; 25:20; cf. also Isa 28:16).

The reason this hope does not disappoint us, that is, the reason Christians maintain a confident expectation to be delivered from God’s wrath, is because of the love of God (ἡ ἀγάπη τοῦ θεοῦ, hē agapē tou theou). Though some interpreters understand this phrase to mean “our love for God” (an objective genitive) this is highly unlikely and provides at best a shaky foundation for the certain hope about which Paul speaks. It is better to read it as “God’s love for us” (a subjective genitive) in keeping with the language of “pouring out” and the focus in the passage on God justifying us. God grounds our future in the certainty of his own sovereign work (cf. 5:8).

God’s love has been poured out (ἐκκέχυται, ekkechutai) into our hearts through the Holy Spirit (πνεύματος ἁγίου, pneumatos hagiou) who was given to us (τοῦ δοθέντος ἡμῖν, tou dothentos hēmin). Paul is not talking about the objective love of God shown to us in the cross (3:25; 5:8), but rather the subjective apprehension (i.e., in our hearts) of God’s love. For Paul this is primarily an emotional experience with a force greater than the doubt inflicted through trials (cf. Phil 4:6-7).

The language of “pouring out,” “in our hearts,” and especially the mention of the “Holy Spirit” in the same breadth, is covenantal in nature and recalls certain aspects of the promise in Joel 3:1-4 LXX (cf. Acts 2:17, 33; 10:45; Titus 3:6), Jeremiah 31:31-33 and Ezekiel 36:25-27 (NET). Thus, Paul writes Romans in light of new covenant inauguration which makes our hope certain as we wait expectantly for its consummation (Rom 8:16, 22-26; 2 Cor 3:7-18; Luke 22:15-20). The apostle suggests similar ideas in Ephesians 1:13-14 and 2 Corinthians 1:21-22:

But it is God who establishes us together with you in Christ and who anointed us, 1:22 who also sealed us and gave us the Spirit in our hearts as a down payment. (NET)

In both 2 Cor 1:21-22 and Ephesians 1:13-14 the certainty of the future is bound up with the present ministry of the Spirit and this should be seen as the inaugural realization of OT hope.

5:6-8 In vv. 6-8 Paul gives the objective foundation for justification and the gift of the Spirit: it is the work of Christ on the cross—a work which highlights the amazing love of God in contrast to the conditional and impotent love of man.

First, it is important to note that Paul refers to us as helpless (ἀσθενῶν, asthenōn) and in some sense this word parallels “ungodly,” but it denotes our total inability to save ourselves or reconcile ourselves to God. Human depravity and inability are core doctrines in this letter and indeed in Paul’s letters in general (Rom 3:9-20; Eph 2:1). There is no way a person can position themselves in such a way so as to impose a claim on God. Second, we are ungodly (ἀσεβῶν, asebōn)—a term which has particular religious connotations wherein a person is completely impious and without respect for the sacred (cf. 4:5; 1 Tim 1:9; 1 Pet 4:18; 2 Pet 2:5, 6; 3:7; Jude 4, 15).

Paul says, that even for wretches like us, Christ died and that he died at just the right time (κατὰ καιρὸν, kata kairon). But what does he mean by “at the right time”? In Galatians 4:4 the apostle argues that Christ was sent by the father in the “fullness of time” (cf. Eph 1:10). In Mark 1:15 Jesus begins his preaching about the kingdom with the words: “the time has come.” John’s repeated emphasis on the timing of Jesus’ death shows the divine timetable at work (cf. 2:4; 4:21, 23; 5:25, 28; 7:6, 8, 30; 12:23, 27; 13:1; see also Heb 9:26). These references show that the coming of Christ was according to a divine ordering of things and this is perhaps what Paul means here in Romans 5:6 (cf. 3:26).

The overall point of verse seven is clear even though the precise significance of its parts is debated. Its presentation of faulty human love stands as a marked contrast to the love which God himself demonstrated in Christ. But what does Paul mean by the contrast between a righteous (δίκαιος, dikaios) man and a good (ἀγαθός, agathos) man? Some scholars argue that there is no contrast in the Greek text and the terms mean essentially the same thing. But a contrast seems to be the point of what Paul is saying and there is evidence that the two terms were contrasted by the Gnostics who held that that the God of OT was dikaios while the God of the NT was agathos (Irenaeus, Adv. Haer. 1. 27.1). The point, then, as it applies to men, is that a person will rarely (if ever) die for a purely righteous person, though for a person who was good, that is, benevolent and generous, a person might dare to die.

But God demonstrates (συνίστησιν, sunistēsin) his own love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us (Χριστὸς ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν ἀπέθανεν, Christos huper hēmōn apethanen). God did not wait for us to clean up our act or get it all together. While we were sinners Christ died for us. His love is pure and in complete contrast to fickle human attempts at love. His love resulted in the ultimate sacrifice. Love is known by its demonstrations.

5:9-10 The form of the argument Paul adopts here in vv. 9-11 is from the lesser to the greater or according to the rabbinic principle, qal wa„h£o‚mer: “having done this, how much more, then.” Paul argues that if God did the more difficult thing of justifying sinners, how much more, then, can he save (i.e., deliver) them through Christ from the future wrath (ὀργή, orgē), i.e., the future judgment (cf. John 5:28-29). If God has made a way in which he can legally declare the sinner righteous, to declare a verdict of acquittal, then there is no way that any future judgment—as he himself is the judge—can threaten that verdict and the new relationship into which the justified sinner has entered.

In v. 10 Paul returns again to the theme of justification and peace with God (cf. v. 1), only this time he speaks of it in terms of reconciliation. Reconciliation is thus another angle through which to understand our new relationship with God. It implies a reconciler, but the focus is not on the satisfaction of just legal requirements, but rather on the bringing back into relationship of two parties formerly at war with one another. It is a more personal lens through which to view our new relationship with God and is intimately related to the idea of peace in 5:1.

But the emphasis in the passage is on the fact that we were reconciled (κατηλλάγημεν, katēllagēmen) to God, not that he was reconciled to us. We are the offending party (1:18-3:20). We were God’s enemies (ἐχθροί, echthroi). It is difficult to understand how some scholars can argue that the term “enemies” indicates a more passive than active hostility. First, Paul has argued at length that men are not only hostile to God himself, but also to the very thought of God. The unregenerate mind is always investigating and creating ways to vanquish the knowledge and truth of God (cf. Rom 8:7-8). They want to suppress the truth about God to the point of extinguishing it, if they can. In the very least they invent ways of overturning it (Rom 1:18-3:20). Second, the fact that men need to be reconciled shows that their hostility to God is active and personal. All that can be said about a view that maintains less than an active and open hostility between men and God probably has its origin in the naïve epistemological optimism of the modern period.

The expression through the death of his son (διὰ τοῦ θανάτου τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ, dia tou thanatou tou huiou autou) in v. 10 parallels by his blood (ἐν τῷ αἵματι αὐτοῦ, en tō haimati autou) in v. 9 and again stresses the eternal price God paid in order to accomplish reconciliation and justification for those who were enemies and sought, at all points, to overthrow the very knowledge of God himself (cf. 1:2-4; 8:32; 1 Peter 3:18; 1 John 4:10).

Paul says that if, while we were enemies, we were reconciled to God through the death of his son, how much more then shall we be saved by his life (σωθησόμεθα ἐν τῇ ζωῇ αὐτοῦ, sōthēsometha en tē zōē autou)? The reference to “saved by his life” is not a reference to being saved through Christ’s present intercession in heaven, though “by his life” does refer to Christ’s resurrection life. Paul’s point seems to be that not only have we been reconciled to God and delivered from his wrath, we will also be completely saved someday from sin and death by Christ’s resurrection life and our union with him. If this interpretation is correct, then 5:9-11 anticipate certain aspects of the theology of chapter 6. Paul’s point is that the one who participates in the benefits of the death of Christ will certainly also share in the benefits of his resurrected life.

5:11 Though there is some discussion as to the grammatical connection between v. 11 and v. 10, the overall sense of the passage is clear. Paul is moving back to the present experience of the believer after having given due consideration in vv. 9-10 to the future and the believer’s eternal hope with God. Paul says that the believer can be certain to be delivered from God’s wrath, but not only this (οὐ μόνον δέ, ou monon de) they can also rejoice in God now (νῦν, nun) through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom they have now received reconciliation. Their rejoicing is a present reality because they have reconciliation now. Reconciliation to God means relationship with God, which in turn means righteousness and life in the kingdom of God (Rom 14:17). For Paul the future has broken into the present.

F. Homiletical Idea and Outline

Idea: Rejoice in God…

I. In Light of Your Present Circumstances (5:1-5)

A. You Have Peace with God Now (5:1-2a)

B. You Have A Sure Hope (5:2b-5)

II. In Light of the Rock Solid Foundation of Your Salvation (5:6-8)

A. Man’s Fickle Love (5:7)

B. God’s Sacrificial Love (5:6, 8)

III. In Light of Your Bright Future (5:9-11)

A. You Will not Face the Wrath of God (5:9)

B. You Will Be Saved by His Life (5:10)

C. You Have Reconciliation Now (5:11)

G. Contribution of Passage to Systematic Theology

This passage teaches many important truths. First, justification is a past act done on behalf of the believer, not something the believer does. It is not moral, but forensic or legal in character. This does not mean, however, that it is not real.

Justification, then, whether or not it stands at the very heart of Paul’s theology, is nonetheless foundational to our relationship with God and a doctrine, which if properly understood, helps us emotionally with the sufferings in the Christian life. It teaches us and assures us as believers that difficulties do not mean God does not love us or care about us. One of the results or benefits of justification is peace between God and me, the sinner. This peace will never change and refers not to an inner awareness of God’s peace, but to an objective condition of tranquility between God and me whether I feel it at any one time or not.

Reconciliation was secured by God though we were the offending party and the ones who needed to reconcile ourselves. But, the text does not say, we “reconciled ourselves.” It says, “we were reconciled” or “we have received reconciliation.” The emphasis is on God’s electing grace from beginning to end. Reconciliation is another lens through which to view our new relationship with God and is more personal, less courtroom-ish, than justification.

The present ministry of the Holy Spirit enables us to rejoice and know that our hope of God’s glory is certain. Even though we go through difficulties in life, the Spirit does not allow our hope to fade. Thus this passage sheds profound light on the process of sanctification, conspicuously absent from 8:30.

The love that the Holy Spirit has poured out in our hearts is the same love that sent Christ to the cross for our sakes. The cross is the greatest demonstration of God’s love for people. Even when we were still sinners Christ died for us! The work of Christ on the cross is the foundation of our justification and future hope.

Finally, the Christian can be assured because of justification and reconciliation now that he/she will not suffer the wrath of God in the future. Our future as Christians is not as people destined for wrath, but glory—the glory of God!

H. Contribution of Passage to Discipleship and Church Mission

One of the most profound contributions of this passage to the process of discipleship is the fact that it brings together theology and experience in a way that gives the believer real hope and enables him/her to rejoice even in sufferings. Life has a way of knocking people down, sometimes for the count. But Paul’s emphasis here is that in light of justification and the indwelling Spirit, God can actually use our difficult experiences in life to work a deeper hope in us—i.e., a deeper longing for him and desire to experience him. Paul will say in Romans 8:28 that God works all things for good to those who love him and are called according to his purpose. The believer needs to know that he is in a “win-win” situation!

⁴³ Paul Johnson, Modern Times, rev. ed. (New York: HarperCollins, 1991), 456.

⁴⁴ The varied titles given this section by different commentators indicates how difficult it is to pin down the subject with certainty. “The Benefits of Justification” is an attempt to capture the general overall message of the paragraph. See also the teaching outline at the front of the book. It suggests the title of: “Exultation because of the Certainty of Justification.”

14. Study and Exposition of Romans 5:12-21

A. Introduction

In his book, Kingdoms in Conflict, Charles Colson paints a dismal picture of the state of commitment to God at the UN building complex in New York:

The United Nations complex sits on sixteen acres of New York City’s choicest real estate, bordering the East River and Manhattan. The lean, immense Secretariat building rises into the sky, the sun reflecting off its window walls. Bright flags of the nations of the world fly in the breezes off the river; the most prominent is the blue and white UN flag, its two white reeds of olive branches surrounding the world.

A visitor is immediately struck by the grandeur of the building, stirred by the sight of dignitaries stepping out of black limousines to cross the massive plaza. He realizes that if this place represents the powers of the world, one may well want to see the place of worship, where the nations bow before the One under whose rule they govern.

The information personnel are bemused, “The chapel? We don’t have a chapel. If there is one, I believe it’s across the street.”

The visitor darts across the thoroughfare, dodging New York’s taxis, and successfully arrives at the opposite building’s security-clearance desk.

“Well, there’s a chapel here,” responds the officer, “but it’s not associated with the UN.” He thumbs through a directory. “Oh, I see, all right, here it is. It’s across the street—and tell them you’re looking for the meditation room.”

Again the visitor dashes across the pavement. An attendant tells him that the room is not open to the public; it’s a “nonessential area,” and there has been a personnel cutback. But a security guard will escort the visitor through the long, crowded hallways and the swinging doors. Again, there is the pervasive sense of weighty matters being discussed in the noble pursuit of world peace.

The guide pauses at the unmarked door. He unlocks it and gingerly pushes it open. The small room is devoid of people and decoration. The walls are stark white. There are no windows. A few wicker stools surround a large square rock at the center of the room. It is very quiet. But there is no altar, rug, vase, candle, or symbol of any type of religious worship.

Lights in the ceiling create bright spots of illumination on the front wall. One focuses on a piece of modern art; steel, squares, and ovals. Beyond the abstract shapes, there is nothing in those bright circles of light. They are focused on a void. And it is in that void that the visitor suddenly sees the soul of the brave new world.”⁴⁵

A wise teacher once said, “A mist in the pulpit is a fog in the pew!” If the leaders are off course, what is to become of those who follow? As the leaders go, so goes the nation. Colson’s comments reveal a startling practical atheism entrenched in the hearts and minds of our political leaders. The end result will not be the peace they supposedly seek, but rather strife, turmoil, and suffering for all involved.

But while the nations frantically search for world peace, there can be no real peace apart from repentance and obedience to God through Christ. There can be no real peace until we get rid of our idols and turn and serve the living and true God (1 Thess 1:9-10). In vain will people search. But the good news is that through Christ God is building a new humanity, a new nation as it were—a nation of people dead to life in Adam and sin, and brought into new life in Christ, their leader. This is the point of Romans 5:12-21. There is hope for peace in Christ because he alone brings righteousness and staves off the judgment of God. While world rulers continue on ignoring God (1 Cor 2:6, 9), he continues on with his program for a new humanity, where

“The wolf will live with the lamb, the leopard will lie down with the goat, the calf and the lion and the yearling together; and a little child will lead them. 7The cow will feed with the bear, their young will lie down together, and the lion will eat straw like the ox. 8 The infant will play near the hole of the cobra, and the young child put his hand into the viper’s nest. 9 They will neither harm nor destroy on all my holy mountain, for the earth will be full of the knowledge of the LORD as the waters cover the sea (Isa 11:6-9).⁴⁶

B. Translation of Passage in NET

5:12 So then, just as sin entered the world through one man and death through sin, and so death spread to all people because all sinned—5:13 for before the law was given, sin was in the world, but there is no accounting for sin when there is no law. 5:14 Yet death reigned from Adam until Moses even over those who did not sin in the same way that Adam (who is a type of the coming one) transgressed. 5:15 But the gracious gift is not like the transgression. For if the many died through the transgression of the one man, how much more did the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one man Jesus Christ multiply to the many! 5:16 And the gift is not like the one who sinned. For judgment, resulting from the one transgression, led to condemnation, but the gracious gift from the many failures led to justification. 5:17 For if, by the transgression of the one man, death reigned through the one, how much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one, Jesus Christ!

5:18 Consequently, just as condemnation for all people came through one transgression, so too through the one righteous act came righteousness leading to life for all people. 5:19 For just as through the disobedience of the one man many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of one man many will be made righteous. 5:20 Now the law came in so that the transgression may increase; but where sin increased, grace multiplied all the more, 5:21 so that just as sin reigned in death, so also grace will reign through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

C. Full Exegetical Outline

Idea: Sin, death, judgment, and condemnation came through Adam, whereas God’s grace, the gift of righteousness (justification), and reigning in life—indeed eternal life, came through Jesus Christ.

I. As a result of Adam’s sin, sin and death entered the world, even before the law was given, and even over those who did not sin in the same way as Adam, who is a type of the coming one (5:12-14).

A. As a result of Adam’s sin, sin and death entered the world and spread to all men, because all sinned (5:12).

B. Death reigned before the law was given even over those who did not sin in the same way as Adam (5:13-14b).

C. Adam is a type of the coming one (5:14c).

II. The gracious gift is not like Adam’s transgression, for the latter brought death, judgment, condemnation upon all and made sinners of all, while the former brought overflowing grace, justification, and the opportunity to reign in life through Jesus Christ (5:15-19).

A. Adam’s transgression brought death to the many, while the grace of God and the gift which came by Christ’s grace overflowed to the many (5:15).

B. Adam’s transgression led to death and condemnation while the gift followed many transgressions and led to justification (5:16).

C. By Adam’s transgression death reigned, but for those who receive the abundance of grace and the gift of righteousness, they will reign in life through Christ (5:17).

D. Through one transgression condemnation came to all people, but through one righteous act came righteousness leading to life for all people (5:18).

E. Through Adam’s disobedience the many were made sinners, but through Christ’s obedience the many were made righteous (5:19).

III. The law came in so that transgression may increase, and it did, but just as sin reigned in death so also grace multiplied all the more and continues to reign through righteousness to eternal life (5:20-21).

A. The law came in so that the transgression may increase, but where sin increased grace multiplied all the more (5:20).

B. Just as sin reigned in death, grace reigns through righteousness to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord (5:21).

D. Simple Point Outline

Idea: Death through Adam, Life through Christ

I. Through Adam’s Sin, All Have Sinned (5:12-14)

A. Adam’s Sin and the World (5:12)

B. Universal Death before the Law (5:13-14b)

C. Adam: A Type of Christ (5:14c)

II. Death through Adam, Life through Christ (5:15-19)

A. Adam’s Transgression—Grace (5:15)

B. Judgment/Condemnation—Justification (5:16)

C. Death/Adam—Reigning in Life/Christ (5:17)

D. All Men Condemned—“All Men” Justified (5:18)

E. The Many/Sinners—The Many Righteous (5:19)

III. The Triumph of Grace over Law and Sin (5:20-21)

A. The Law, Sin, and Grace (5:20)

B. Grace, Righteousness, Eternal Life (5:21)

E. Exposition Proper

The exegesis and exposition of 5:12-21 is filled with many difficulties and challenging questions. We will try to surface the major issues and deal with them in a preliminary way.

5:12 Paul begins this new section with a common expression, so then (Διὰ τοῦτο, dia touto), which does not indicate a mere transition, but functions inferentially so that what follows in 5:12-21 is a conclusion based on preceding material. Literally, the expression dia touto means, “on account of this….” Since Paul does not explicitly identify what he means by the word “this,” it is reasonable to assume that he has the major thrust of 5:1-11 in mind, since dia touto generally looks backward and not ahead. The principal thrust of 5:1-11 is that because of justification and reconciliation the Christian can be certain of being delivered from the wrath of God in the future. The connection between 5:1-11 and 5:12-21, then, can be summarized as such: since Christians have been completely delivered from God’s wrath (5:1-11), Christ must have completely overturned the effects of Adam’s sin (5:12-21).

With the expression just as (ὥσπερ, hōsper) in v. 12 Paul begins a comparison which he does not complete until vv. 18-19. The comparison is between the effects of Adam’s sin and the effects of Christ’s obedience. Compare vv. 18-19.

When Paul says sin (ἡ ἁμαρτία, hē hamartia) he is not referring to “specific acts of sin,” but rather the principle of sin, that is, the ruling power of sin to which all human beings (i.e., the world) are subject and which leads to death. In this case Paul says that sin entered the world (does this mean that it existed beforehand?) through one man, namely, Adam. It is interesting that he does not mention Eve here (but cf. 1 Tim 2:13-14). This is probably due to creation order and the inherent responsibility (upon the man) that came with that (1 Cor 11:9-10).

When sin entered the world death (ὁ θάνατος, ho thanatos) followed immediately. The Genesis record is filled with the stark reality of the consequence of sin (Gen 4-5). It was in this way—through Adam’s sin—that death spread to all men. Thus Paul’s focus is not so much on original sin, though that is definitely important to him, but on death and how it came to be that it captured the entire race.

But what does Paul mean when he says, because all sinned (ἐφ᾿ ᾧ πάντες ἥμαρτον, eph’ hō pantes hēmarton)? This passage has elicited numerous interpretations. There seems to be a contradiction in Paul’s words, for on the on hand, he says that all die because of the sin of Adam, but on the other, he says that all die because all sinned. Which is it? At least three important issues need to be considered: (1) the meaning of “because” (eph’ hō)? (2) what does “all sinned” (pantes hēmarton) mean? (3) what is the precise relationship of Adam’s sin to the sin of the world?

First, let’s deal with the meaning of because (ἐφ᾿ ᾧ, eph’ hō). It could be translated as “in whom” or “in which.” If taken the first way, the referent for “whom” is generally taken to be “one man” and the point is that all sinned “in Adam” (Augustine’s view, probably due to the influence of the Latin Vulgate). If taken as “which” (masculine in Greek) the referent is “death” and the point is that “in death” all sinned. We could also take the phrase as “because of whom.” This would mean, then, that all sinned “because of Adam.” The problem which besets these three views is that the available evidence suggests that Paul means “because” when he uses the phrase eph’ hō, not “in which,” “in whom,” or “because of whom.” This is the case in 2 Cor 5:4, Phil 3:12 (but cf. Phil 4:10), and other Greek literature where the two words function together as a conjunction indicating cause (i.e., “because”).

If eph’ hō means “because,” what, then, does “all sinned” mean? Some argue that what Paul means here in Romans 5:12 is that all men sin “in and of themselves” and for that reason they die. They argue that there is no internal connection of any kind between Adam’s sin and that of the race. Of these commentators, some suggest that if there is a connection, it is purely external in the sense that Adam functioned as an example. While this interpretation gives a well attested meaning for “all sinned,” as referring to personal acts of sin, it cannot account for Paul’s language in 5:12 and throughout 5:12-21, especially vv. 18-19.

First, the comparison between the effects of Adam’s sin and Christ’s obedience breaks down under this interpretation for if I became a sinner solely by my own personal choice, can I become righteous solely by my own personal choice? If this is the case, why does Paul repeatedly call righteousness a gift in this passage? Further, if all men are sinners—as everyone in this discussion agrees—doesn’t it seem rather strange that every person on the globe chose to rebel—every person down to the last one? This being the case, a better explanation seems to be that all men are born subject to another law, than that each had their own personal fall into sin. One might also ask why infants die since they never “sinned” (at least according to this model) and how God can view all of us as sinners even though some are not yet born (Rom 5:8).

Second, and most damaging to this position, is the fact that the text repeatedly relates the sin of Adam directly to the race as a whole: (1) death spread to all men through the sin of Adam (5:12); (2) “the many died through the transgression of the one man” (5:15); (3) “judgment resulting from the one transgression led to condemnation” (5:16); (4) “For if, by the transgression of the one man, death reigned through the one” (5:17); (5) “condemnation for all people came through one transgression” (5:18); (6) “just as through the disobedience of the one man many were made sinners.” It is difficult to argue away the direct connection Paul explicitly makes between the sin of Adam and that of the race as a whole. In short, this view has little to commend it except the notion that it appears to be fair: we die only for our own sin, not that of another, i.e., Adam. But this is clearly not what the passage teaches.

Therefore, the better explanation is to see a connection between the sin of Adam and that of the race. But what is the nature of this connection? Some have argued that the connection is mediate and that all men sinned because they received a corrupt nature from Adam. There is room in the passage for such an interpretation, at least in vv. 17-19, when Paul uses the preposition “through” in regard to (1) death reigning through Adam; (2) through the one transgression, condemnation came to all men, and (3) through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners. The problem with this view is that “through” could just as easily be read in line with the more narrow statements in the passage that indicate a direct connection between Adam’s sin and the condemnation of the race (vv. 15). This is strengthened by the fact that nowhere does Paul mention the sinful nature, but only that death reigned through Adam, not through a fallen nature which he passed on to the race. More important is the fact that v. 18 explicitly says that a legal verdict of “condemnation” was passed on all people through one transgression (i.e., Adam’s transgression), not through the sin of the “all.”

Thus the connection seems to be direct and not mediate. Therefore, there must be a corporate meaning to the verb hēmarton. In some sense, then, probably due to Paul’s view of corporate solidarity (cf. Joshua 7), we were there when Adam sinned so that his sin is our sin; in God’s holy and judicial eyes, we sinned when Adam sinned and God imputed (i.e., reckoned to our account) to us his guilt. Notice that the text says, “because all sinned (not that “all sin,” present tense), referring to our participation in the sin of Adam. Generally there are two views advanced in order to explain this direct relationship between Adam and the race. The traditional reformed view, i.e., “federal headship,” refers to Adam’s position as head of the race so that the choices he makes affect the entire race. The other view is the “realist” or “seminal” view. This position argues that the race was there seminally in Adam much the same as Levi was seminally in Abraham so that the patriarch’s actions when he paid the tenth to Melchizedek can be said to be the actions of Levi, even though Levi had not yet been born (Heb 7:9-10). The federal headship view has more to commend it, however. First, the fact that death reigned even over those who did not commit a sin in the likeness of the sin of Adam shows that the participation is not of the nature required by the seminal view (Rom 5:14). Further, the relationship is spelled out in vv. 18 to be judicial, that is, a sentence of condemnation was passed on all men because of Adam’s transgression—a fact which more easily supports the federal headship view.

5:13 The term for (γὰρ, gar) indicates that what follows in vv. 13-14 is explanatory. But of what? It seems that Paul is trying to explain that universal death is due to Adam’s transgression, not to the presence or absence of the law. Thus vv. 13-14 explain Paul’s statement in v. 12a-c that universal sin and death are due to Adam’s transgression. His ultimate point is to further buttress the close connection established in v. 12 between Adam and the race which itself will be compared to the relationship between Christ and His new humanity (in vv. 15-19).

Paul says that there is no accounting for sin (ἁμαρτία δὲ οὐκ ἐλλογεῖται, hamartia de ouk ellogeitai) when there is no law, but this does not mean that sin and death were not realities before the law. It simply means that sin is not recognized for the rebellion that it is apart from an explicit revelation of the will of God pointing it out—a revelation such as we have in the Mosaic law.

5:14 Again, to reinforce the idea of “universal death through Adam” Paul emphatically states that while sin is not recognized for what it truly is without the law, death reigned (ἐβασίλευσεν ὁ θάνατος, ebasileusen ho thanatos) over those who did not sin in the same way Adam transgressed (ἐπὶ τῷ ὁμοιώματι τῆς παραβάσεως ᾿Αδὰμ, epi tō homoiōmati tēs parabaseōs Adam). Even though many did not sin by breaking an explicit command (the threat for which was death), as did Adam, death still reigned over them.

The statement who is a type of the coming one (ὅς ἐστιν τύπος τοῦ μέλλοντος, hos estin tupos tou mellontos) refers to Adam as a type of Christ. The phrase serves to bring the discussion back to the Adam Christ comparison which will finally be made complete in vv. 18-19. The word type refers to a mark or impression made by striking an object. The sense of it here in Romans 5:14 is “example,” “form,” “figure,” or “pattern.” A biblical “type” is a person, institution, or thing, which prefigures another person, institution, or thing to come in the age of the fulfillment of promise. The children of Israel and the lessons they learned in relationship with God are a type; they prefigure the Christian’s walk with God in the present age of fulfillment (1 Cor 10:6). In Romans 5:14 Adam is a type of Christ in the sense that the impact of his one act of disobedience parallels by way of contrast the impact of Christ’s one act of obedience. This is spelled out in more detail in vv. 15-19.

5:15-19 The point of vv. 15-19 is to show how much more (πολλῷ μᾶλλον, pollō mallon) the effects of God’s grace and the gift of righteousness surpass the results of Adam’s sin, death, and condemnation (vv. 15, 17). When Adam’s transgression brought death upon the many (οἱ πολλοί, hoi polloi), the grace of God and the gift which came by the grace of the one man Jesus Christ multiplied (ἐπερίσσευσεν, eperisseusen) to the many (τοὺς πολλούς, tous pollous; 5:15; cf. v. 20). Adam’s transgression led to judgment and ultimately to condemnation, but the gracious gift (χάρισμα, charisma), that is, Christ’s sacrificial act on the cross, followed (from [ἐκ, ek]) many transgressions and led to justification (εἰς δικαίωμα, eis dikaiōma) as the new permanent state of the believer (5:16). Death reigned as a result of Adam’s transgression, but much more those who receive the abundant provision of grace and the gift of righteousness will reign (βασιλεύσουσιν, basileusousin) in life through Jesus Christ (5:17). What Christ has done for those attached to him (by faith) reaches far beyond the judgment imposed due to the transgression of Adam. As condemnation for all people came through Adam, so also righteousness which leads to life (eternal and spiritual; 5:21) came for all people through Jesus Christ (5:18). Finally, because of Adam’s disobedience—his failure to hear and obey the command of God—the many were made sinners (ἁμαρτωλοὶ κατεστάθησαν οἱ πολλοί, hamartōloi katestathēsan oi polloi). But because of Christ’s obedience the many will be made righteous (δίκαιοι κατασταθήσονται οἱ πολλοί, dikaioi katastathēsontai oi polloi; 5:19). Such is the basic argument of vv. 15-19—a movement from the lesser to the greater; from the results of Adam’s transgression to the results of Christ’s grace.

Before leaving these verses, however, we must take a brief look at three important questions. First, what does Paul mean by “the many”? A few things should be noted: (1) Paul has clearly indicated that the entire human race is under sin (3:9-20) so that when he says that the “the many died” in v. 15 he is certainly not implying that some did not die as a result of Adam’s sin; (2) Paul has also clearly indicated that only those who believe in Christ benefit from his grace (3:22; 5:17: “those who receive”) so that when he says, “the grace of God…multiplied to the many” in v. 15 he does not mean that every person has received this grace personally; (3) Paul uses the expression, “the many,” only after he uses the phrase “the one.” It appears best then to take it as stylistic refrain so as to set off a contrast between “the one” and “the many.” The particular “one” to which the many are attached defines the numerical scope of “the many.” This is true in 5:19 as well.

Second, is Paul espousing universalism in 5:18 when he compares the universal effects of Adam’s sin with the effects of Christ’s righteous act: “so too through the one righteous act came righteousness leading to life for all people”? To argue for universalism in this text, however, is to neglect other key Pauline texts (2 Thess 1:8-9), including Romans 5:17 which plainly states that justification/salvation is for “those who receive” the abundant provision of grace. It is sufficient for all men, but only those who receive it, reign in life! Paul has simply chosen the expression “all people” so as to keep the parallel between Adam and Christ going throughout the passage. Also, universalism requires the questionable premise that Paul is arguing in 5:15-19 that the group in Adam has now become the group in Christ. But this is certainly not his point. He is arguing, rather, that in the same way as Adam directly affects all those connected to him (i.e., all humanity), so also Christ directly affects all those connected to him (i.e., all those who receive his grace). We might also add that it is doubtful whether any specific contribution can be made from this passage to the question of limited atonement (i.e., for whom did Christ die?).

Third, what does term “made” in “made sinners” and “made righteous” mean (5:19)? Is Paul’s point that people are made sinners or made righteous by what they do? This is highly unlikely. Therefore, it is better to understand the entire verse as God’s pronouncement or verdict vis-à-vis our connection to one “head” or the other. Insofar as we are all connected to Adam, God has pronounced us all as sinners (5:12). Insofar as we are connected to Christ through faith, God has declared us righteous. Thus the idea in the passage is forensic and legal in character, not moral or ethical.

5:20 Paul finishes off this paragraph in vv. 20-21 commenting on the purpose of the law and the superabounding nature of God’s grace. The point he is making is that it is not the law which brings righteousness, it only reveals sin; it is Christ and grace which brings righteousness leading to eternal life. He says that the law came in (παρεισῆλθεν, pareisēlthen) so that transgressions may increase (πλεονάσῃ τὸ παράπτωμα, pleonasē to paraptōma). He does not mean by this that specific acts of sin might increase numerically, but rather that people might become increasingly conscious of their sin when seen against the standard of God’s holy law—that sin might be seen for what it actually is! Thus the law “came in,” not to deliver Adam’s posterity from sin and its penalty—a common Jewish belief—but to reveal their desperate and rebellious condition (Rom 7:13).

But where the power of sin increased (ἐπλεόνασεν ἡ ἁμαρτία, epleonasen hē hamartia), as seen in the post-Sinai life of Israel, God’s grace multiplied all the more (ὑπερεπερίσσευσεν ἡ χάρις, hupereperisseusen). He continually forgave Israel and enjoined her to return to him and walk with him.

5:21 Even in the face of sin, the grace of God multiplied all the more so that (ἵνα, hina) just as sin reigned in the sphere of death so also grace will reign through righteousness (ἡ χάρις βασιλεύσῃ διὰ δικαιοσύνης, hē charis basileusē dia dikaiosunēs). The penalty of sin is death as decreed by God himself. It is in that sphere of death and alienation from God that sin began its reign and has ever since continued to hold sway over Adam’s children. But the reign of grace is stronger so that those who have come under the headship of Christ enjoy transfer to a new sphere of existence characterized by “righteousness” (imputed and imparted). This is a present reality for the believer and has as its goal, eternal life (εἰς ζωὴν αἰώνιον, eis zōēn aiōnion), enjoyed now and consummated in the future (5:10).

F. Homiletical Idea and Outline

Idea: Contemplate the Power of God’s Grace through Christ!

I. Contemplate the Origin of Sin and Death (5:12-14)

A. Adam’s Sin and the World (5:12)

B. Universal Death before the Law (5:13-14b)

C. Adam: A Type of Christ (5:14c)

II. Contemplate The Victory of Christ (5:15-19)

A. Adam’s Transgression—Grace (5:15)

B. Judgment/Condemnation—Justification (5:16)

C. Death/Adam—Reigning in Life/Christ (5:17)

D. All Men Condemned—“All Men” Justified (5:18)

E. The Many/Sinners—The Many Righteous (5:19)

III. Contemplate The Triumph of Grace over Law and Sin (5:20-21)

A. The Law, Sin, and Grace (5:20)

B. Grace, Righteousness, Eternal Life (5:21)

G. Contribution of Passage to Systematic Theology

Romans 5:12-19 is a key passage in discussions about the origin of sin. It is clear from this text that as far as the human race is concerned, sin entered through Adam. Further, there is a direct connection between the transgression of Adam and the sin of the entire race. Any explanation that attempts to soften or do away with this direct connection falls on difficult times in vv. 18-19 and throughout the passage. The best explanation, then, is to affirm a direct connection, some sort of corporate solidarity between Adam and his posterity. For the most part this has been viewed either seminally (the “realist” view) or by way of federal headship. The judicial language of the passage tends to favor the federal view. Thus the passage is not dealing with “inherited corruption,” or “original sin” per se—as referring to a sinful nature or the actual sins people commit—but with imputed guilt or what has been reckoned to my account by God. This explanation seems to have the greatest explanatory power regarding the details in vv. 12-19 and it maintains the parallel between Christ and Adam (see comments).

⁴⁵ Charles Colson, Kingdoms in Conflict (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1987), 182-83.

⁴⁶ The full realization of this promise awaits the millennial reign of Christ, but his death and resurrection set off the inaugural stages of this victory and reign.

16. Study and Exposition of Romans 6:15-23

A. Introduction

Mahatma Gandhi (1869-1948) “fought” for the freedom of enslaved and oppressed peoples for over thirty years and is rightly recognized as one of the world’s great leaders in this regard. He protested racial legislation in South Africa and led civil disobedience campaigns in his native India in order to secure home rule. He was especially noted for his commitment to non-violent ways, his self-discipline and denial, as well as his championing of the underclass within the caste system. It has been said that the theme of his life revolved around the question: “How can people know freedom from slavery—politically, socially, or internally within themselves?”⁵⁰

Christian, this too should be your theme. Not freedom from political institutions per se, but freedom from sin, on the one hand, and enslavement to God, righteousness, sanctification, and eternal life, on the other. Again, we should ask how can I, as a believer in Jesus Christ, be freed from the reigning power of sin in my daily life? Gandhi was quoted as saying, “the moment the slave resolves that he will no longer be a slave, his fetters fall.”⁵¹ The gospel has made every provision for this reality in your life. Have you resolved that sin will no longer have dominion over you? Paul says in Romans 6:15-23 that a proper understanding of grace (and the fact that the Christian is not under law) should lead to freedom from sin and enslavement to obedience.

Near the end of Gandhi’s life he made the following comment:

What I want to achieve—what I have been striving and pining to achieve these thirty years—is self realization, to see God face to face, to attain Moksha (spiritual deliverance)…I have not yet found Him, but I am seeking after Him…For it is an unbroken fortune to me that I am still so far from Him…I have not seen Him, neither have I known Him.⁵²

But according to Jesus Christ, the Christian knows God and has been spiritually delivered from sin. Therefore, Christian, live like it is so, for the payoff of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

B. Translation of Passage in NET

6:15 What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? Absolutely not! 6:16 Do you not know that if you present yourselves as obedient slaves, you are slaves to the one you obey, either to sin resulting in death, or obedience resulting in righteousness? 6:17 But thanks be to God that though you were slaves to sin, you obeyed from the heart that pattern of teaching you were entrusted to, 6:18 and having been freed from sin, you became enslaved to righteousness. 6:19 (I am speaking in human terms because of the weakness of your flesh.) For just as you once presented your members as slaves to impurity and lawlessness leading to more lawlessness, so now present your members as slaves to righteousness leading to sanctification. 6:20 For when you were slaves of sin, you were free with regard to righteousness.

6:21 So what benefit did you then reap from those things that you are now ashamed of? For the end of those things is death. 6:22 But now, freed from sin and enslaved to God, you have your benefit leading to sanctification, and the end is eternal life. 6:23 For the payoff of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

C. Full Exegetical Outline

Idea: The reason Christians who are no longer the law, but under grace should not sin is because it leads to slavery to sin and death, whereas slavery to righteousness leads to eternal life.

I. Should Christians who are no longer under law, but under grace, continue in sin? Absolutely not! (6:15)

II. A person is a slave to the one whom he obeys, whether sin resulting in death or obedience resulting in righteousness (6:16)

A. A person is a slave to the one whom he obeys (6:16a-b)

B. Sin results in death (6:16c)

C. Obedience (to God) results in righteousness (6:16d)

III. Paul gives thanks for the Roman Christians because they had become obedient to righteousness which leads to sanctification and he encourages them to continue to offer themselves as slaves to righteousness (6:17-20)

A. The Romans were salves to sin, but they obeyed from the heart the teaching to which they were entrusted with the result that they have become freed from sin and enslaved to righteousness (6:17)

1. Paul gives thanks for the Roman Christians (6:17a)

2. The Roman Christians were slaves to sin (6:17a)

3. The Roman Christians obeyed from the heart the pattern of teaching to which they were entrusted (6:17c)

4. The Roman Christians have been freed from sin and enslaved to righteousness (6:18)

B. Paul, through the illustration from slavery, encourages the Roman Christians to present their members, not to sin leading to greater and greater lawlessness, but to righteousness, leading to sanctification, because they are now slaves to righteousness (6:19-20)

1. Paul is using the illustration of slavery in order to help the Romans better comprehend what he’s saying since people have limited abilities to understand (6:19a)

2. The Roman Christians, at one time, presented their members to impurity and lawlessness, leading to more lawlessness (6:19b)

3. The Roman Christians are now to present their members as slaves to righteousness leading to sanctification (6:19c)

4. When the Roman Christians were slaves to sin they were free with regard to righteousness (6:20)

IV. Paul reminds the Roman Christians that their previous way of life reaped shame and death whereas now, having been freed from sin, they are reaping sanctification, the end of which is eternal life (6:21-22)

A. The Romans Christians did not reap any good thing from those things which they are now ashamed of (6:21a)

B. The end of those things is death (6:21b)

C. The Roman Christians have been freed from sin and enslaved to God (6:22a)

D. The Roman Christians have their benefit from enslavement to God, namely, sanctification and eternal life (6:22b)

V. The payoff of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life (6:23)

A. The payoff of sin is death (6:23a)

B. The gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord (6:23b)

D. Simple Point Outline

Idea: Sin leads to death, but obedience leads to righteousness and eternal life.

I. The Question: Shall Christians who are not under the law, therefore, have freedom to sin? (6:15)

II. The Fruit of Sin

A. It Leads to Enslavement (6:16, 17)

B. It Leads to Death (6:16, 21)

C. It Involves Enslavement to Impurity and Lawlessness (6:19)

D. It Leads to Further Enslavement and Lawlessness (6:19)

E. It Is A Condition in Which A Person Is Free with Regard to Righteousness (6:20)

F. It Leads to Shame (6:21)

G. It Deceives: It’s Wages Is Death (6:23)

III. The Fruit of Obedience

A. Obedience is Not An Option (6:15)

B. It Leads to Righteousness (6:16, 18)

C. It Comes from the Heart and Realizes an External Standard (6:17)

D. It Leads to Freedom from Sin (6:18)

E. It Leads to Sanctification (6:19)

F. It Involves No Shame (6:21)

G. It Leads to the Enjoyment of Eternal Life (6:22)

IV. The Conclusion of the Matter (6:23)

A. Sin Leads to Death

B. The Gift of God Is Eternal Life

E. Exposition Proper

In 6:14 Paul summarizes 6:1-13 saying that Christians are under grace and are no longer under law. This statement, however, could be misunderstood to mean that Christians are free to be lawless. Paul anticipates such a ludicrous misreading of his gospel, that he surfaces the question and deals with it in 6:15-23. There is always the danger that the doctrine of grace might be misunderstood to mean license (Rom 3:8), but Paul’s gospel will have none of it. If a person gives themselves to sin, under the pretense of grace, they will soon find themselves a slave to sin and all that goes with that, i.e., death in all its aspects. In 6:1-14 Christians are to refrain from sin and live a righteous life because they have been united with Christ in his death to sin and resurrection to new life. In 6:15-23 the Pauline gospel teaches that Christians are to refrain from sinning and live a righteous life because those who sin will become slaves to sin leading to death whereas those who live for righteousness will increase in holiness and enjoy the gift of eternal life, even now.

6:15 Paul begins in 6:15 with a question: He says, “What then” (τι οὖν, ti oun)? Shall we sin (ἁμαρτήσωμεν, hamartēsōmen) because (ὅτι, hoti) we are not under law (ὑπὸ νόμον, hupo nomon) but (ἀλλὰ, alla) under grace (ὑπὸ χάριν, hupo charin)? The question is similar to that in 6:1, but with a different twist. In 6:1 the question anticipates the false inference that if grace increases where sin increases, then why not continue in sin? In 6:15 Paul’s question anticipates another false inference, namely, that if Christians are no longer under the law, but under grace (Rom 5:20), then why not sin freely? After all, it was Paul who just finished saying that where there is no law, sin is not taken into account, i.e., there is no punishment (Rom 5:13). So then, if the demands of the law have been set aside and no longer have any real application to the Christian, then why not sin to our heart’s content? Again Paul’s response is an emphatic denial of such nonsense: Absolutely not (μή γένοιτο, mē genoito)! Contrary to the opinion of some expositors, Paul is deeply concerned in Romans 6:15ff that Christians not become enslaved to sin through a misunderstanding of the role of the law in their present experience of salvation. The fact that Christians are not under law, does not mean that it no longer has any validity in the life of the Christian. See Romans 13:8-10.

This is the last occurrence of the verb “to sin” (ἁμαρτήσωμεν, hamartēsōmen) in this chapter and indeed the entire book. It means, as it has done in every previous occurrence in Romans, responsible acts of disobedience to God whether there is a law in place to point it out or not (Rom 2:14-15; 3:23).⁵³ The idea of being under law is not to be equated strictly with simply being Jewish, but rather being under the situation of law in comparison to things under grace in Christ. That is, “under law” refers to a situation in which there is limited resources available for the performance of the demands of the law. Being “under grace” is to be united to Christ in his death and resurrection and to possess the Spirit (to be discussed in chapter 8) as key resources for the overthrow of the reign of sin in one's experience (see esp. Galatians 5:18).⁵⁴ While believing Israelites certainly experienced the salvific and sanctifying grace of God (cf. Rom 2:28-29), the new age inaugurated with the death and resurrection of Christ and the coming of the Spirit is vastly superior in its new covenant resources (cf. John 14:17; 2 Cor 3:1-18). The righteous demands of the law remain for the Christian (Rom 13:8-10), especially as it is fulfilled, properly interpreted and applied by Christ and the apostles, and lived out according to the leading of the indwelling Spirit—that great, eschatological sign of being a true Christian (Rom 8:4, 9).

6:16 Having emphatically denied that being “under grace” and not “under law” leads to license, Paul begins to set up a stark contrast between slavery, sin, and death, and obedience, righteousness, and eternal life. For Paul there is no middle ground. Everyone is a slave. The question is not, “Are you a slave?” but “to whom are you enslaved?” If it's to sin, the result will be death. If it's to obedience (to God), the result will be righteousness and eternal life.

The expression Do you not know (οὐκ οἴδατε ὅτι, ouk oidate hoti) doesn’t indicate that these Roman Christians did not yet understand apostolic teaching about sin and righteousness. In fact, Paul’s statement in 6:17 clearly indicates that they did understand “how to live so as to please God” (cf. 1 Thess 4:1-2). The expression is simply rhetorical and sets up what follows as a reminder of that which they already knew and were committed to (cf. 1 Cor 3:16; 6:19-20).

Paul says that if you present (παριστάνετε, paristanete) yourselves as obedient slaves (δούλους εἰς ὑπακοήν, doulous eis hupakoēn), you are slaves to the one you obey, either to sin (ἁμαρτίας, hamartias) resulting in death (εἰς θάνατον, eis thanaton), or obedience (ὑπακοῆς, hupakoēs) resulting in righteousness (εἰς δικαιοσύνην, eis dikaiosunēn). The idea of slavery to sin echoes the words of Jesus in John 8:34: “I tell you the solemn truth, everyone who practices sin is a slave to sin.” The illustration from slavery would have been readily understood by all who lived in Rome, since a large number of people in the city and also in the church, were either slaves or freedmen.

Thus Paul casts life into an “either-or” category. There is no half-way house. A person is either serving God or serving the flesh with its lusts. Jesus said, “You cannot serve both God and money” (Matt 6:24).⁵⁵ We are reminded of the saying popular in some Christian circles, claiming that the most miserable person in the world is the Christian who tries to live in both worlds, in two kingdoms simultaneously. Undoubtedly this has some truth in it. In Christ we have made a decisive break with our old ways in Adam and have been called to both renounce sin as Master and daily foster allegiance to the risen Son.

We have been called to “obedience”, that is, adherence to the gospel in faith and life. As we sow to please the Spirit (Gal 5:16; 6:8-10), the result is a transformation; we are changed into the likeness of Christ. The result of heartfelt obedience to Christ is righteousness in our character and conduct. On the other hand, service to sin leads to “death.” The meaning of the term “death” here probably includes, as several commentators point out, the ideas of physical death, as well as spiritual and eternal death. Sin leads to death in every sense, though the grace of Christ is strong enough to keep the Christian who sins (Rom 8:38-39), though loss of fellowship with the Lord is a consequence.

6:17 The Roman Christians knew that sin led to death and obedience to righteousness and eternal life. Indeed, Paul gives thanks to God that though these people were once, as he was, enslaved to sin (Eph 2:1-3), they had through the gospel obeyed Christian teaching. But they obeyed from the heart (ἐκ καρδίας, ek kardias), or wholeheartedly that pattern of teaching (τύπον διδαχῆς, tupon didachēs) to which they were entrusted (παρεδόθητε, paredothēte). The “pattern of teaching” probably refers to teaching regarding salvation through Christ and a lifestyle commensurate with the claim to have become a follower of Jesus. Though it undoubtedly has an ethical focus, we may reasonably assume that Christ is at the center and therefore it rests on an explicit theological foundation. Thus new Christians came to understand what they believed and why they were to live a certain way. Three things can be noted from Paul's statement: (1) there was by this time a fixed “form” of teaching which was approved by apostolic witness. Thus there is such a thing as objective truth to which all Christians must respond; (2) these Christians were handed over to it, it was not handed over to them! This fact enhances the idea of their obedience “from the heart”; they were totally given over to the teaching they had received. They were not trying to change, alter, or amend it in any way, they were trying to obey it through Christ. We could go a long way following their example (James 1:22); (3) the notion that they were “entrusted” to it suggests both the intrinsic value of the teaching and therefore its importance in the process of sanctification. By comparison today, how many evangelicals read and study their Bibles daily, weekly, monthly?

6:18 The result of having given themselves over to Christian teaching was that they had been freed (ἐλευθερωθέντες, eleutherōthentes) from sin, and become enslaved (ἐδουλώθητε, edoulōthēte) to righteousness (τῇ δικαιοσύνῃ, tē dikaiosunē). By obeying from the heart that form of Christian teaching to which they had been entrusted, the Roman Christians were experientially realizing freedom in their lives from the power of indwelling sin and freedom, on the other hand, to live for righteousness. They were set free from sins such as lust, impurity, idolatry, malice, anger, hatred, and the like and were constantly growing in Christlikeness (cf. Gal 5:16-24).

6:19 Verse 19 begins with a parenthetical comment in which Paul explains why he has been using the imagery of “slavery” throughout this paragraph. He says: (I am speaking in human terms [᾿Ανθρώπινον, anthrōpinon] because of the weakness [ἀσθένειαν, astheneian] of their flesh [σαρκὸς, sarkos]). Thus the reason Paul is using the concept of slavery, which he refers to as “speaking in human terms,” is because of the weakness of their flesh, that is, because they are unable to grasp spiritual truth very easily and illustration affords a modest way of clarifying otherwise complex spiritual truths. Paul does not mean that he has lowered God's righteous standard so that they can now attain it. Again, slavery was well understood by his brothers and sisters in Rome and thus a suitable vehicle through which to communicate the nature of life under sin or righteousness.

Paul begins the next sentence with For (γάρ, gar) which indicates that what follows in the rest of the sentence is a basic explanation/summary of his comments in vv.15-18. The point of this second part to the verse is to encourage the Roman Christians to continue in their obedience to apostolic doctrine.

The construction just as (ὡσπερ, hōsper)…so now (οὕτως νῦν, houtōs nun) suggests a comparison between the way they once lived and the way they now live as Christians. They are to show the same zeal for righteousness that they once had for sin. In the past they presented (παρεστήσατε, parestēsate) themselves and their bodies as slaves to impurity (ἀκαθαρσίᾳ, akatharsia) and lawlessness (ἀνομίᾳ, anomia). The term “impurity” refers literally to dirt or refuse, but figuratively to immorality and viciousness (see 2 Cor 12:21; Gal 5:19; Eph 4:19; 5:3; Col 3:5). “Lawlessness” is the way John describes all sin in its essential character (1 John 3:4). It is an affront to the holiness of God as it constantly transgresses his holy law and invokes his wrath. Our lawlessness is never satisfied with its current state, but always seeks, always strives to go further into greater acts of lawlessness. As time progresses our condition worsens and we are in the end, as Paul said in Ephesians 2:3, “by our very nature objects of wrath.”

Therefore, the zeal we once had for sin should now be brought to bear in moving in the direction of righteousness. As we do this we are embarking on a new course toward greater and greater sanctification (ἁγιασμόν, hagiasmon) which will culminate in glorification (Rom 8:30). The term “sanctification” means “holiness” or “consecration” and refers here to a spiritual and moral transformation in the believer ultimately brought about by the Spirit himself (2 Cor 3:18). The Spirit uses the word of God, the people of God, and circumstances to change us into the image of Christ (Rom 8:29). Thus the term refers to both a state as well as a process.

6:20-22 Verses 20-22 gives further explanation to this theme of slavery to sin and slavery to righteousness. First, a person who sins may think they are free, but in reality they are slaves to an evil, accusing conscience and can never have the “glorious freedom” God envisions for his children (cf. Rom 2:14-16; 8:21). They reap (καρπὸν εἴχετε, karpon eichete)—a common (with Paul) agrarian metaphor describing moral and spiritual realities (e.g., Gal 6:7-8)—no benefit from the sin they commit. It is a lie to think they do. Indeed, the opposite is true. They reap ruined lives and estrangement from God—the source of life, righteousness, and freedom. In the end they are ashamed (ἐπαισχύνεσθε, epaischunesthe) of what they have done. They are disgraced for having lived a lawless lifestyle; God cannot be mocked. In the case of these Roman Christians, their shame led to repentance. In the end we reap death when we sin; indeed the end or result of all sin is death. Here again death (θάνατος, thanatos) is to be read in its broadest sense with a possible emphasis on eternal death after an unrepentant person dies physically (cf. Matt 25:46).

Second, since the Romans Christians had now been set free from sin, and were enslaved to God “the benefit they received” (lit. “the fruit you have”) is sanctification and the pure conscience which accompanies love for God and service to him. Paul says their enslavement to God leads to sanctification, viewed as both a process and a state, with the end result being eternal life (ζωὴν αἰώνιον, zōēn aiōnion). Eternal life refers to knowing God, as Jesus said (John 17:3). Thus it has both a present aspect to it and its enjoyment by the Christian is bound up with growing in holiness (cf. Heb 13:14). There is also a future aspect to it when our knowing God will not be hindered by even the presence of sin.

6:23 For (γάρ, gar) the payoff (ὀψώνια, opsōnia) of sin is death, but the gift (χάρισμα, charisma) of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. This last verse further explains vv. 20-22 and closes out the entire paragraph by way of summary. The summary does have a new element, however, for God and sin are now contrasted, not as slave owners, but as different generals. The term “payoff” alludes to compensation paid to a soldier for services rendered.⁵⁶ So sin promises to pay a wage to its soldiers, to take care of their needs, but in the end it is a lie and death is the payment, not provision for life. Eternal life, however, is not earned, but comes as the radically free gift of God. The gracious nature of God's provision is similar to that which we found in 4:4-5 in which Paul was talking about imputed righteousness. Eternal life is completely according to the grace of God; he has not asked us to try and earn it and only curses any so-called arrogant efforts in that direction.

F. Homiletical Idea and Outline

Idea: Choose you this day whom you will serve…whether sin leading to death or righteousness leading to life! (cf. Joshua 24:15)

I. The Question (6:15)

II. Choice Number One: To Enjoy the Pleasures of Sin… But…

A. It Leads to Enslavement and Death (6:16, 17)

B. Is Never Satisfied (6:19)

C. It Leads to Shame (6:21)

D. It Deceives: It’s Payoff Is Death (6:23)

III. Choice Number Two…Heartfelt Obedience to God…Because It

A. Is Not An Option (6:15)

B. Leads to Righteousness (6:16, 18)

C. Realizes an External Standard (6:17)

D. Leads to Freedom from Sin (6:18)

E. Leads to Sanctification (6:19)

F. Leads to A Clear Conscience (6:21)

G. Leads to the Enjoyment of Eternal Life (6:22)

IV. The Conclusion of the Matter (6:23)

A. Sin Leads to Death

B. The Gift of God Is Eternal Life

G. Contribution of Passage to Systematic Theology

In Romans 6:1-14 we learned that we should not offer the parts of our bodies as instruments of unrighteousness because it is inconsistent with who we are now as those who have died to sin with Christ and resurrected to new life with him. Here in Romans 6:15-23 Paul gives another reason, namely, sin leads to enslavement and death whereas obedience to God leads to righteousness, sanctification, and eternal life. Thus this passages teaches us that we are to “work out our own salvation with fear and trembling” (Phil 2:12-13). It teaches us that grace does not give rise to license, but ushers in obedience (Titus 2:12-13). This passages teaches us that justification leads to sanctification and that the two should not be separated to the point where people miss the obvious connections.

H. Contribution of Passage to Discipleship and Church Mission

⁵⁰ See Richard Bewes, Great Quotations of the Twentieth Century (Great Britain: Christian Focus, 1999), 115-16, 125.

⁵¹ Bewes, Great Quotations, 116.

⁵² As cited in Bewes, Great Quotations, 125.

⁵³ See Dunn, Romans, in loc.

⁵⁴ In Galatians 5:18 the text says that the opposite of being under law is to possess and be led by the Spirit.

⁵⁵ See Murray, Romans, NICNT, 231.

⁵⁶ BAGD, s.v. ὀψώνια.

You are here

From the series: Romans: The Gospel of God's Righteousness PREVIOUS PAGE | NEXT PAGE

6. Study and Exposition of Romans 2:17-29

A. Introduction

B. Translation of Passage in NET

C. Full Exegetical Outline

D. Simple Point Outline

E. Exposition Proper

F. Homiletical Idea and Outline

G. Contribution of Passage to Systematic Theology

H. Contribution of Passage to Discipleship and Church Mission

From the series: Romans: The Gospel of God's Righteousness PREVIOUS PAGE | NEXT PAGE

From the series: Romans: The Gospel of God's Righteousness PREVIOUS PAGE | NEXT PAGE

7. Study and Exposition of Romans 3:1-8

A. Introduction

B. Translation of Passage in NET

C. Full Exegetical Outline

D. Simple Point Outline

E. Exposition Proper

F. Homiletical Idea and Outline

G. Contribution of Passage to Systematic Theology

H. Contribution of Passage to Discipleship and Church Mission

From the series: Romans: The Gospel of God's Righteousness PREVIOUS PAGE | NEXT PAGE

From the series: Romans: The Gospel of God's Righteousness PREVIOUS PAGE | NEXT PAGE

8. Study and Exposition of Romans 3:9-20

A. Introduction

B. Translation of Passage in NET

C. Full Exegetical Outline

D. Simple Point Outline and Homiletical Outline

E. Exposition Proper

F. Contribution of Passage to Systematic Theology

G. Contribution of Passage to Discipleship and Church Mission

From the series: Romans: The Gospel of God's Righteousness PREVIOUS PAGE | NEXT PAGE

From the series: Romans: The Gospel of God's Righteousness PREVIOUS PAGE | NEXT PAGE

9. Study and Exposition of Romans 3:21-31

A. Introduction

B. Translation of Passage in NET

C. Full Exegetical Outline

D. Simple Point Outline

E. Exposition Proper

F. Homiletical Idea and Outline

G. Contribution of Passage to Systematic Theology

H. Contribution of Passage to Discipleship and Church Mission

From the series: Romans: The Gospel of God's Righteousness PREVIOUS PAGE | NEXT PAGE

From the series: Romans: The Gospel of God's Righteousness PREVIOUS PAGE | NEXT PAGE

10. Study and Exposition of Romans 4:1-12

A. Introduction

B. Translation of Passage in NET

C. Full Exegetical Outline

D. Simple Point Outline

E. Exposition Proper

F. Homiletical Idea and Outline

G. Contribution of Passage to Systematic Theology

H. Contribution of Passage to Discipleship and Church Mission

From the series: Romans: The Gospel of God's Righteousness PREVIOUS PAGE | NEXT PAGE

From the series: Romans: The Gospel of God's Righteousness PREVIOUS PAGE | NEXT PAGE

11. Study and Exposition of Romans 4:13-22

A. Introduction

B. Translation of Passage in NET

C. Full Exegetical Outline

D. Simple Point Outline

E. Exposition Proper

F. Homiletical Idea and Outline

G. Contribution of Passage to Systematic Theology

H. Contribution of Passage to Discipleship and Church Mission

From the series: Romans: The Gospel of God's Righteousness PREVIOUS PAGE | NEXT PAGE

From the series: Romans: The Gospel of God's Righteousness PREVIOUS PAGE | NEXT PAGE

12. Study and Exposition of Romans 4:23-25

A. Introduction

B. Translation of Passage in NET

C. Full Exegetical Outline

D. Simple Point Outline

E. Exposition Proper

F. Homiletical Idea and Outline

From the series: Romans: The Gospel of God's Righteousness PREVIOUS PAGE | NEXT PAGE

From the series: Romans: The Gospel of God's Righteousness PREVIOUS PAGE | NEXT PAGE

13. Study and Exposition of Romans 5:1-11

A. Introduction

B. Translation of Passage in NET

C. Full Exegetical Outline