Down an Unfamiliar Road

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

Dr. Robert R. Seyda

EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

SUMMARY OF CHAPTER THREE

The Apostle Paul begins this chapter by asking what advantage was there being a Jewish member of the church in Rome. After all, were they not the first ones to receive God’s Law through Moses. They received circumcision as a sign of God’s covenant and were called His chosen people. But they ended up breaking the Law anyway. However, God did not break His promise to Abraham. God is always true to His word, He does not lie like humans do.

As a result, Paul said, the Jews missed their opportunity to be the first into the Kingdom of Heaven. In fact, God was looking for anyone who could work their way into the Kingdom, but He found none among the Gentiles, and then the Jews turned out to be no better, even though they had the Law. In fact, their sins were of the same sort as those of the Gentiles. Everything their Creator gave them with which they could praise and honor Him, they used for immoral purposes. Their mouths were like an open grave; their feet ran in search of sinful activities; their eyes turned toward idols instead of toward God.

So, says Paul, by this we can see that no one could get right with God on their own, not even by trying to follow the Law. In fact, each failure in keeping the Law only pointed out what hopeless and helpless sinners mankind had become. That’s why God had to find a better way, and that was by sending His only Son to become a human being and die so that they could be redeemed from sin’s bondage.

But it wasn’t easy. You see, God still demanded punishment for all the sins mankind committed; He still needed a sacrifice to atone for those sins so that the blood of the sacrifice could cover them and that God would no longer remember them. And that necessary sacrifice turned out to be His Son. So Jesus willingly took the punishment of mankind on His shoulders and suffered the penalty of God for those sins. It ended up killing Him. But God in His kindness, raised His Son back to life so that everyone who believes in Christ’s sacrifice may also have a new life.

But this new life is not to be lived selfishly for one’s own pleasure or gratification. Since our salvation is not based on our own works, we have nothing to boast about when we claim to be saved. All praise and honor belong to God. And the best way to show that praise and honor is to live our lives for His glory. So in the end, Paul answers his own question about whether the Jew had an advantage when it came to salvation. The answer, of course, is an emphatic, “No!” We are all the same, and, therefore, we all need the same salvation. And this one-of-a-kind salvation, can only come through faith in Jesus Christ, God’s sacrifice on the cross for our sins.

I praise God and thank Him every day for all of you who take the time to read His Word. He sees the hunger in your heart to know more about His plan for mankind. I’ve asked Him to bless you in your life and in your work for Him. I hope that you will continue your desire to grow in Christ and in God’s Word, as we move to the next chapter in the Book of Romans. – Dr. Robert R Seyda

I once read this quote from an unknown author: “Never deprive someone of hope – it may be all they have.” The Bible says that faith is the basis for having hope.¹ So if hope is already gone, there is no chance for faith to develop. Most Christians are hoping that Jesus will return soon. But if we lose that hope then our faith in God’s promise to send Him back will fade away. That’s why the Apostle Paul said: “We are saved by hope. And hope means looking forward to getting something we don’t yet have – for a person who already has something doesn’t need to hope that they will get it.”² So don’t take anyone’s hope away. – Dr. Robert R Seyda

Jewish scholar David Stern tells this story in his commentary on Romans, and I want to share it with you: 

Once upon a time, there was a king who was strong, brave and possessed of all other good qualities. He ruled his country justly, loved his people and was loved by them. Because of this, there was no crime in his kingdom — until one day it was discovered that a thief was loose in the land.

Knowing that wrongful behavior would multiply unless he took a strong stand against it, the king decreed that when caught the thief would receive twenty lashes. But the thefts continued. He raised the punishment to forty lashes in the hope of deterring further crime, but to no avail. Finally, he announced that the criminal would be punished with sixty lashes, knowing that no one in the country could survive sixty lashes except himself. At last the thief was caught, and it turned out to be — the king’s mother.

The king was faced with a dilemma. He loved his mother more than anyone in the world, but justice demanded that the punishment be carried out. Moreover, were his subjects to see that it was possible to commit a crime and not be punished for it, social order would eventually be completely undermined. At the same time, he knew that if he were to subject his own mother to a punishment that would kill her, the people’s love would turn to revulsion and hate toward a man so lacking in compassion and ordinary affection, and he would be unable to govern at all. The whole nation wondered what he would do.

The day arrived for administering the prescribed punishment. The king mounted a platform in the capital’s central square, and the royal flogger took his place. Then the king’s elderly mother was brought forward, fragile and trembling. On seeing her son the king, she burst into tears. “I’m… so sorry… for what I did!” she wailed, between sobs. Then, recovering, the stooping, white-haired figure made her way toward the flogging harness. The people gasped as the flogger raised his muscled arm with the leather whip.

Just as it was about to crack down on the exposed back of the woman who had given him birth, the king cried “Stop!” The arm poised in mid-air, the whip fell limp. The king rose from his seat, removed his robe, walked to the harness, put his arms around his mother, and, with his broad frame covering her frail body and his bared back exposed to the flogger, he commanded, “Execute the sentence on me!” The sixty painful stripes then fell on the back of the king.

“He was wounded for our transgressions,

bruised for our iniquities;

his suffering was for our well-being,

and by his stripes, we are healed.

We all, like sheep, have gone astray;

we have turned, each one to his own way;

and Adonai has laid on Him

the iniquity of us all.”¹

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

Dr. Robert R. Seyda

EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

CHAPTER THREE (Lesson XXIII)

Verse 31: So, do we destroy the law by following the way of faith? Not at all! In fact, faith causes us to be what the law actually wants.

Paul must have perceived that those receiving this missive already decided that he was advocating that the law scrolls be torn up and thrown away. But he had no such intention. Jesus was the one who gave him the Gospel directly. And this same Jesus had said: “Don’t think that I have come to destroy the Law of Moses or the teaching of the Prophets. I have come not to destroy their teachings but to give full meaning to them. I assure you that nothing will disappear from the Law until heaven and earth are gone. The Law will not lose even the smallest letter or the smallest part of a letter until it has all been accomplished.”¹

So Paul was trying to get the believing Jews to see that the whole purpose of the Law of Moses was for them to live in harmony with God’s will and purpose fo their lives. But try as they may, it was not possible because their sinful nature always influenced them into breaking the Law. Therefore, only by having their sinful nature put under subjection by their new spiritual nature could this be possible. And, the only way their spiritual nature could come alive and survive was through the power of Jesus the Messiah. As such, the impact of the Law of Grace would then be sufficient, as long as it is followed by faith, trust, and love for the One who brought it into effect.

Several early church writers give their expositions on what Paul declares here. For instance, Augustine says: “Do we then make void freedom of choice through grace? God forbid! Rather, we establish freedom of choice. As the law is not made void by faith, so freedom of choice is not made void but established by grace. Freedom of choice is necessary to the fulfillment of the Law. But by the Law comes the knowledge of sin; by faith comes the obtaining of grace against sin; by grace comes the healing of the soul from sin’s sickness; by the healing of the soul comes freedom of choice; by freedom of choice comes the love of righteousness; by the love of righteousness comes the working of the Law. Thus, as the Law is not made void but established by faith since faith obtains the grace whereby the Law may be fulfilled, so freedom of choice is not made void but established by grace, since grace heals the will whereby righteousness may freely be loved.”²

Then Pelagius asks: “Is the law which enjoins us to be circumcised unnecessary? Not at all! On the contrary, we enable it to stand firm when we show that what it said is true. Namely, that (spiritual) law would follow after (physical) law, (spiritual) testament after (physical) testament, (spiritual) circumcision after (physical) circumcision.”³ And to this, we add Patriarch Cyril’s words: “On account of His humanity Emmanuel is called a prophet, who following Moses is the mediator between God and humanity. The Law was a shadow, but even so, it presented an image of the truth. Furthermore, the truth hardly destroys its images; rather it makes them clearer.”⁴

John Calvin draws a distinction between the moral laws and the ceremonial laws of Moses. He writes: “For the moral law is in reality confirmed and established through faith in Christ, inasmuch as it was given for this end — to lead man to Christ by showing him his iniquity; and without this it cannot be fulfilled, and in vain will it require what ought to be done; nor can it do anything but irritate lust more and more, and thus finally increase man’s condemnation. But where there is a coming to Christ, there is first found in Him the perfect righteousness of the Law, which becomes ours by imputation, and then there is sanctification, by which our hearts are prepared to keep the Law; it is indeed imperfectly done, but there is an aiming at the work. Similar is the case with ceremonies, which indeed cease and vanish away when Christ comes, but they are in reality confirmed by Him; for when they are viewed in themselves they are vain and shadowy images, and then only do they attain anything real and solid when their end is regarded. In this then consists their chief confirmation, when they have obtained their accomplishment in Christ.”⁵

John Bengel sees a similarity here between Paul’s declaration and our Lord’s declaration of upholding the law. He goes on to say that while we are supposed to uphold what law testifies to (See Romans 3:20-21), we thereby show how the demands of law are satisfied through Christ.⁶ And Bible scholar Robert Haldane echoes what Bengel reveals: “From the doctrine of justification by faith alone, which the Apostle had been declaring, it might be supposed that God’s law was made void. This consequence might be drawn from the conclusion that a man is justified by faith without any respect to his obedience to the law. This the Apostle denies, and, on the contrary, asserts that by his doctrine law is established. The article is here wanting before [the word] law, indicating that the reference is not to the legal dispensation, or to the books of Moses, as in the last clause of verse 21, but to the general law of God, whether written or unwritten.”⁷

Adam Clarke then explains: “This verse states the third result of this method of salvation; instead of invalidating, it establishes the law. In every sense this declaration is true. If the law means the Old Testament generally, then it is true; for the gospel method of justification contradicts not one of its statements, is inconsistent with not one of its doctrines, and invalidates not one of its promises, but is harmonious with all, and confirms the whole. If it means the Mosaic institutions specifically, these were shadows of which Christ is the substance. Such laws are abolished, not by being pronounced spurious or invalid, but by having met its purpose, and answered its design in the Gospel. What it taught and promised, the Gospel also teaches and promises, only in clearer and fuller measure. If it means the moral law, which no doubt was prominently intended, still it is not invalidated, but established. No moral obligation is weakened, no penal sanction disregarded. The precepts are enforced by new and stronger motives, and the penalty is answered in Him who bore our sins in His own body on the tree.”⁸

Albert Barnes sees an anticipation here on Paul’s part: “This is indeed a beautiful and just view of the moral influence of the Gospel, and especially of the Doctrine of Justification by faith alone. It may be questioned, however, whether the Apostle in this place refers chiefly, or even at all, to the sanctifying tendency of his doctrine. This he does very fully in Romans 6; and therefore, if another and consistent sense can be found, we need not resort to the supposition that he now anticipates what he intended to discuss more fully in a later part of his epistle. In what other way, then, does the Apostle‘s doctrine establish law? How does he vindicate himself from the charge of making it void? In the preceding chapter he had pointed out the true ground of pardon in the ‘righteousness of God.’ He had explained that none could be justified, but they who had by faith received it. ‘Do we then,’ he asks in conclusion, ‘make void the Law by maintaining: No sinner can be accepted who does not receive a righteousness commensurate with all its demands?.’ ‘Yea, we establish law,’ is the obvious answer. Jesus has died to satisfy its claims and lives to honor its precepts. Thus, He has brought in ‘righteousness,’ which, being imputed to them that believe, forms such a ground of pardon and acceptance, as the Law cannot challenge.”⁹

Charles Spurgeon states: “There is no one who so much loves the law of God, and delights in it after the inward man, as the one who is justified by faith. There is nothing that so honors the law as ‘the righteousness of God which is by faith in Jesus Christ.’”¹⁰ F. F. Bruce tells us: “If Paul had expressed himself in Hebrew, he would have used the verb qiyyēm. This is the verb used in the rabbinical assertion that Abraham ‘fulfilled the law’. Paul may have some such assertion in mind when he goes on to argue that Abraham did indeed fulfill or ‘uphold’ the law, but that, according to the testimony of Scripture, he upheld it through receiving God’s gift of righteousness by faith.”¹¹

As we have seen, Paul did not start his defense of God’s righteousness by faith by merely writing down extemporaneous thoughts as they came to mind. As a devout Pharisee, and a student of the Torah, Mishnah, and Talmud, he understood God’s intent of giving the Law and how it had been corrupted over time when intertwined with human ideas. So he wants to set the record straight. And we can say, that up to this point he has done a terrific job.

Jewish scholar David Stern tells this story which is a fitting end to this chapter. He writes: 

Once upon a time, there was a king who was strong, brave and possessed of all other good qualities. He ruled his country justly, loved his people and was loved by them. Because of this, there was no crime in his kingdom — until one day it was discovered that a thief was loose in the land.

Knowing that wrongful behavior would multiply unless he took a strong stand against it, the king decreed that when caught the thief would receive twenty lashes. But the thefts continued. He raised the punishment to forty lashes in the hope of deterring further crime, but to no avail. Finally, he announced that the criminal would be punished with sixty lashes, knowing that no one in the country could survive sixty lashes except himself. At last the thief was caught, and it turned out to be — the king’s mother.

The king was faced with a dilemma. He loved his mother more than anyone in the world, but justice demanded that the punishment be carried out. Moreover, were his subjects to see that it was possible to commit a crime and not be punished for it, social order would eventually be completely undermined. At the same time, he knew that if he were to subject his own mother to a punishment that would kill her, the people’s love would turn to revulsion and hate toward a man so lacking in compassion and ordinary affection, and he would be unable to govern at all. The whole nation wondered what he would do.

The day arrived for administering the prescribed punishment. The king mounted a platform in the capital’s central square, and the royal flogger took his place. Then the king’s elderly mother was brought forward, fragile and trembling. On seeing her son the king, she burst into tears. “I’m… so sorry… for what I did!” she wailed, between sobs. Then, recovering, the stooping, white-haired figure made her way toward the flogging harness. The people gasped as the flogger raised his muscled arm with the leather whip.

Just as it was about to crack down on the exposed back of the woman who had given him birth, the king cried “Stop!” The arm poised in mid-air, the whip fell limp. The king rose from his seat, removed his robe, walked to the harness, embraced his mother, and, with his broad frame covering his mother and his bared back exposed to the flogger, commanded him, “Execute the sentence!” The sixty stripes fell on the back of the king.

“He was wounded for our transgressions,

bruised for our iniquities;

his suffering was for our well-being,

and by his stripes we are healed.

We all, like sheep, have gone astray;

we have turned, each one to his own way;

and Adonai has laid on him

the iniquity of us all.” (Isaiah 53: 5– 6)¹²

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

Dr. Robert R. Seyda

EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

CHAPTER THREE (Lesson XXII)

Jewish theologian David Stern says that Jews have substituted service for sacrifice. He writes that Non-Messianic Jews are hard pressed to give an answer to the question: ‘Now that the Temple has been destroyed so that sacrifices can no longer be offered in the manner God requires in the Torah, what is their kapparah¹ for sins? Their customary answer that sacrifices have been replaced by repentance, prayer, and works of charity, finds no basis in the Jewish Bible, even though all three are worthy activities and the first two are surely essential elements of the atonement process. The correct answer to the question is given in this verse: Yeshua is the kapparah for sin.²

Verses 29-30: God is not only the God of the Jews. He is also the God of those who are not Jews. There is only one God. He will make Jews right with Him by their faith, and He will also make non-Jews right with Him through their faith.

Paul made it clear to the Judaizers who came to Galatia that you do not need to faith in the Law of Moses along with faith in the Law of Grace. So here in this letter to the Romans, he felt it necessary to disconnect the idea that salvation offered to the Jews under the Law of Grace was, therefore, superior to the salvation offered to the non-Jews without the Law of Moses. In doing so, he quotes part of the Shema from the Torah: “Hear, Israel! Adonai our God, Adonai is one.”³ Jewish Rabbis tell us that the Shema is an affirmation of Judaism and a declaration of faith in one God. This is why the non-Jews have the same saving God as the Jews.

Paul uses the fact that there is but one God to support his teaching that, therefore, one God offers one plan of salvation. After all, the Psalmist did say: “God, show mercy to us and bless us. Please accept us! Selah Let everyone on earth learn about You. Let every nation see how You save people. May people praise You, God! May all people praise You.”⁴ And Isaiah was given this message to spread among the Israelites: “Your real husband is the one who made you. His name is the LORD All-Powerful.
The Holy One of Israel is your Protector, and He is the God of all the earth!”⁵ And God informed the Prophet Jeremiah that He refused to allow any other god to take His place. So Jeremiah gave the LORD this affirmation: “You are my strength and my protection. You are a safe place to run to in time of trouble. The nations all around the world will acknowledge You.”⁶ And to the prophet Zechariah the LORD said: “At that time people from many nations will come to me. They will become my people, and I will live in your city.”⁷ So it should have been no secret to these Messianic Jews in Rome that God wanted the whole world to worship and serve Him.

Clement, himself an early church convert from paganism, had this to say: “One righteous person is no different from another righteous person, whether Jew or Greek. For God is not only the Lord of the Jews but of all humanity. He is the Father of all who know Him. To live well and according to the law is to live. To live rationally according to reason is to live. Those who lived rightly before the Law were classed under faith and judged to be righteous. Those who were outside the Law, having lived rightly, on hearing the voice of the Lord … may turn and believe with all speed.”⁸

Then in the commentary by Ambrosiaster we read: “Undoubtedly there is only one God for everybody. For even the Jews cannot claim that their God is not the God of the Gentiles as well because they believe that the origin of all people is from the one Adam and that no one who comes willingly to the law may be prevented from accepting it. Some Gentiles actually went with the Israelites into the desert of Egypt, and the Israelites were ordered to accept them as long as they agreed to be circumcised and eat unleavened bread, and [celebrate] the Passover, together with them.⁹ Then again, Cornelius, a Gentile who was not Judaized, received the gift of God, and it is clear from Holy Scripture that he was justified.¹⁰”¹¹

This no doubt inspired Chrysostom to preach: “There is only one God, who is Lord of all, both Jew and Gentile. Even in ancient times, the blessings of Providence were shared by both, although in different ways. The Jews had the written law, and the Gentiles had a natural law, but in this, they lacked nothing, because if they tried hard enough, they could always surpass the Jews in their observance… If there was no difference then, there is much less even now, and this Paul establishes even more firmly by demonstrating that both alike stand in equal need of faith.”¹²

Reformist John Calvin carries on this same theme: “He [Paul] does not then ask simply or expressly, whether God was the Creator of the Gentiles, which was admitted without any dispute; but whether He designed to also manifest Himself as a Savior to them. As He had put all mankind on an equal level, and brought them to the same condition, if there be any difference between them, it is from God, not from themselves, who have all things alike. But if it be true that God designs to make all the nations of the earth partakers of His mercy, then salvation, and righteousness, which is necessary for salvation, must be extended to all.”¹³ This should force us to ask a question today: If God makes no distinction between people as to their eligibility to receive grace before they are saved, should we then make any distinction between them after they are saved?

John Bengel says that Paul is making an inference here: “If justification comes by way of the law, then the Gentiles, who are without the law, cannot be justified; and yet they also rejoice in God, as their justifier.” Bengel points to what Paul said earlier: “Therefore, the promise comes by faith so that it may be by grace and may be guaranteed to all Abraham’s offspring — not only to those who are of the law but also to those who have the faith of Abraham. He is the father of us all.”¹⁴ By referring to the promise of Abraham, Paul speaks as if he were looking forward out from the Old Testament toward the New. It is to this that the expressions of foreseeing, Galatians 3:8; the promise, Galatians 3:14; and the hope, Romans 5:5 refer. For instance, it was said of John the Baptizer: “This is that Elijah who was to come.”¹⁵ Here we have the discourse of a forerunner. The Jews had been long ago in the faith; the Gentiles had lately obtained faith from them. Also, the word through is used in a number of passages.¹⁶ It is right by all means to compare the difference in the particles used in Romans 2:27; and the difference in the thing signified [i.e., the different footing of the Jew and Gentile] Romans 11:17, etc. He does not say, on account of faith, but through faith.¹⁷

This question is on the mind of Adam Clarke when he asks: “Is not God the Maker, Preserver, and Redeemer, also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles as much as of the Jews. For all have equally sinned and there is no reason if God is disposed to show mercy at all, that He should prefer the one over the other; since they are all equally guilty, sinful, and destitute.” Clarke then goes on the answer: “It is one and the same God who made both Jews and Gentiles, who shall justify – pardon, the circumcised – the believing Jews, by faith; and the uncircumcised – believing Gentiles, by the same faith; as there are but one Savior and one Atonement provided for them all.”¹⁸

Robert Haldane makes this point: “Seeing there is one God, this assigns the reason why God must be the God of Gentiles as well as of Jews. If He justifies both, in the same way, He must be equally the God of both. In the previous part of the discussion, Paul had shown that by works of the Law no flesh shall be justified, proving it first respecting Gentiles, and afterward respecting Jews. Now he affirms that God’s method of justifying man applies equally to Jews and Gentiles. This confirms his doctrine respecting the ruin of all men by sin, and of there being only one way of recovery by the righteousness of God received through faith. To urge this was likewise of great importance, with a view to establishing the kingdom of Christ in all the earth.¹⁹ Having thus reduced the whole human race to the same level, it follows that all distinction among them must be from God, and not from themselves, — all standing on the same footing with respect to their works. There is but one God, and so but one way of becoming His people, which is by faith.”²⁰

Charles Hodge draws a similar conclusion: “We have here the second result of the gospel method of justification; it presents God as equally the God of the Gentiles and of the Jews. He is such, because ‘it is one God who justifies the circumcision by faith, and the uncircumcision through faith.’ He deals with both classes on precisely the same principles; He pursues, with regard to both, the same plan, and offers salvation to both on exactly the same terms. There is, therefore, in this doctrine, the foundation laid for a universal religion, which may be preached to every creature under heaven; which need not, as was the case with the Jewish system, be confined to any one sect or nation. This is the only doctrine which suits the character of God, and His relation to all His intelligent creatures upon earth God is a universal, and not a national God; and this is a method of salvation universally applicable.”²¹

Then Frederic Godet remarks: “To the question: Is He not also the God of the Gentiles? Paul could answer with assurance: Yes, of the Gentiles also; for the entire Old Testament had already drawn from Monotheism this glorious inference. The Psalms celebrated Jehovah as the God of all the earth, before whom the nations walk with trembling (Psalms 96-98, 100). Jeremiah called Him King of nations;²² and the Apostle himself demonstrated in Chapter One the existence of a universal divine revelation.”²³

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

Dr. Robert R. Seyda

EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

CHAPTER THREE (Lesson XXI)

To summarize what Paul has said since verse 19: You cannot work your way into heaven! Remember, there is a gate, and the gate is guarded. God only recognizes one work, one sacrifice, and one offering, and that is the death and resurrection of His Son Christ Jesus. If we are to be justified, it must be through the blood of Jesus. Cain was a prototype of those who attempt to approach God without the shedding of blood. It didn’t work when Cain tried to avoid the expense of losing a lamb, and it surely will not work now. In fact, it cost the sacrifice of the Lamb of God to make it possible.

Jesus Himself made this very clear: “I assure you, anyone who hears what I say and believes in the One who sent me has eternal life. They will not be judged guilty. They have already left death and have entered into life.”¹ And this became the central part of Paul’s preaching: “Brothers, understand what we are telling you. You can have forgiveness of your sins through this Jesus. The Law of Moses could not free you from your sins. But you can be made right with God if you believe in Jesus. So be careful!”² And just as important in identifying the Law of Grace as the only rule by which salvation was given, Paul wanted everyone to know that this was an immutable truth for all mankind.

Early church theologian Origen writes: “It remains for us who are trying to affirm everything the Apostle says, and to do so in the proper order, to inquire [as to] who is justified by faith alone apart from works. If an example is required, I think it must suffice to mention the thief on the cross who asked Christ to save him and was told: ‘Truly, this day you will be with Me in Paradise.’³ A man is justified by faith. The works of the law can make no contribution to this. Where there is no faith which might justify the believer, even if there are works of the law these are not based on the foundation of faith. Even if they are good in themselves, they cannot justify the one who does them, because faith is lacking, and faith is the mark of those justified by God.”⁴

Then Bishop Theodore points out: “Paul did not say ‘we conclude’ because he was himself uncertain. He said it in order to counter those who concluded from this that anyone who wished to, could be justified simply by willing faith. Note carefully, that Paul does not say simply ‘without the law,’ as if we could just perform virtue by wanting to, nor do we do the works of the law by force. We do them because we have been led to do them by Christ.”⁵

Then Pelagius writes: “Some people misinterpret this verse in order to do away with the works of righteousness, saying that faith by itself is enough, even though Paul says elsewhere: ‘If I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing.’⁶ If this seems to contradict the sense of the other [verses], what works did the Apostle mean when he said that a man is justified by faith, without works? Obviously, these are the works of circumcision, the Sabbath, and so on, and not the works of righteousness about which St. James says: ‘Faith without works is dead.’⁷ [In this verse] Paul is speaking about the man who comes to Christ and is saved when he first believes by faith alone. But by adding the works of the law, Paul is saying that there are also works of grace which believers ought to perform.”⁸ Clearly, Pelagius is not advocating salvation by works or by works and grace. He is merely pointing out that good works play a significant role in how a Christian lives his or her life. But these actions are not intended as a substitute for faith, but a result of faith.

Reformist John Calvin shares how this teaching was viewed by the established church in his day: “Justification by faith is indeed made very clear, while works are expressly excluded. Hence, in nothing do our adversaries labor more in the present day than in attempts to blend faith with the merits of works. They indeed allow that man is justified by faith; but not by faith alone. Yes, they place the effectiveness of justification in love, though in words they ascribe it to faith. But Paul affirms in this passage that justification is so gratuitous [by grace], that he makes it quite evident, that it can by no means be associated with the merit of works.”⁹

John Bengel points out that Paul’s question, “Where is your boasting then?” is unanswerable.¹⁰ The only person who could make such claims is one who can say that they have fully attained the level of living a completely righteous life. This is what the Jews tried to do. (Unfortunately, many who call themselves Christians have tried the same down through the centuries.) Bengel goes on to say that although a person, according to the law, might have supposed they may reap righteousness as a reward, yet they could not boast before God.¹¹ Now, as things are, seeing that there is no righteousness available by the law, there remains much less room for boasting; and boasting is much more excluded by the Law of Faith, than by the Law of Works. An appropriate misuse in the application of the word Law is made by calling justification by faith, a Law. This is allowed inasmuch as it is by Divine appointment, to which submission is due.¹² Thus, the Law of Justification by faith was broken because they did not submit themselves to the righteousness of God.¹³

Adam Clarke puts it in terms of the Wesleyan view: “Seeing these things cannot be denied, viz., that all have sinned: that all are guilty, that all are helpless: that none can deliver his own soul, and that God, in His endless mercy, has opened a new and living way to the Holy of Holies by the blood of Jesus.¹⁴ Therefore, we apostles and Christian teachers conclude – prove by fair, rational consequence – that a man – any man, is justified – has his sins blotted out, and is received into the Divine favor by faith in Christ‘s blood, without the deeds of the law, which never could afford, either to Jew or Gentile, a ground for justification. Because both have sinned against the law which God has given them, and, consequently, forfeited all right and title to the blessings which the obedient might claim.”¹⁵

Robert Haldane gives his commentary on the futility of boasting about one’s self-righteousness: “That is, according to the doctrine which the Apostle, by the Spirit of God, is teaching. There is no ground for it, or for ascribing salvation in any part or degree to the works of men. This shows that salvation was appointed to come to the redeemed through faith, for the very purpose of excluding all pretenses to allege that human merit has any share in it. This applies to all works, moral as well as ceremonial. If ceremonial works only were here meant, as many contend, and if moral works have some influence in procuring salvation, or in justification, then the Apostle could not have asked this question. Boasting would not have been excluded.”¹⁶ In other words, justification to stand before God as innocent cannot be granted by an individual or church. It is by divine appointment through faith.

Haldane also touches on Justification by Faith being called a law. “It is not by works; for if works were admitted, in the smallest degree, to advance or aid man’s justification, he might in that proportion have ground for boasting. It is, then, by the law of faith; not by a law requiring faith, or as if the Gospel was a law, a new law, or, as it has been termed a remedial or mitigated law. But the word law is here used in allusion to the law of works, according to a figure usual in the Scriptures. By the same figure, Jesus says, ‘This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent.’ Here faith is called work, for a similar reason. Faith in the righteousness of Christ is, by the appointment of God, the medium of a sinner’s justification, without any consideration of works. This way of justification clearly shows that a man has no righteousness of his own and that he can obtain nothing by means of conformity to the law, which can have no place since he must admit that he is a transgressor. It impels him to search outside himself, and to lay hold of the righteousness of another, and so leaves no room for glorying or boasting in himself, or in his own performances more or less. His justification is solely by faith, and it is clear that to believe a testimony, and rely on what has been done by another, furnish no ground for boasting. ‘Therefore, it is by faith, that it might be by grace.’ The whole plan of salvation proceeds on this principle, ‘that no flesh should glory in His presence,’ but ‘that, according as it is written, he that glories, let him glory in the Lord.’ ¹⁷No ingenuity can ever make elevation by human merit consistent with the passage before us.”¹⁸

And Spurgeon preached: “The Apostle Paul peremptorily, over and over again, tells us that salvation is not by works; nor does he tell us that it is by works and grace put together. He testifies that the two principles neutralize and cancel each other out and that a man must either be saved wholly as the result of God’s favor or else he must be saved altogether as the result of his own merit, for the two principles cannot in any way be combined.”¹⁹ As we know, man’s way is meant for failure from the start because he cannot keep his own promises. But God’s way guarantees success because God’s promises will never fail.

F. F. Bruce gives an excellent explanation of justification apart from works. He writes: “Paul does not mean that such works need not be performed, but that, even when they are performed tolerably well, one is not thereby justified in God’s sight. He is cutting the ground from under the feet of those who say, ‘I always do the best I can … I try to live a decent life … I pay my lawful dues, and what more can God expect of me?’ When this is grasped, it can be seen that they have no ground for self-congratulation as they contemplate the way of salvation: it is ‘by grace alone, through faith alone; to God alone be the glory.’. Yet, while justification in this sense is received by faith alone, ‘the faith which justifies is not alone;’ it is, as Paul says, ‘faith working through love’²⁰”²¹

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

Dr. Robert R. Seyda

EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

CHAPTER THREE (Lesson XX)

Charles Ellicott gives us his scholarly summary on man’s desperate need for getting right with God: “God appeared as a twofold character, simultaneously righteous Himself, and producing a state of righteousness in the believer. Under the Old Testament God had been revealed as righteous; but the righteousness of God was not met with any corresponding righteousness on the part of man. Therefore, [God] could only issue condemnation. Under the New Testament the righteousness of God remained the same, but it was met by a corresponding state of righteousness in the believer. However, [it was] not inherent, but superinduced by God Himself through the process of justification by faith. In this way, the great Messianic precondition of righteousness was fulfilled.”¹

F. F. Bruce adds: “In the self-offering of Christ, God’s righteousness is vindicated and the believing sinner justified. For Christ occupies a unique position as God’s representative with man and man’s representative with God. As the representative of man He absorbs the judgment incurred by human sin; as the representative of God He bestows God’s pardoning grace on men and women. The words recall Isaiah’s (‘a righteous God and a Savior’)² and Zechariah’s (‘righteous and delivering’).³”⁴

Verses 27-28: So do we have any reason to boast about ourselves? No reason at all. And why not? Because we are depending on the way of faith, not on what we have done in following the law. What I mean to say is, we are made right with God through faith, not through what we have done to follow the law. This is what we believe.

The Apostle Paul cannot make it any clearer. The old Jewish way of crediting one’s salvation to all their good works is over. Now one points to the good work of Christ on the cross as the only sacrifice that God the Father will accept. As we know from the Gospels, many Pharisees bragged about all their self-righteous deeds, and then thanked God that they were not one with the lower class.⁵ But they should have paid attention to what God said through the prophet Zephaniah: “I will remove all the bad people from Jerusalem. I will take away all the proud people. There will not be any of them on my holy mountain. I will let only meek and humble people stay in my city, and they will trust the Lord’s name.”⁶

Paul drew on this same thought when he wrote the Corinthians: “God chose what the world thinks is not important — what the world hates and thinks is nothing. He chose these to destroy what the world thinks is important. God did this so that no one can stand before Him and boast about anything. It is God who has made you part of Christ Jesus. And Christ has become for us wisdom from God. He is the reason we are right with God and pure enough to be in His presence.”⁷ Paul did this to counter what the people were thinking. In fact, Paul ask them: “Who do you think you are? Everything you have was given to you. So, if everything you have was given to you, why do you act as if you got everything by your own power?”⁸ And Paul makes a similar point to the Ephesians: “You did not save yourselves; it was a gift from God. You are not saved by the things you have done, so there is nothing to boast about. God has made us what we are. In Christ Jesus, God made us new people so that we would spend our lives doing the good things he had already planned for us to do.”⁹

So Paul is making the same argument here with the Messianic Jews in Rome that he used with the believers in Galatia: “We know that no one is made right with God by following the law. It is trusting in Jesus Christ that makes a person right with God. So we have put our faith in Christ Jesus, because we wanted to be made right with God. And we are right with Him because we trusted in Christ – not because we followed the law.”¹⁰ What Paul said back then about the role of the Law in salvation is true today when speaking of Church Laws that are not part of Christ’s Laws. Trust in Christ alone is the basis for our faith and belief in salvation. In this teaching Paul says that the Law of Moses had been replaced by the Law of Grace. That’s why he went on to tell the Galatians: “The Scriptures put the whole world in prison under the control of sin, so that the only way for people to get what God promised would be through faith in Jesus Christ. It is given [only] to those who believe in Him.”¹¹

Early church Bishop Theodoret has this to say: “By ‘boasting’ Paul means the proud spirits of the Jews and their excessive arrogance. For they thought they were the only ones who enjoyed God’s providence. But after the divine grace appeared and spread to all nations, the boasting of the Jews ceased… Paul calls faith a law, recalling the words of the prophet Jeremiah: “Behold, the days are coming, says the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the House of Israel and the House of Judah, not like the covenant which I made with their fathers.¹²”¹³

Reformist John Calvin has this to say: “The Apostle, after having with reasons abundantly strong, cast down men from their confidence in works, now triumphs over their folly: and this exulting conclusion was necessary; for on this subject, to teach us would not have been enough; it was necessary that the Holy Spirit should loudly thunder, in order to lay prostrate our loftiness. But he says that glorying is beyond all doubt excluded, for we cannot adduce anything on our own which is worthy of being approved or commended by God.”¹⁴

John Bengel makes this statement: “Although a man, according to the law, might have [i.e., supposing he might have] righteousness and a reward, yet he could not boast before God.¹⁵ Now as it is, seeing that there is no righteousness to be had by the law, there remains even less room for boasting; and boasting is much more excluded by the law of faith, than by the law of works. This [justification by faith] is also a law, inasmuch as being of Divine appointment, to which subjection [submission] is due, Romans 10:3. [They have not submitted themselves to the righteousness of God].”¹⁶ Bengel goes on to say that here we have a dispute involving two elements, Faith and Works. Faith alone results in God’s justification. Works alone inhibits God’s justification. You can’t have both. If you want God’s justification, remove your good works. If you do not want justification, remove your faith. Good works come after faith in the work of Christ. But they are not for justification. Rather, they are the result of justification.

Adam Clarke then adds his understanding: “The law of works grants no pardon, it requires obedience, and threatens the disobedient with death. But all glorying in the expectation of salvation, through your own obedience, is excluded by the law. The doctrine of faith: faith alone, in the mercy of God, through the propitiation made by the blood of Jesus, is that by which you can be justified, pardoned, and received by Divine favor.”¹⁷

Robert Haldane echoes the thoughts of his fellow reform theologians when it comes to boasting about how one’s good works may bring justification: “According to the doctrine which the Apostle, by the Spirit of God, is teaching, there is no ground for it, or for ascribing salvation in any part or degree to the works of men. This shows that salvation was appointed to come to the redeemed through faith, for the very purpose of excluding all pretenses to allege that human merit has any share in it. This applies to all works, moral as well as ceremonial. If only ceremonial works were meant here, as many contend, and if moral works have some influence in procuring salvation, or in justification, then the Apostle could not have asked this question. Boasting would not have been excluded. Paul had declared the only way in which a man can be ‘just with God.’ He had proved that it is not by his own righteousness, which is of the law, but by that righteousness which is received by faith. This is clear from what had been advanced in the preceding verse, from which this is an inference. If, then — as if he had said — God had purposed that men should have any grounds for boasting, He would not have set forth Christ to be a propitiation through faith in His blood, that thereby a way might be opened for justifying sinners, so that His justice might suffer no prejudice. But now He has taken this course; and, therefore, the only way of justification precludes all boasting.”¹⁸

And British scholar Charles Hodges offers his insight: “A plan of salvation which strips every man of merit, and places all sinners on the same level before God, of course cuts off all assumption of superiority of one class over another. Paul means to say that the result of the gospel plan of salvation is to prevent all self-commendation, self-satisfaction, and exaltation on the part of the sinner. He is presented as robbed of all merit, and as deserving the displeasure of God. He can attribute, in no degree, his deliverance from this displeasure to himself, and he cannot exalt himself either in the presence of God, or in comparison with his fellow-sinners. As sin is odious in the sight of God, it is essential, in any scheme of mercy, that the sinner should be made to feel this, and that nothing done by or for him should in any measure diminish his sense of personal deserved punishment on account of his transgressions. This result obviously could not follow from any plan of justification that placed the ground of the sinner’s acceptance in himself, or his peculiar advantages by birth or church membership; but it is effectually secured by that plan of justification which not only places the ground of his acceptance entirely outside himself, but which also requires, as the very condition of that acceptance, an act involving a penitent acknowledgment of personal deserved punishment, and exclusive dependence on the merit of another.”¹⁹

Frederic Godet has an interesting point to make here: “That glory which man derives from his self-righteousness, and which the law had already foreclosed, has been finally excluded. And by what means? By a rule of works? Certainly not, for such a means would rather have promoted it, but by that of faith (Rom 3:26.) The Apostle thus reaches the striking result that the rule of works would contradict the law, and that the rule of faith is that which harmonizes with it.”²⁰

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

Dr. Robert R. Seyda

EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

CHAPTER THREE (Lesson XIX)

Bible scholar F. F. Bruce shares with us his understanding of the doctrine of atonement: “The form hilastērion is related to the verb hilaskomai, which in pagan Greek means ‘placate’ or ‘make gracious’, but in the Septuagint it takes on the meaning of Hebrew kipper (‘make atonement’) and related words, among which is included kappōret (‘mercy-seat’). An exception has been taken to the use of the verb ‘propitiate’ and the noun ‘propitiation,’ to render these words in the older English versions of the New Testament, on the ground that the English terms smack of placating or appeasing. We may compare the avoidance of these terms here in the Revised Standard Version and New English Bible (‘God designed Him to be the means of expiating sin by His sacrificial death, effective through faith’) and the Good News Bible (‘God offered Him, so that by His death He should become the means by which people’s sins are forgiven through their faith in Him’)”

Bruce then says: “But if hilaskomai, hilastērion and their cognates acquired a new meaning from their biblical setting, it might be expected that by means of long usage the English terms ‘propitiate’ and ‘propitiation’ should have acquired a biblical meaning in the same way. In any case, misunderstanding is excluded by Paul’s insistence that it is God, and not the sinner, who has provided this hilastērion. The Old Testament similarly ascribes the initiative in this matter to God’s grace: ‘The life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it for you upon the altar to make atonement for your souls; for it is the blood that makes atonement, by reason of its life.’¹ It is an Old Testament text like this, moreover, that explains Paul’s use of the expression ‘by his blood’ in the present context and justifies the New English Bible’s interpretation of it as ‘by His sacrificial death.’”²

But the act of sacrifice by itself is not sufficient under the new agreement with God as it was under the old agreement. Having faith in the validity of that sacrifice and the cleansing power of the Lamb of God’s blood must also be exercised by the recipient for the promise of everlasting life to receive God’s stamp of approval. This is clearly expressed by the Apostle John when he wrote: “Yes, God loved the world so much that He gave His only Son, o that everyone who believes in Him would not be lost but have eternal life.”³ That gave Paul the courage to write the Colossians: “Through Him, God was happy to reconcile all things to Himself – things on earth and things in heaven. God made peace by using the blood sacrifice of His Son on the cross.”⁴

I’m sure it was with joy that the author of Hebrews described this new way to God when he wrote: “And so, brothers and sisters, we are completely free to enter the Holy of Holies. We can do this without fear because of the blood sacrifice of Jesus. We enter through a new way that Jesus opened for us. It is a living way that leads through the curtain—Christ’s body.”⁵ It is no wonder then that at the end of what is considered a Messianic Psalm the writer was thrilled to say: “Our descendants will serve Him. Those who are not yet born will be told about Him. Each generation will tell their children about the good things the Lord has done.”⁶ So why couldn’t doubting Jews see the truth about Jesus that was made so clear in their own Bible?

Paul also wanted to make sure that they understood that no one could have taken Christ’s place. Jesus of Nazareth was the one redeemer God sent for this reason because He alone qualified to do the work that was necessary. This was in Paul’s message he preached in Antioch: “Brothers, understand what we are telling you. You can have forgiveness of your sins through this Jesus. The Law of Moses could not free you from your sins. But you can be made right with God if you believe in Jesus.”⁷ This harmonizes with what the writer of Hebrews also had to say: “So, it is Christ who brings a new agreement from God to His people. He brings this agreement so that those who are chosen by God can have the blessings God promised, blessings that last forever. This can happen only because Christ died to free people from sins committed against the commands of the first agreement.”⁸

But Paul wanted the congregation in Rome to realize that God did not do this just for His pleasure, but for the good of those He created for the purpose of honoring and glorifying Him as their Creator. When Moses got ready to turn everything over to Joshua, and wrote a scroll that contained all his teachings for Joshua to follow, he gathered the people together to teach them a song. And in that song we read the second stanza: “The Lord is The Rock, and His work is perfect! Yes, His way of doing things is always right! God is true and faithful. He is good and honest.”⁹ In other words, no matter what changes were made in the world around them, the one thing their lives depended on was that God would never change. Unfortunately, God could not rely on the same thing from them.

No doubt, it was this failure on their part that disappointed God the most. So Korah’s family composed a song of praise that expressed God’s desire for His children in a beautiful way: “His saving grace is near for those who revere Him, so we can live with honor in our land. That way, grace and truth will have embraced each other; equality and peace will have kissed each other.”¹⁰ That’s why when Israel refused to listen to God’s voice, He sent this message to them through the prophet Isaiah: “My people see what they should do, but they do not obey me. They can hear with their ears, but they refuse to listen to me.”¹¹ So then, Isaiah laments: “The Lord wants them to do what is right. He wants them to honor His wonderful teachings.”¹² Not only was that valid in Isaiah’s day, and Paul’s day, but it is equally valid today. That’s why Paul tells the Roman believers that God worked all this out so that He can justify His decision to make things right with those who repent and confess their faith in Jesus as the one true Messiah and Savior. If the Law of Moses could not save people back then, then the Law of the Church cannot save people today. It is Christ, and Christ alone!

Reformist John Calvin gives a clear example of how God went about demonstrating the justice in His justification. He writes: “This is a definition of that righteousness which Paul has declared was revealed when Christ was given, and which, as he taught us in the first chapter, is disclosed in the Gospel. Paul affirms that it consists of two parts — The first is, that God is just, not simply as one among many, but as [the only one who possesses within Himself all the fullness of righteousness. But the complete and full praise due Him is not given when He alone acquires the reputation and the honor of being just, while the whole human race is condemned for injustice. Then the second part refers to the dispensing of righteousness. God by no means keeps His riches laid up for Himself, but pours them out upon mankind. Thus the righteousness of God shines in us, whenever He justifies us by faith in Christ. It would have been in vain if Christ was given for our righteousness unless there was the realization of who He is by faith. It follows then, that all sinners were unjust and lost until a remedy from heaven was offered to them.”¹³

Wesleyan theologian Adam Clarke offers his explanation: “To manifest now, by the dispensation of the Gospel, His righteousness, His infinite mercy; and to manifest it in such a way, that He might still appear to be the just God, and yet the justifier, the pardoner, of him who believes in Jesus. Here we learn that God designed to give the most evident displays both of His justice and mercy. Of His justice, in requiring a sacrifice, and absolutely refusing to give salvation to a lost world in any other way; and of His mercy, in providing the sacrifice which His justice required. Thus, because Jesus was an atonement, a ransom price, for the sin of the world, therefore God can, consistently with His justice, pardon every soul that believes in Jesus. This is the full discovery of God‘s righteousness, of His wonderful method of magnifying His law and making it honorable; of showing the infinite purity of His justice, and of saving a lost world.”¹⁴ What a wonderful thought: God required a sacrifice that mankind could not offer, so God provided it for us!

Robert Haldane gives a clear rendition of what Paul is driving at here: “God has at this time also set forth His Son as a propitiatory sacrifice, in order to make manifest His righteousness, on account of which now, under the Gospel dispensation, He remits the sins of His people. He was always just in forgiving sin, but now the ground on which He forgives it is manifested, which vindicates His justice in doing so. The word here rendered just, is variously translated by those who do not understand God’s plan of salvation. Some make it to signify benevolent, kind, merciful, etc.; but it has here its own proper meaning, which it never deserts. God is just: He acts according to strict justice, as becomes His character, while He justifies, accounts, and treats as perfectly righteous all who believe in Jesus, who are thus one with Him, and consequently have His righteousness imputed to them.”¹⁵

Says British scholar Charles Hodge: “A judge is unjust when he allows a criminal to be pronounced righteous, and treated accordingly. On the other hand he acts justly when he pronounces the offender guilty, and secures the infliction of the penalty which the law denounces. What the apostle means to say is, that there is no such disregard to the claims of justice in the justification of the sinner who believes in Christ. This is seen and acknowledged, when it is known that he is justified neither on account of his own acts or character, nor by a mere sovereign dispensing [through rites and rituals] to meet the demands of the law, but on the ground of a complete satisfaction rendered by His substitute, i.e. on the ground of the obedience and death of Christ.”¹⁶

But the great expositor Charles Spurgeon put it this way: “Every sinner knows that sin must be punished. He may trifle with that knowledge, but he cannot destroy it; and he never can get any peace of mind, when his conscience is really awakened, till he learns this great truth — God punished Christ instead of you. Christ has so honored the law of God that, without God being unjust, or being thought to be so, He can forgive you.”¹⁷

William Blake, well-known English poet, painter, and visual artistry pioneer, penned this proverb: “Shame is Pride’s cloak.” But in my many years here on earth, I have often found the opposite to be true: “Pride is Shame’s cloak.”¹

How often are people too proud to admit their wrongdoings, misdeeds, falsehoods, pretensions, and hypocrisies? They pass them off as bad luck, being in the wrong place at the wrong time, etc. So they wrap their cloak of pride around their shame. What they don’t realize is that their cloak of pride is transparent. – Dr. Robert R Seyda

TRUE STORY OF DETECTING GOD’S PRESENCE

On a cold March night in Dallas, Texas a doctor walked into the small hospital room of Diana Blessing. She was still groggy from surgery. Her husband, David, held her hand as they braced themselves for the latest news. That afternoon, complications forced Diana, only 24-weeks pregnant, to undergo an emergency Cesarean to deliver the couple’s new daughter, Dana Lu Blessing.

Only 12 inches long and weighing one pound nine ounces, they already knew she was perilously premature. Still, the doctor’s soft words were crushing. “I don’t think she’s going to make it,” he said, as kindly as he could. “There’s only a 10-percent chance she will live through the night, and even then, if by some slim chance she does make it, her future could be a very cruel one.” Numb with disbelief, David and Diana listened as the doctor described the devastating problems Dana would likely face if she survived. She would never walk, would never talk, would probably be blind, and would certainly be prone to other catastrophic conditions from cerebral palsy to complete mental retardation.

“No! No!” was all Diana could say as she sobbed. She and David, with their 5-year-old son Dustin, had long dreamed of the day they would have a daughter to become a family of four. Now, within a matter of hours, that dream was slipping away. But as those first days passed, a new agony set in for David and Diana. Little Dana’s underdeveloped nervous system was essentially ‘raw,’ the lightest kiss or caress only intensified her discomfort, so they couldn’t even cradle their tiny baby girl against their chests to offer the strength of their love.

All they could do, as Dana struggled alone beneath the ultraviolet light in the tangle of tubes and wires, was to pray that God would stay close to their precious baby girl. There was never a moment when Dana suddenly grew stronger. But as the weeks went by, she did slowly gain an ounce of weight here and an ounce of strength there.

At last, when Dana turned two months old, her parents were able to hold her in their arms for the very first time. And two months later, though doctors continued to gently but grimly warn that her chances of surviving, much less living any kind of normal life, were next to zero, Dana finally went home from the hospital, just as her mother had prayed.

Five years later, when Dana was a petite but feisty young girl with glittering gray eyes and an unquenchable zest for life. She showed no signs whatsoever of any mental or physical impairment. Simply, she was everything a little girl can be and more. But there’s more to her incredible story.

One blistering summer afternoon near her home, Dana was sitting in her mother’s lap in the bleachers of a local ball park where her brother Dustin’s baseball team was practicing. As always, Dana was chattering nonstop with her mother and several other adults sitting nearby when she suddenly fell silent. Hugging her arms across her chest, little Dana asked, “Do you smell that?” Smelling the air and detecting the approach of a thunderstorm, Diana replied, “Yes, it smells like rain.” Dana closed her eyes and again asked, “Do you smell that?” Once again, her mother replied, “Yes, I think we’re about to get wet. It smells like rain.” Still caught in the moment, Dana shook her head, patted her thin shoulders with her small hands and loudly announced, “No, it smells like Him. It smells like God when you lay your head on His chest.”

Tears blurred Diana’s eyes as Dana happily hopped down to play with the other children. Her daughter’s words confirmed what Diana and all the members of the extended Blessing family had believed all along, at least in their hearts. During those long days and nights of her first two months of her life, when her nerves were too sensitive for any human to touch her, God was holding Dana on His chest, and it is His loving scent that she remembers so well.

There may have been times in your life when you were beyond the help or consolation of any family member or friend. It was during those dark, lonely times that you felt the invisible arms of God cradling you. And as you think back on it now, you do remember there was a sense of His presence. Maybe it wasn’t a scent like little Dana recalled, but nevertheless, it was just as real. – Dr. Robert R Seyda