Down an Unfamiliar Road

CONGRATULATIONS IF YOU WERE BORN IN THE 1930’s, 40’s, 50’s, 60’s, 70’s or early 80’s!!!

I read this humorous article and thought you’d get a kick out of it too.

Many of you born in these decades survived being born to mothers who didn’t drink smoothies or eat nothing but yogurt while they carried us around in their wombs. They took aspirin, ate blue cheese dressing, tuna from a tin, sardines from a can, and didn’t get tested for diabetes. Then after surviving that trauma, your baby cribs were covered with bright colored lead-based paints. You had no childproof lids on medicine bottles, doors or cabinets and when you rode your bikes, you had no helmets, not to mention, the risks you took hitchhiking.

As children, you would ride in cars with no seatbelts or airbags. Sliding around on the backseat of a van or in the luggage space of a station wagon was always great fun. You drank water from the garden hose and not from a filtered water pitcher. You shared one soft drink with four friends and not one of them actually died from doing this. You ate chocolate cakes, white bread, and real butter and drank soda pop with sugar in it, but you weren’t overweight because…… YOU WERE ALWAYS OUTSIDE RUNNING AROUND!

You would leave home in the morning and play outside all day, as long as you were back when the streetlights came on. No one was able to reach you all day on a cell phone. And yet you felt safe. You would spend hours building your go-carts out of scraps and then ride down the hill, only to find out you forgot the brakes. After running into the bushes a few times, you learned to solve the problem. You did not have Playstations, Nintendo’s, X-boxes, no video games at all, no 999 channels on cable TV, no videotape or CD movies, no surround sound, no text messaging, no laptop computers, no Internet or Internet chat rooms. And when you did something you were told not to do or sassed your parents, you received a spanking and it wasn’t called child abuse.

BUT YOU HAD FRIENDS, and you went over to their house or they came over to yours so you could go down to the park and play! You fell out of trees, got cuts, broke bones and teeth and there were no lawsuits from these accidents. You played with worms (well most boys did) and mud pies (as girls did), and the dirt on your hands was digested easily. You made up games with sticks and balls to play in the street, and although you were told it would happen, you didn’t poke out any eyes. You rode bikes or walked to a friend’s house and knocked on the door or rang the bell, or just yelled for them to come out and play! You would play games where some would win and some would lose. No one got a trophy just for being there. You didn’t go to classes to learn how to deal with disappointment, it was part of life. The idea of a parent having to bail you out of jail if you broke the law was a rarity. They actually took the side of the law! These generations have produced some of the best risk-takers, problem solvers, and inventors in the world! The past 50 years have seen an explosion of innovation and new ideas your generation. You had freedom, failure, success, and responsibility, and you learned HOW TO DEAL WITH IT ALL! So congratulations, if YOU are one of them!

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

Dr. Robert R. Seyda

EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

CHAPTER ONE (Part XVIII)

Paul is not shy in revealing those things that can bring on condemnation and punishment. The first is godlessness. The Greek word Paul uses here, asebeia, means, “lacking in something.” It comes from a root word that defines, “being destitute of reverential awe.” And since the thing lacking relates to God, it refers to the total lack of reverence and respect for anything having to do with God. That includes His existence, power, rulership, laws, will, and purpose. This then spawns irreverence and disrespect for His Word. But even more sinister is that it disregards any need for God’s love, mercy, grace, and kindness, because no use is seen for them. Man determines his own destiny, therefore, God is given no say or sway over what man wants to do or be.

The second reason for condemnation and punishment is immorality. This means not having the ethics or morals to guide a person’s thoughts, intentions, and deeds. The Greek word that Paul uses suggests having no moral qualities, which leads to being evil in character. So it is easy to understand why Paul can say that such people refuse to accept the truth about their condition even though it has been made undeniably clear to them. It is like a person standing in a court of law, being shown a videotape of them actually committing a crime, yet refusing to accept it as any incriminating evidence of their desire or intent against the law.

Jesus used His own parable to illustrate such people when He told this story about servants who were told to always be ready to open the door when their master returned, even if it meant sleeping by the door. So His disciples asked what would happen to the servant who disregarded those orders. Jesus said: “That servant knew what his master wanted him to do. But he did not make himself ready or try to do what his master wanted, that servant will be punished severely!”¹

When Nicodemus came to get instructions from Jesus on the Kingdom of Heaven, John preached a sermon about that encounter and said: “People who believe in God’s Son are not judged guilty. But people who do not believe are already judged, because they have not believed in God’s only Son. They are judged by this fact: The light has come into the world. But they did not want light. They wanted darkness, because they were doing evil things. Everyone who does evil hates the light. They will not come to the light, because the light will expose all the bad things they have done.”²

The apostle Paul encountered this kind of conviction when he stood before Governor Felix and told him about what it means to believe in Jesus being the Christ. Luke tells us: “Felix became afraid when Paul spoke about things like doing right, self-control, and the judgment that will come in the future. He said, ‘Go away now. When I have more time, I will call for you.’”³ Later Paul would write the believers in Thessalonica: “The Man of Evil will use every kind of immorality to fool those who are lost. They are lost because they refused to love the truth and be saved.”⁴ It is like a person who sees a sign that says, “Bridge Out!” and yet keeps on driving because they believe the sign was put there to keep them from having the pleasure of going the route they want to take. Or, when they see a, “Do Not Enter” sign. They see this as a ploy to make them take a longer route instead of a shorter and faster route to their intended destination. To use the title of a popular song years ago, they want to sing, “I did it my way.” The apostle John must have felt a certain sense of frustration when he had to write these words about the Living Word: “He came to the world that was His own. But His own people refused to accept Him.”⁵

One of the early patriarchs of the eastern Greek church has this to say: “Generally speaking there are two main types of sin—discord with God and discord with one’s neighbor. Paul mentions them both, putting discord with God first because it is the greater sin, and calling it ‘ungodliness.’ He then mentions the second kind of discord, the one with one’s neighbor, calling it ‘unethical behavior.’ He even states that our entire race has rightly come under judgment, saying that they have suppressed the truth in unethical behavior. Nor can they claim to be ignorant, for knowing the truth, they perverted it.… And outlining their sins, Paul lists the one against God first, saying that they had clear and plain knowledge about God because God had revealed Himself to them.”⁶

And early church commentator Ambrosiaster adds this: “The knowledge of God is plain from the structure of the world. For God, who by nature is invisible, may be known even from things which are visible. For His work is made in such a way that it reveals its Maker by its very visibility, so that what is concealed may be known by looking at what is revealed.⁷ This is revealed so that everyone might believe that He is God, who made this cosmos, which was impossible for anyone else to do.”⁸

Reformer John Calvin comments on what mankind should know about God: “Paul thus designates what would be wise of us to know about God; and he means all that belongs to the setting forth of the glory of the Lord, or…, whatever ought to move and excite us to glorify God. And by this expression he intimates, that God in His greatness can by no means be fully comprehended by us, and that there are certain limits within which men ought to confine themselves, inasmuch as God accommodates to our small capacities what He testifies of Himself. Insane then are all they who seek to know by themselves what God is: for the Spirit, the Teacher of perfect wisdom, does not in vain invite our attention to what may be known; and by what means this is known, He immediately explains. By saying, that God has made it manifest, he [Paul] means, that man was created to be a spectator of this formed world, and that eyes were given him, that he might, by looking at so beautiful a picture, be led up to the Author Himself.”⁹

H. A. Ironside makes another point: “The heathens are without excuse. Paganism and idolatry are not steps in human evolution as man advances from slime to divinity. Heathenism is a declension, not an upward reach. The great pagan nations once knew more than they do now. The knowledge of God brought through the flood was disseminated throughout the ancient world. Back of all the great idolatrous systems is pure monotheism. But men could not stand this intimate knowledge of God for it made them uncomfortable in their sins; so a host of lesser deities and divinities were invented as go-betweens, and eventually the knowledge of the true God was entirely lost. But even today creation is His constant witness: ‘That which may be known of God is manifest to them; for God has showed it to them.’ This orderly universe with its succession of the seasons and the mathematical accuracy of the movements of the heavenly bodies bears testimony to the Divine Mind. The stars in their courses proclaim the great Creator’s power.”¹⁰

As far as how God’s indignation is revealed, Charles Hodge has this to say: “A thing is said to be revealed, when it becomes known from its effects. It is thus that the thoughts of the heart, the arm of the Lord, and wrath of God are said to be ‘revealed.’ It is not necessary therefore to infer from the use of this word, that the apostle meant to intimate that the purpose of God to punish sin was made known by any special revelation. That purpose is manifested in various ways; by the actual punishment of sin, by the inherent tendency of moral evil to produce misery, by the voice of conscience. Nor do the words ‘from heaven’ imply any extraordinary mode of communication. They are added because God dwells in heaven whence all exhibitions of His character and purposes are said to proceed. It is however implied in the whole form of expression, that this revelation is clear and certain. Men know the righteous judgment of God; they know that those who commit sin are worthy of death. As this is an ultimate truth, existing in every man’s consciousness, it is properly assumed, and made the basis of the apostle’s argument.”¹¹

Adam Clarke shares important thoughts: “Dr. John Taylor of Norwich¹² paraphrases this and the following verse thus: “Although the Gentiles had no written revelation, yet what may be known of God is everywhere manifest among them, God having made a clear discovery of Himself to them. For His being and perfections, invisible to our bodily eyes, have been, ever since the creation of the world, evident to be seen, if attentively considered, in the visible beauty, order, and operations observable in the constitution and parts of the universe; especially His eternal power and universal dominion and providence: so that they cannot plead ignorance in excuse of their idolatry and wickedness.”¹³

Bible scholar John Stott presents an interesting dialogue to explain Paul’s reasoning in these verses:

[Q: Why do you feel so assured about your mission, Paul?]

Paul: Because I am not ashamed of the gospel (v. 16a).

Q: Why not, Paul?

Paul: Because it is the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes (v. 16b).

Q: How so, Paul?

Paul: Because in the gospel a righteousness from God is revealed, that is, God’s way of justifying sinners (v. 17).

Q: But why is this necessary, Paul?

Paul: Because the wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness (v. 18).

Q: But how have people suppressed the truth, Paul?

Paul: Because what may be known about God is plain to them … For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities … have been clearly seen … (vv. 19–20).¹⁴

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

Dr. Robert R. Seyda

EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

CHAPTER ONE (Part XVII)

Charles Spurgeon has an inspiring homily on this subject: “The gospel tells us about this living by faith, this believing, this receiving righteousness through believing, and not through working. This is the sweet story of the cross, of which Paul was not ashamed. It is through faith that a man becomes just, for otherwise, before the law of God he is convicted of being unjust: being justified by faith, he is enrolled among the just ones. It is through faith that he is at first quickened and breathes the air of heaven, for by nature he was dead in trespasses and sins. As it is by faith that we come out from the world and begin to tread the heavenly road, so it must be by faith that we walk all the journey through. Till we lay down this veil of flesh, till the angel of death shall rend the curtain and we shall see [Him] face to face, let us not hope to walk by sight or sense, but only by faith in the living God.”¹

Then, Albert Barnes takes note of the difference between God’s righteousness and man’s righteousness. He writes: “The plan of God was to arrive at it [righteousness] by faith. Here the two schemes differ; and the great design of this Epistle is to show that man cannot be justified on his own plan, to wit, by works; and that the plan of God is the only way, and a wise and glorious way of making man just in the eye of the Law. No small part of the perplexity usually attending this subject will be avoided if it is remembered that the discussion in this Epistle pertains to the question, ‘how can mortal man be just with God?’ The apostle shows that it cannot be by works; and that it ‘can be’ by faith. This latter is what he calls the ‘righteousness of God’ which is revealed in the gospel.”²

John Stott offers a helpful interpretation of the quote from Habakkuk 2:4. He says: “The prophet had complained that God intended to raise up the ruthless Babylonians to punish Israel. How could He use the wicked to judge the wicked? Habakkuk was told that whereas the proud Babylonians would fall, the righteous Israelite would live by his faith, that is, in the context, by his humble, steadfast trust in God.”³ This has led many scholars to take the word “faith” here not only to mean faith in God and His Word, but the faith needed to remain faithful.

Douglas Moo also has an excellent section in his commentary on this discussion of righteousness and justification by faith in the writings of Paul that is much too long to include here, but as far as its vital role he has this to say: “Justification by faith is the anthropological reflex of Paul’s basic conviction that what God has done in Christ for sinful human beings is entirely a matter of grace (see especially 3:24; 4:1-8, 16).”⁴ In that sense, it is beyond the control and approval of man. Only God can justify, and He will only justify those drawn to Him by the Holy Spirit through faith in Christ Jesus.

Paul must have sensed the same confusion that would occur among those to whom he is writing in Rome, so he adds this explanation of how man’s efforts at righteousness had turned into unrighteousness:

Verse 18-19: We see God’s indignation sent from heaven against the ungodliness and unethical behavior of mankind who water down the truth about God. It’s not that they are truly ignorant about God because He has made His indignation plain for them to see.

Up until now, Paul has shown the positive side in his introduction of the Good News. But it would be absurd if God offered a plan of redemption and salvation if there was nothing to be redeemed and saved from. Why would the Gospel need any power if there was nothing that needed to be broken so people could be freed? That would be like a game where you could win a, “Get out of jail free” card, but there is no jail. Jail represents a form of punishment for wrongdoing. So with this verse, Paul develops his view of why mankind was in such dire need of salvation.

After establishing such a broad and sound foundation, it is interesting to see what he will now construct on this foundation of spiritual knowledge. We will discover that it is equally necessary for the Gentile and the Jew to recognize the same Jesus as their true Messiah. In the case of the Gentiles, it would require giving up their pagan habits and idolatry and taking hold of the plan offered to them by God to join the family of God. With the Jews, it would demand that they stop the impossible task of following the Law under the old agreement and accept the grace of God through Christ under the new agreement. In both cases, it would take faith.

Reformist Martin Luther makes this observation: “Here the Apostle begins to show that all men live in sin and folly, in order that they may realize that their wisdom and righteousness are in vain and they need the righteousness of Christ. This He illustrates, first of all, by describing the moral condition of the heathen.”⁵ In other words, the negative results that ensue after the sinful habits of sinners clearly show how abominable they are in God’s sight. That in itself should be a witness to them that there is a God, and that He loves what is right and despises what is wrong.

John Calvin speaks about the revelation of God’s displeasure from heaven against those who misinterpret the Gospel. Calvin writes: “Paul reasons now… that there is no righteousness except what is conferred, or comes through the gospel; for he shows that without this all men are condemned: by it alone there is salvation to be found. And he brings, as the first proof of condemnation, the fact, — that though the structure of the world, and the most beautiful arrangement of the elements, ought to have induced man to glorify God, yet no one discharged his proper duty: it hence appears that all were guilty of blasphemy, and of wicked and atrocious ingratitude.”⁶

John Bengel ties what Isaiah is quoted by Paul as saying here with what Isaiah said in verse 19. To this degree then, Israel did not sin in ignorance, but knowingly. By showing glory to them, they should have praised Him in thanksgiving. Furthermore, they should have rendered thanks to Him for His benefits in keeping them under His care as He led them out of Egypt and through the wilderness. But instead of glorifying Him, they became vain in their own glory. Bengel goes on to say: “The heart, which through these vanities had become foolish, became too dark, losing the truth entirely.”⁷

H. A. Ironside remarks: “We have seen that the gospel reveals the righteousness of God. The apostle now proceeds to show the need for such a revelation, and piles proof upon proof, evidence upon evidence, and scripture upon scripture to demonstrate the solemn fact that man has no righteousness of his own, but is both by nature and practice utterly unsuited to a God of infinite holiness whose throne is established on righteousness…. In a masterly way, he brings the whole world into court and shows that condemnation rests upon all because all have sinned. Mankind is guilty, hopelessly so, and can do nothing to retrieve his condition. If God has no righteousness for him his case is ended.”⁸

Charles Hodge adds his thoughts to this: “The wrath of God is His punitive justice, His determination to punish sin. The passion which is called anger or wrath, and which is always mixed more or less with malignity in the human breast, is of course infinitely removed from what the word imports when used in reference to God. Yet as anger in man leads to the infliction of evil on its object, the word is, agreeably, to a principle which pervades the Scriptures, applied to the calm and undeviating purpose of the Divine mind, which secures the connection between sin and misery, with the same general uniformity that any other law in the physical or moral government of God operates.”⁹

Then Charles Spurgeon has this to say: “Those last words may be read, ‘Who hold down the truth in unrighteousness.’ They will not let the truth work upon their hearts; they will not allow it to operate in their minds, but they try to make it an excuse for their sin. Is there anybody here who is holding down the truth to prevent it entering his heart? I fear that there are some such persons, who have come here for years, and the truth has pricked them, troubled them, made them lie awake at night; but they are holding it down, like one who grasps a wild animal by the ears, and holds it down for fear it should bite him. Oh, sirs, when you are afraid of the truth, you may well be afraid of hell! When you and the truth quarrel, you had better end your fighting soon, for you will have the worst of it if you do not yield.”¹⁰

Albert Barnes also employs a comparison between man’s admiration for ethical law and divine law. He writes: “We admire the character of a ruler who is opposed to all crime in the community, and who expresses those feelings in the laws. And the more he is opposed to vice and crime, the more we admire his character and his laws; then why shall we be not equally pleased with God, who is opposed to all crime in all parts of the universe, and who determines to express it in the proper way for the sake of preserving order and promoting peace?”¹¹

Douglas Moo makes this point: “Truth in the NT is not simply something to which one must give mental assent; it is something to be done, to be obeyed. When people act sinfully, rebelling against God’s just rule, they fail to embrace the truth and so suppress it. In this case, as Meyer says, they ‘do not let it develop itself into power and influence on their religious knowledge and moral condition.’¹²”¹³

The phrase in our text: “who withhold the truth about God,” is rendered in the KJV as: “who hold the truth in unrighteousness.” Methodist theologian Adam Clarke writes this: “In what sense could it be said that the heathen held the truth in unrighteousness when they really didn’t have the truth? Some think this refers to the conduct of their best philosophers, such as Socrates, Plato, Seneca, etc., who knew much more of the Divine nature than they thought safe or prudent to explore; and who acted in many things contrary to the light which they enjoyed. Others think this to be spoken of the Gentiles in general, who either did know or might have known, much of God from the works of creation, as the apostle intimates in the following verses. But German Protestant theologian Ernst Friedrich Karl Rosenmüller and some others contend that the word “katechō” here does not signify to hold, but to hinder; and that the place should be translated, who through maliciousness hinder the truth; i.e. prevent it from taking hold of their hearts, and from governing their conduct.”

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

Dr. Robert R. Seyda

EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

CHAPTER ONE (Part XVI)

Now we look at the context in which this message of the “Just” living by faith was delivered. In Habakkuk, this phrase is used at the end of God’s answer to Habakkuk’s complaint about those things that were going on in Israel in contrast to what was going on with Israel’s enemies. God says: “Write down what I will show you. Write it clearly on a sign so that the message will be easy to read by a runner. This message is about a special time in the future. This message is about the end, and it will come true. Just be patient and wait for it. That time will come; it will not be late.”¹ Then God tells Habakkuk: “This message cannot help those who refuse to listen to it, but those who are good [the Just] will live because they believe it.”²

So, in what context does Paul use this phrase? Paul had just written: “I am proud of the Gospel because it is the power God uses to save everyone who believes—to save the Jews first, and now to save those who are not Jews. The Gospel shows how God makes people right with Himself. God’s way of making people right begins and ends with faith.” In other words, the end times that were spoken of in Habakkuk had now come. Therefore, says Paul, “The one who is right with God [the Just] will by faith live forever.”³

Paul repeats this same phrase in his letter to the Galatians. There, he is talking about how the Jews expect to be saved by works instead of grace. He writes: “People who depend on following the law to make them right are under a curse. As the Scriptures say, ‘They must do everything that is written in the law. If they do not always obey, they are under a curse.’⁴ So it is clear that no one can be made right with God by the law. The Scriptures say, ‘The one who is right with God [the Just]will by faith live forever.’⁵”⁶ So again, Paul states that remaining true to one’s confession of faith in Christ as Savior will be the power that guarantees eternal life.

Finally, this phrase is repeated in the Message to the Hebrews. This gives us even more reason to believe that Paul wrote this message to scattered Jews who had become followers of Christ. There, he is speaking about keeping one’s courage and patience in their struggle while living under persecution and suffering. He writes: “Don’t lose the courage that you had in the past. Your courage will be rewarded richly. You must be patient. After you have done what God wants, you will get what He promised you. He says, ‘Very soon now, the one who is coming will come and will not be late. The person who is right with me [the Just] will live by trusting in me. But I will not be pleased with the one who turns back in fear.’⁷”⁸ So, from the first mention to the last the context reveals that every believer must stick to their confession, conviction, and crusade of living for Christ in this world no matter what the cost.

Early church bishop Theodoret has an interesting commentary on this verse: “The righteousness of God is not revealed to everyone but only to those with the eyes of faith. For the holy apostle teaches us that God foresaw this for us from the beginning and predicted it through the prophets, and even before the prophets, had it hidden in His secret will. Paul quoted Habakkuk for the benefit of the Jews because he wanted to teach them not to cling to the provisions of the law but to follow the prophets. For many centuries before they had predicted that one day there would be salvation by faith alone. Then departing from his admonition to the Jews, he accuses everyone else of having brazenly departed from the natural law which the Creator had placed in them. For when God made them, He did not allow them to live like beasts but honored them with reason and gave them the ability to know the difference between good and evil. Those who lived righteous lives before the time of Moses confirm this by their witness.”⁹

On this same subject, Martin Luther speaks to a problem in his day on how the church understood and taught the imparting of righteousness: “God’s righteousness is that by which we become worthy of His great salvation, or through which alone we are righteous before Him. Human teachers set forth and inculcate the righteousness of men, that is, who is righteous, or how a person becomes righteous. Both in his own eyes and those of others. Only the Gospel reveals the righteousness of God, that is, who is righteous or how a person become righteous before God, namely, alone by faith, which trusts the Word of God.”¹⁰

In light of what Luther says, think of this illustration: Imagine a towering mountain, like Mt. Everest, and let’s call it Mt. Righteousness. From the beginning, people tried to climb this mountain because it was said that whosoever reached the top would find the fountain of everlasting life. Yet, no one, not one, was able to make it to the top. Then comes a man sent from God who is able to make it to the top. Not only that, but He clearly marks the path for others to follow. Yet, they insist on doing it their way, following their own path, so that they will owe nothing to Him for their success. Such is the case with the righteousness of God. Only Christ was able to achieve it, and only by following His path can anyone reach that pinnacle. There is no other way.

John Calvin speaks about the righteousness of God by saying: “Now this righteousness, which is the groundwork of our salvation, is revealed in the gospel: hence the gospel is said to be the power of God unto salvation. Thus he reasons from the cause to the effect. Notice further, how extraordinary and valuable a treasure God bestows on us through the gospel, even the communication of His own righteousness. I take the righteousness of God to mean, that which is approved before His tribunal; as that, on the contrary, is usually called the righteousness of men, which is by men counted and supposed to be righteousness, though it be only vapor. Paul, however, I doubt not, alludes to the many prophecies in which the Spirit makes known everywhere the righteousness of God in the future kingdom of Christ.”¹¹

John Bengel (1687-1752), the father of modern biblical scholarship, has much to say about this subject of the righteousness of God and man. In Bengel’s mind, God’s righteousness is how He acts and what He does through grace and mercy to justify His saving the sinner while He is clearly condemning the sin in their lives. This then is what is called, “justification.” Therefore, any righteousness a believer may have is a derivative of God’s righteousness, by which a person (through the gift of God, See Matthew 6:33) becomes righteous and lives righteously. And laying hold of that righteousness is done by receiving and accepting Jesus Christ, through faith, as their Lord and Savior (see Romans 3:21-22). So it is not man who originated and designed righteousness, it is God who reveals and bestows it, approves and crowns it (See 2 Peter 1:1) on those He calls and chooses. This then makes it easier to see the difference between God’s righteousness and man’s righteousness.¹²

Bible scholar and teacher H. A. Ironside gives us this to think about: “This gospel had been demonstratively proven to be the divine dynamic bringing deliverance to all who put faith in it, whether the religious Jew or the cultured Greek. It was the power of God and the wisdom of God unto salvation. It met every need of the mind, the conscience, and the heart of man, for in it the righteousness of God was revealed faith-wise. This I take to be the real meaning of the somewhat difficult expression translated ‘from faith to faith.’ It is really ‘out of faith unto faith.’ That is, on the principle of faith to those who have faith. In other words, it is not a doctrine of salvation by works, but a proclamation of salvation entirely on the faith principle. This had been declared to Habakkuk long centuries before when God said to the troubled prophet, ‘The just shall live by faith‘.”¹³

Charles Hodge has much to say on the subject of being right with of God, but here is a part of what he says: “The reason why the gospel has the effectiveness ascribed to it in the preceding verse, is not because of its pure morality, or because it reveals and confirms a future state of retribution, but because the righteousness of God is therein revealed. As this is one of those expressions which are employed to convey ideas peculiar to the gospel, its meaning is to be learned not merely from the signification of the words, but from parallel passages, and from the explanations given in the gospel itself of the whole subject to which it relates. That ‘justice’ cannot here be understood of a divine attribute, such as rectitude, justice, goodness, or veracity, is obvious, because it is a ‘righteousness which is by faith’, i.e., attained by faith, of which the apostle speaks. Besides, it is elsewhere said to be without law,¹⁴ to be a gift,¹⁵ not to be our own,¹⁶ to be from God.¹⁷ These and similar forms of expression are inconsistent with the assumption that the apostle is speaking of a divine attribute. The righteousness of God, therefore, must mean either the righteousness of which God is the author, or which he approves.”¹⁸

Adam Clarke also has a very interesting comment on the term “righteousness.” He writes: “There are few words in the sacred writings which are taken in a greater variety of acceptations than the word ‘tsedakah‘ in Hebrew, and ‘dikaiosynē’ in Greek, both of which we generally translate as ‘righteousness.’ Our English word was originally ‘rightwiseness,’ from the Anglo-Saxon justice, right, and to know; and thus the righteous man was a person who was allowed to understand the claims of justice and right, and who, knowing them, acted according to their dictates. Such a man is thoroughly wise; he aims at the attainment of the best end by the use of the best means. This is a true definition of wisdom, and the righteous man is he that knows most and acts best. The Hebrew ‘tsadak,’ in its ideal meaning, contains the notion of a beam or scales in equipoise, what we call ‘even balance;’ and it is well-known that in all the personifications of Justice, both ancient and modern, she is represented as a beautiful female with a bandage on her eyes, and a beam and scales in her hand, so perfectly poised that neither end preponderates. The Greek word ‘dikaiosynē’ has been derived from ‘dikazo’ to divide; and hence justice because it is the property of this virtue to divide to each his due… Both the noun ‘dikaiosynē’ and the verb ‘dikaioō’ (justify), have a great variety of meaning in the New Testament; but they are all reducible to this original idea, acting according to the requisitions of justice or right.”¹⁹

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

Dr. Robert R. Seyda

EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

CHAPTER ONE (Part XV)

We also read what one early church patriarch had to say about the power of the Gospel: “Those who objected to the Christian gospel ridiculed it, mocking it because of its absurdity. For there is nothing more ridiculous than the word of someone who preaches that the Son of God was born and brought up by Jews, who rejects neither the cross nor death, who says moreover not only that Christ rose from the dead but that He ascended to heaven as Lord of all, that He will raise everyone else from the dead, and other things the apostles preached. The pagans mocked these things and ridiculed them, thinking that they would make the apostles shut up. Therefore, St. Paul feeling obliged to reply to this opinion of the apostles, began his teaching thus: ‘I am not ashamed of the gospel.’”¹

In reference to the power of the Gospel, Martin Luther has this to say: “The Gospel is called the power of God in contradistinction to the power of man. The latter is the ability by which he, according to his carnal opinion, obtains salvation by his own strength, and performs the things which are of the flesh. But this ability God by the Cross of Christ, has utterly declared null and void, and He now gives us His own power by which the spiritual is empowered unto salvation.”² So the word “power” is the important term here. In Thayer’s Greek Lexicon, he describes the usage of the word dynamis here in the same sense as the power to heal diseases. In other words, “the power to make things happen.”

Reformist John Calvin offers this comment about Paul not being ashamed of the Gospel he preached: “This is an anticipation of an objection; for he declares beforehand, that he cared not for the taunts of the ungodly; and he thus provides a way for himself, by which he proceeds to pronounce a eulogy on the value of the gospel, that it might not appear contemptible to the Romans. He indeed intimates that it was contemptible in the eyes of the world; and he does this by saying, that he was not ashamed of it. And thus he prepares them for bearing the reproach of the cross of Christ, lest they should esteem the gospel of less value by finding it exposed to the scoffs and reproaches of the ungodly; and, on the other hand, he shows how valuable it was to the faithful. If in the first place, the power of God ought to be extolled by us, that power shines forth in the gospel; if again, the goodness of God deserves to be sought and loved by us, the gospel is a display of His goodness. It ought then to be reverenced and honored since veneration is due to God’s power; and as it avails to our salvation, it ought to be loved by us.”³

Charles Hodge offers this definitive exhortation: “We have here the two great doctrines set forth in this epistle. First, salvation is by faith; and secondly, it is universally applicable, to the Greek as well as to the Jew. The faith of which the apostle here speaks includes a firm persuasion of the truth and a reliance or trust on the object of faith. Sometimes the one, sometimes the other of these ideas is expressed by the word, and very often both are united. The meaning of the term is not to be determined so much by philosophical analysis as by scriptural usage. For the question is not what is the abstract nature of the act of believing, philosophically considered, but what act or state of mind is expressed by the words ‘believing’ and ‘faith’ in the various constructions in which they occur. It is rare indeed that the state of mind expressed by any word is so simple as not to admit of being resolved into various elements… So also with the word faith, the exercise which it expresses includes a perception of its object and its qualities, that is, it includes knowledge; secondly, an assent of the mind to the truth of the thing believed, and very often a reliance or trust on the object of faith. Assent is therefore but one of the elements of saving faith, that is, it is but one of the constituents of that state of mind which, in a multitude of cases, is in the Bible expressed by the word. And as the great object of interest to Christians is not a philosophical definition of a word, but a knowledge of the sense in which it is used in the word of God, we must recur to the usage of the Scriptures themselves to determine what that faith is which is connected with salvation.”⁴

Adam Clarke gives his commentary on Paul being unashamed of the Gospel: “This text is best illustrated by Isaiah,⁵ quoted later by the apostle: ‘As Scripture says, “Anyone who believes in Him will never be put to shame.”’⁶ That is, they will neither be confounded nor disappointed of their hope… Those who have believed on Christ have, in and through Him, all the blessings of which the prophets spoke; every promise of God being yea and amen through Him. Paul, as a Jew, believed on Christ Jesus; and in believing he had life through His name; through Him, he enjoyed an abundance of grace; so that, being filled with that happiness which an indwelling Christ produces, he could cheerfully say, I am not ashamed of the Gospel of Christ. And why? Because he felt it to be the power of God to the salvation of his believing soul. This appears to be the true sense of this passage, and this interpretation acquires additional strength from the consideration that St. Paul is here most evidently addressing himself to the Jews.”⁷

Charles Spurgeon adds his homiletical commentary here: “Many other people were ashamed of the gospel of Christ. It was too simple; it had not enough of mystery about it; it had not enough of worldly wisdom about it. Paul says, “I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ,” and then gives his reason for not being ashamed of it. At this day, is not the gospel in itself the rod of Jehovah’s strength? Is it not the power of God unto salvation to every one that believes? And does not our beloved apostle constantly insist upon it, that it is not with wisdom of words, nor with fineness of speech, lest the excellency of the power should not be of God, but of man; and lest man’s faith should stand in the wisdom of man, and not in the power of the Most High?”⁸

Albert Barnes continues this thought on the effect of this power to offer and complete salvation: “The apostle commences his discussion with one of the important doctrines of the Christian religion, the final preservation of the saints. He is not defending the gospel for any temporary object, or with any temporary hope. He looks through the system and sees in it a plan for the complete and eternal recovery of all those who believe in the Lord Jesus Christ. When he says it is the power of God unto salvation, he means that it is the power of God for the attainment of salvation. This is the end or the design of this exertion of power.”⁹

John Stott gives us his impression: “I once heard James Stewart of Edinburgh, in a sermon on this text, make the perceptive comment that ‘there’s no sense in declaring that you’re not ashamed of something unless you’ve been tempted to feel ashamed of it’. And without doubt, Paul knew this temptation. He told the Corinthians that he came to them ‘in weakness and fear, and with much trembling.’ He knew that the message of the cross was ‘foolishness’ to some and ‘a stumbling-block’ to others because it undermines self-righteousness and challenges self-indulgence. So whenever the gospel is faithfully preached, it arouses opposition, often contempt, and sometimes ridicule.”¹⁰

During the years I worked in the Philippians I met a lady with a beautiful, powerful, and anointed voice named Maricris Bermont who became my favorite singer (next to my mom). At a Philippine Full Gospel Businessmen’s Fellowship in Manila, I heard her sing this song for the first time, and it thrilled my heart and soul each and every time she sang it after that. The final chorus to the song goes:

That’s why I am not ashamed of the gospel

The gospel of Jesus Christ

No, I am not afraid to be counted

But I’m willing to give my life

See I’m ready to be

All He wants me to be

Give up the wrong for the right

No, I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ

No, I am not ashamed of the gospel of Jesus Christ

I’ve got too much behind me

To let this world blind me

To some, He’s just a name

But to me, He’s my everything

I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ

No, I am not ashamed of the gospel

Oh, I am not ashamed of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Verse 17: The Gospel shows how God reconciles people to Himself. God’s way of making people right begins and ends with faith. As the Scriptures say, “The one who is right with God will live by faith forever.”¹¹

Now Paul adds more to his exposition on the Good News and what it contains and is able to do. First, he said it had to power to save. Now he says it has the power to reconcile. But this is not a one-way street. God offers, but mankind must accept; God reaches out, but mankind must take hold. This is done by faith. Here Paul quotes a phrase that had already become a mantra among the Jews. It first appears in the text of Habakkuk: “The just shall live by faith.”¹² The Jewish Bible renders it: “The righteous will attain life through trusting faithfulness.” And the Aramaic Version reads: “But the righteous will live by his faith.”

So we see two key words here in understanding what the prophet Habakkuk had to say and how the apostle Paul understood it. The first is the word “Just.” The Hebrew word tsaddiyq in Habakkuk means one who does what is right, not only according to the law, but also in harmony with their morals, ethics, and virtues, especially to their neighbors and strangers. The Greek word dikaios means the same thing. This describes someone who is virtuous in keeping the commands of God and being fair in their judgment when dealing with others.

The second is the word “Faith.” The Hebrew word “’emuwnah” refers to firmness, fidelity, steadfastness, and steadiness in fulfilling one’s promises. The Greek word “pistis” is defined as conviction of the truth of anything, belief; in the NT of a conviction or belief respecting man’s relationship to God and divine things, generally with the included idea of trust and holy fervor born of faith and joined with it. Today, the word “trust” may fit the context better than faith. When put together, we see that this phrase complies completely with what Jesus said was the two greatest commandments a believer must have and follow: “[Faith] You must love the LORD your God with all your heart, all your soul, all your strength, and all your mind. And [being Just], Love your neighbor as yourself.”¹³

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

Dr. Robert R. Seyda

EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

CHAPTER ONE (Part XIV)

This apostle to the non-Jews had the same attitude that we find in the prophet Isaiah. After he saw the glory of the LORD, and one of the Seraph’s took a hot coal from the altar and touched Isaiah’s lips, he heard the LORD calling out desperately: “Who can I send? Who will go for us?” So without hesitation, Isaiah responded immediately: “Here I am. Send me!”¹ Paul would share that same passion for the Corinthians: “It’s not my work of telling the Good News that gives me any reason to boast. That is my duty—something I must do. If I don’t tell people the Good News, I am in real trouble. If I did it because it was my own choice, I would deserve to be paid. But I have no choice. I must tell the Good News. So I am only doing the duty that was given to me.”² Here Paul gives a clear signal that when someone receives a calling they should constantly be reminded, they are not in it for themselves but they are in it for the One who called them. That’s why Paul could endure his inconveniences, persecutions, rejections, beatings, imprisonment, and shipwreck, to exclaim quite assuredly: “I can do everything God asks me to do with the help of Christ who gives me the strength and power.”³

This means that Paul’s sense of duty was not a formality. He was compassionate about spreading the Gospel to all who would hear, especially those who had never heard the name Messiah before. As far as he was concerned, he had everything to gain and nothing to lose. All that he had accomplished as a compliant Jew and Pharisee was now thrown aside to put on the apron of a servant of Christ. He told the believers in Philippi: “At one time all these things were important to me. But because of Christ, I decided that they are now worth nothing. Not only these things but now I think that all things are worth nothing compared with the greatness of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord. Because of Christ, I lost all these things, and now I know that they are all worthless trash. All I want now is Christ.”⁴

Early church preacher Chrysostom has this to say about Paul’s testimony of faithfulness: “What a noble soul Paul was! Having taken on himself a task full of such great danger, a voyage across the sea, temptations, intrigues, uprisings—for it was likely that one who was going to address so great a city, which was under the tyranny of ungodliness, should undergo temptations thick as snowflakes. He lost his life in this way, cut down by a tyrant. Yet still, he was ready to undergo great troubles. In fact, he was enthusiastic even in travail, even as one in haste. He was in a constant state of preparation.”⁵ The most recent candidate nominated for approval to the United States Supreme Court, Judge Neil Gorsuch, said in his acceptance speech: “A judge who likes every result he reaches is very likely a bad judge.” Meaning, we are all susceptible to misjudging situations, and such should be taken as learning curves, not failures.

Preacher Charles Spurgeon makes this point: “He had preached the gospel throughout a great part of Asia, he had crossed over into Europe, he had proclaimed the Word through Greece; and if ever an opportunity should occur for him to get to the capital of the world, whatever might be the danger to which he would be exposed, he was prepared to go. He was ready to go anywhere for Jesus, anywhere to preach the gospel, anywhere to win a soul, anywhere to comfort the people of God. I do not suppose that Paul guessed that he would be sent to Rome at the government expense, but he was. The Roman Empire had to find a ship for him, and a proper escort for him, too; and he entered the city as an ambassador in bonds. When our hearts are set on a thing, and we pray for it, God may grant us the blessing; but, it may be, in a way that we never looked for.”⁶

Albert Barnes hears Paul saying, as he reaches a crescendo at the end of this first section of his letter: “’I am prepared to preach among you, and to show the power of the gospel, even in the splendid metropolis of the world.’ He was not deterred by any fear; nor was he indifferent to their welfare; but he was under God’s direction. and as far as He gave him the opportunity, he was ready to make known to them the gospel, as he had done at Antioch, Ephesus, Athens, and Corinth. This closes the introduction or preface to the Epistle. Having shown his deep interest in their welfare, he proceeds in the next verse to state to them the great doctrines of that gospel which he was desirous of proclaiming to them.”⁷

John Stott makes these points about the Greek text: “The NIV, ‘I am bound, and the RSV, ‘I am under obligation’ should properly be translated ‘I am [a] debtor’ (AV).”⁸ The question is why did Paul feel indebted to the believers in Rome? Stott says the answer is because Jesus Christ had entrusted him with the Gospel for them and he would be remiss if he did not pass it on to them. In other words, he is in indebted to them for Jesus’ sake. When taken in that sense, it should make every believer feel indebted to God after having been given the truth of the Gospel to share with those around them.⁹ And that feeling of indebtedness should never be satisfied until the believer actively witnesses to everyone the Holy Spirit leads to them or those He leads them to, about the good news of Jesus Christ. To say that Jesus would be pleased is an understatement. As Stott concludes: “We are debtors to the world, even though we are not apostles. If the gospel has come to us (which it has), we have no liberty to keep it to ourselves. Nobody may claim a monopoly of the gospel. Good news is for sharing. We are under obligation to make it known to others.”¹⁰

Verse 16: For I am not ashamed of the Gospel of Christ because it is the power God uses to save everyone who believes – to save the Jews first, and now to save those who are not Jews.

This verse must be viewed in context to gain a fuller understanding of what Paul announces here about His commitment to the Gospel. First, in verses 11-12 Paul tells the Roman believers that he has long desired to come to Rome to meet them and teach about spiritual gifts so that both he and they will be encouraged to remain faithful. Then in verse 13, the apostle admits that things kept getting in the way but that he still hadn’t given up. And, in verses 14-15, he talks about how indebted he feels to all races and classes of people that they should hear the gospel preached to them, especially those in Rome. So that raises the question, why did he feel so purpose-driven? Why was he so insistent on delivering his message about the Gospel of Christ to them? Because he was not ashamed to preach the message of salvation through Christ to everyone who believes. I used to paraphrase this verse to read: “For I am proud of the Gospel of Christ…” Paul showed his allegiance to the Gospel during the time he traveled preaching the Gospel around Asia Minor and Greece. As he told the Corinthians: “This is the message we tell everyone: Christ was killed on a cross. This message is a problem for Jews, and to other people it is nonsense. But Christ is God’s power and wisdom to the people God has chosen, both Jews and Greeks.”¹¹

It should be noted that Paul refers to the power of the Gospel to liberate. “Power” was Rome’s big claim. They had political power, military power, and economic power. Today we hear echoes of the same applied to groups and countries: such as “people power,” “super power.” We can add to this: “money power,” “voting power,” etc. But even as it was in the days of the apostles, the Gospel of Christ is still the only power today that can set people free from the bondage of sin. No wonder the apostle wanted to come to this empire city and show what real power looked like, and that was the power of the Good News.

When it came to proclaiming what God says is the right thing to share, even David was not bashful about telling everyone. He writes: “I told the good news of victory to the people in the great assembly. And, Lord, you know that I will never stop telling that good news. I told about the good things you did. I did not hide these things in my heart. I spoke of how you can be trusted to save us.”¹² And another Psalmist had this to say: “I will tell people how good you are. I will tell about all the times you saved me – too many times to count.”¹³ One Psalmist went so far as to say: “I will discuss your instructions with kings, and no one will embarrass me.”¹⁴

Paul grew up in this Jewish culture where God’s Word was respected and revered. So it’s not hard to imagine that when he was given the Gospel directly through God’s Son, his esteem and awe for the Word would be enhanced. And little did Paul know at this time, how he would, in fact, do what the Psalmist said, be willing to tell kings about what he was given from above. And since Paul received his revelation from Christ, he was determined to do what Jesus said: “Don’t be ashamed of me and my teaching. If that happens, I will be ashamed of you when I come with the glory of my Father and the holy angels.”¹⁵

Then Paul gives his reason why he was so proud of the Good News he carried to every place the Holy Spirit led him. He defines it clearly: “It is God’s method of saving everyone who believes in what they are hearing.” The prophet Isaiah said it was God’s way of revealing how strong His arm is to save.¹⁶ And Jeremiah was told by God: “Isn’t my word like fire, like a hammer shattering rocks?”¹⁷ So Paul had no trouble telling the Corinthians: “The teaching about the cross seems foolish to those who are lost. But to us who are saved, it is the power of God.”¹⁸ So for Paul, the dynamo producing the power in the Gospel was that the Messiah had come to deliver. It had the power to draw; the power to break the chains of sin and set sinners free; the power to sanctify believers for God’s use, and the power to inspire them to give their all for the One who gave His all for them.

Early church scholar Pelagius had this point to make: “This is subtly intended to censure the pagans who, although they do not hesitate to believe that their god Jupiter turned himself into irrational animals and inanimate gold all for the sake of his monstrous lust, think that we Christians should be ashamed to believe that our Lord was crucified in the flesh he assumed, in order to save his image.… At the same time Paul is also bearing in mind those heretics who think that the crucifixion is something unworthy of God, not realizing that nothing is more fitting for the Creator than to care for the salvation of His creatures, particularly as He could not suffer any loss to His own nature, which is not subject to corruption. There is no power greater than the one which overcame death and restored to man the life he had lost,¹⁹ even if this seems like a weakness to an unbeliever.”²⁰

SOMETHING TO PIN ON YOUR WALL

Free people, remember this maxim: We may acquire liberty, but it is never recovered if it is once lost.¹ This was written in 1772 by Jean-Jacques Rousseau, a Swiss philosopher whose political philosophy influenced the Enlightenment movement in France and throughout Europe.

Rousseau’s words certainly made it across the ocean to the Colonies in the New World because in a letter from John Adams to his wife Abigail on July 7, 1775, Adams wrote: “Our consolation must be this, my dear, that cities may be rebuilt, and a people reduced to poverty may acquire fresh property: But a Constitution of Government once changed from freedom, can never be restored. Liberty once lost is lost forever. When the people once surrender their share in the legislature, and their right of defending the limitations upon the Government, and of resisting every encroachment upon them, they can never regain it.”

What makes these words of Rousseau so pertinent and apropos to our modern day, is what he wrote before stating this maxim. He said: “I’m not denying that there are times in the history of states when. . . .violence and revolutions jolt the populace into remembering the past, so that the state, set on fire by civil wars, is so to speak born again from its ashes, and with a renewed vigor of youth springs from the jaws of death… But such events are rare; they are exceptions, always to be explained in terms of the particular constitution of the exceptional state. They can’t even happen twice to the same people… when the civic spring has wound down. Then disturbances can destroy it, but revolutions can’t rebuild it: it needs a master, not a liberator. Free people, remember this maxim: We may acquire liberty, but it is never recovered if it is once lost.”

This should give us all something to seriously think about. – Dr. Robert R Seyda

I heard this story a long time ago, but it seemed so relevant to what we see and hear in our world today that I wanted to share it with you. You may have heard it before, but it never hurts to read it again. The author is unknown. Here it goes:

NAILS

There once was a little boy who had a very bad temper. One day his father gave him a bag of nails and told him that every time he lost his temper, he would have to hammer a nail into the top rail of the backyard fence. By the end of the first day, the boy had driven 37 nails into the fence. Over the next few weeks, as he learned to control his anger, the number of nails daily hammered into the fence kept dwindling down. He discovered it was easier to hold his temper than having to drive those nails into the fence.

Finally, the day came when the boy didn’t lose his temper at all. He told his father about it and his father was very happy. But he knew the boy’s learning was not yet over. So he told him to now pull out one nail for each day that he was able to hold his temper. Many, many days passed and eventually, the young lad was glad to tell his father that all the nails were now gone.

That’s when the father took his son by the hand and led him to the fence. He told him, “You have done well, my son, but look at all the holes in the fence. The fence will never be the same. You see, each time you get angry and say bad things to a person, it’s like driving a nail into them. And no matter how many times you try to pull the nail out by apologizing and saying you’re sorry, the wound is still there.”

The little boy then understood how powerful a person’s words are. So he looked up at this father and said: “I hope you can forgive me father for all the holes I put in you.” “Of course I can,, ” said the father.

“It’s not always anger, it is your actions in general. There are no ‘fresh starts’ in life that get rid of all the scars we’ve caused. There is no new beginning that wipes them out of everybody’s memory. Forgiveness may come easy for many people but the scars of the past, they never go away. Watch what you do today because sometimes the hurt you cause is not worth the payoff you want to feel for doing so.”

You may be like me. I can still remember, after all these years, hurtful things that were said to me in anger, and injurious things I said to others in response. That’s because the scars are still there. But rather than letting those scars rekindle the negative emotions that were felt at the time, let them remind us to be more careful when we feel hostility and anger growing in our hearts and minds. Remember, Jesus has scars in His hands, feet, and side, but He used them as evidence before His disciples that He loved them that much. And as He stands next to His heavenly Father advocating on our behalf, all the Father has to see are those scars and that’s enough for Him to offer us forgiveness. Why can’t we do the same for others, what He has done for us? – Dr. Robert R Seyda

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

Dr. Robert R. Seyda

EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

CHAPTER ONE (Part XIII)

On God’s intervention into the plans of His servants, John Calvin has this to say: “We, therefore, learn that the Lord frequently upsets the purposes of His saints, in order to humble them, and by such humiliation to teach them to regard his Providence, that they may rely on it; though the saints, who design nothing without the Lord’s will, cannot be said, strictly speaking, to be driven away from their purposes. It is indeed the presumption of impiety to pass by God, and without Him to determine on things to come, as though they were in our own power; and this is what James sharply reprehends.¹ But he says that he was hindered: you must take this in no other sense, but that the Lord employed him in more urgent concerns, which he could not have neglected without loss to the Church. Thus, the hindrances of the godly and of the unbelieving differ: the latter perceive only that they are hindered, when they are restrained by the strong hand of the Lord, so as not to be able to move; but the former are satisfied with any hindrance that arises from some approved reason; nor do they allow themselves to attempt anything beyond their duty, or contrary to edification.”²

Charles Spurgeon sees Paul’s desire to visit Rome this way: “Rome was a sink of iniquity; it was the den of the lions, where Nero was, who would speedily devour, like a lion, the minister of Christ. Paul wanted somehow to get into that old city on the seven hills and to pluck some fruit for God even from the vine that was planted there, but he was hindered.”³ Spurgeon raises an issue as to why we as believers should not be afraid to go into situations that may be unfriendly to the Gospel in order to rescue those who cannot escape on their own. But the real point is how do some believer’s react when they see such an opportunity? For instance, what would you think while observing two separate firefighting crews called to the same scene if one crew stands outside calling for the residents to run out so they could save them, while the other crew rushes inside the burning building and carries out as many as possible before the building collapses? It is the same with many churches today. Some build a beautiful edifice and put up a sign to welcome to all who want to attend, while others go out into the neighborhood, knocking on doors, knowing they may not get a friendly reaction, to give a personal invitation to attend.

I was once assigned for a short time to pastor a church that had been built at its location many years earlier when the neighborhood consisted of middle-class, Caucasian, blue-collar workers. By the time I arrived, the neighborhood now consisted of Haitian immigrants, African-Americans, and a large gay community. All of the white church members had moved out into surrounding suburbs, and drove into this neighborhood on Sundays and Wednesdays for their services. When I asked if they had carried out any evangelism effort in the neighborhood, they looked at me as if I didn’t understand that the people who lived nearby were not who they wanted in their pews. I organized an outreach program anyhow. We went from door to door in a sixteen block area. I was not surprised when many I talked to, told me they had come once to that church but didn’t feel welcomed.

Verses 14-15: I am indebted to both civilized Greeks and Barbarians, to both educated and the uneducated; therefore I am eager to proclaim the Good News also to you who live in Rome.

Although Paul was born a Jew and raised in Jewish traditions, he feels a strong affinity with other cultures as well. After all, he was born outside of Israel in the Greek-dominated territory of Cilicia, which lies in SE Turkey today, in the city of Tarsus.¹ That’s where he learned Greek, along with Hebrew in the synagogue.

Charles Spurgeon makes this point: “Paul felt a debt to everybody. The God who saved him that he might preach the gospel in every place he could reach. Brethren, if you have received much from God, you are so much the debtor to men; and you are debtors not only to the respectable, but to the disreputable, debtors not only to those who come to a place of worship, but to the dwellers in the slums, “to the Greeks, and to the barbarians; to the wise and to the unwise.”⁵

The influence of the Greek culture also taught him that outside the Hellenistic realm, all other ethnicities were thought of as uncivilized and called “barbarians.” In fact, in one document written by a Greek biographer, we find this sentence: “I come now to the man who was the bravest and the greatest at strategy among of all the barbarians with the exception of the two Carthaginians Hamilcar and Hannibal.”⁶

Early church scholar Ambrosiaster gives his commentary on Paul’s commitment: “Paul says that he is under obligation to those whom he names because he was sent for the purpose of preaching to everyone. For this reason, he states that they are all under obligation to believe in God the Creator, from whom and through whom are all things, for obligation and honor form part of the salvation of the believer. He wrote Greeks instead of Gentiles, but this includes those who are called Romans, whether by birth or by adoption, and barbarians, who are those who are not Romans, whose race is inimical, and who are not Gentiles. He speaks of those who are wise because they are learned in worldly sciences and are called wise in the world whether they are stargazers, geometers, mathematicians, grammarians, orators or musicians. Paul shows that none of these things is of any advantage, nor are these people truly wise unless they believe in Christ. He calls them fools because in their simplicity they lack knowledge of spiritual things. He testifies that he has been sent to preach to them all. But he says nothing about the Jews because he is the teacher of the Gentiles.⁷ And this is why he says that he is under obligation because he has accepted this teaching in order to pass it on, and in passing it on, to acquire it himself.”⁸

So in sharing his burden, Paul uses a repetitive phrase to describe those groups for whom he feels a burden. First, he calls them civilized and uncivilized, then repeats the same phrase with synonyms, educated and uneducated. He did not do this to isolate them, but to draw a circle big enough to include everyone, even the Romans. After all, he told the Thessalonians: “I am free. I belong to no other person, but I make myself a slave to everyone. I do this to help save as many people as I can.”⁹ Paul meant that when he was invited into a Jewish home he complied with the traditions, such as taking off his shoes, having his feet washed. And when he entered the home of a Greek, he ate what was set before him, he did not quibble over whether or not it was kosher.

Bible scholar Charles Hodge offers this comment: “His commission was a general one, confined to no one nation, and to no particular class. Greeks and barbarians, mean all nations; wise and unwise, mean all classes. Barbarian means properly a foreigner, one of another language.¹⁰ Greeks and barbarians, therefore, is equivalent to Greeks and not Greeks, all nations. As the Greeks, however, excelled other nations in civilization, the word came to signify rude, uncultivated; though even by later writers it is often used in its original sense, and not as a term of reproach. The apostle distinguishes men first as nations, Greeks and not Greeks, and secondly as to culture, wise and unwise. The Romans, whose city was called ‘an epitome of the world,’ belonged exclusively neither to the one class nor to the other. Some were wise and some unwise, some Greeks and some barbarians.”¹¹

Paul explained it to the Thessalonians this way: “The new-self allows no room for discriminating between Gentile and Jew, circumcised and uncircumcised, foreigner, savage, slave, free man; on the contrary, having the Messiah in you is everything .”¹² Paul was on good ground for making this claim. It was the Messiah Himself who said this: “I praise you, Father, Lord of the universe. I am thankful that you have hidden these things from those who are so wise and so smart. But you have shown them to people who are like little children.”¹³ Paul made this same point when writing to the Corinthians about why some of the so-called religious experts considered the preaching of the cross as foolishness. He tells them: “As the Scriptures say, ‘I will destroy the wisdom of the wise. I will confuse the understanding of the intelligent.’¹⁴”¹⁵

Paul pointed out to the Corinthians a factor this still confuses some people today who say they can’t understand our explanation of faith in God and in the Bible. He wrote: “We don’t use words taught to us by human wisdom. We use words taught to us by the Spirit. We use the Spirit’s words to explain spiritual truths. People who do not have God’s Spirit do not accept the things that come from his Spirit. They think these things are foolish. They cannot understand them because they can only be understood with the Spirit’s help.”¹⁶ In other words, the only way a sinner can understand the Bible or a sermon from God’s word is if the Spirit opens their mind to comprehend it. So Paul goes on to explain: “Let no one fool himself. If someone among you thinks he is wise (by this world’s standards), let him realize his foolishness so that he may become really wise. For the wisdom of this world is nonsense, as far as God is concerned.”¹⁷ The Greek word used here for “foolish” actually means: “To act like a person with no learning.” In other words, a person whose mind is already made-up, and they have no interest in learning anything new.

Paul would touch on this subject again and tell the Corinthians: “We don’t dare put ourselves in the same class with those who think they are so important. We don’t compare ourselves to them. They use themselves to measure themselves, and they judge themselves by what they themselves are. This shows that they know nothing.”¹⁸ This was not new, Solomon had problems like this in his day: “Fools, how long will you love being ignorant? How long will you make fun of wisdom? How long will you hate knowledge? I wanted to tell you everything I knew and give you all my knowledge, but you didn’t listen to my advice and teaching.”¹⁹ But Paul will not let anything like that slow him down.

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

Dr. Robert R. Seyda

EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

CHAPTER ONE (Part XII)

Bible scholar Charles Hodge looks at the grammatical structure of Paul’s desire to visit Rome in order to share a spiritual blessing with them: “He had desired to see them, in order that he might do them good; but this was not his whole object, he hoped to receive benefit himself… The sense would then be, ‘That you may be strengthened, that I may be comforted.’ Or, ‘That I may impart some spiritual gift to you, in order that you may be strengthened; that is, that I may be comforted together with you.’”¹ Theologian Adam Clarke is convinced that Paul assumes nothing is dependent solely on him; for he suggests that it will require the conjoint action of their faith as well as his own, to be the means of receiving those blessings from God to which he refers.² How important this is when we feel led by the Spirit to impart some blessing to another be it wisdom, assistance, prayer, or guidance. It should not be a one-way street. Both should have a sense of growing in the Lord and His Word.

Charles Spurgeon points out how one person’s faith joined with another person’s faith helps both of their faiths to be strengthened, and how it was lacking in his day: “Paul wanted his faith to establish theirs, and their faith to establish his. Christians grow rich by and exchange of spiritual commodities, and I am afraid some Christians are very poor because they do not engage in the spiritual bartering with one another. You know how it was in the old time, ‘They that feared the Lord spake often one to another.’ Shall I tell you how it is now? They that fear not the Lord speak often one against another. That is a very sad difference. Oh, for more Christian communion; for when we blend our ‘mutual faith’: we are ‘comforted together’; each believer grows stronger as he cheers his brother in the Lord!”³

Too often, this attempted exchange of faith experienced between believers ends up being an argument because one cannot accept that what happened to them did not happen to the other. It would be like the man who Jesus healed by putting spit mixed with dirt in his eyes, talking with the man that Jesus merely spoke to and he received his sight, while also talking with the man who needed a second touch to see clearly, and challenging their healings because neither of them had mud put in their eyes.

John Stott sees Paul advocating a mutual benefit resulting from his visit to Rome: “He knows about the reciprocal blessings of Christian fellowship and, although he is an apostle, he is not too proud to acknowledge his need of it. Happy is the modern missionary who goes to another country and culture in the same spirit of receptivity, anxious to receive as well as give, to learn as well as teach, to be encouraged as well as to encourage! And happy is the congregation who have a pastor of the same humble mind!”⁴

Then Douglas Moo sees Paul using diplomacy in wanting to endear himself to a church he did not start and many of whose members he did not know: “Paul’s wish that his visit would bring spiritual encouragement to him as well as to the Roman Christians is no mere literary convention or ‘pious fraud’ (as Erasmus called it) but is sincerely meant (and he returns to it in the letter closing: see 15:32). But the fact that he mentions it here — in contrast to his habit elsewhere — signals Paul’s diplomacy. For he is dealing with a church that, while certainly within the scope of his authority,⁵ is built on another person’s foundation.⁶ If Paul is to gain a sympathetic ear for ‘his’ gospel from the Roman Christians and enlist their support for his Spanish mission,⁷ he must exercise tact in asserting his authority.”⁸

Verse 13: Brothers and sisters, I want you to know that I have planned many times to come to you, (but I was prevented from doing so) because I wanted to see the same good result among you that I have had from my work among non-Jewish people elsewhere.

The Complete Jewish Bible translates the opening of this verse this way: “Brothers, I want you to know that although I have been prevented from visiting you until now, I have often planned to do so…” They use the passive tone and forego the use of the active phrase, “but I was prevented” as it is rendered in the KJV. This is significant since it makes the reason he could not visit a second thought, and also removes it as a reference to any interference by way of divine intervention. Many scholars feel that Paul was either pointing to his health, lack of time, or insufficient funds as the reason he was unable to visit Rome, not that God actually stopped him in his tracks and said, “Don’t go!”

We also see that it was not for fame or fortune that Paul wanted so desperately to visit these brothers and sisters, it was so that fruit might be produced for the kingdom of God. Paul explained how it worked among the Corinthians: “I planted the seed and Apollos watered it. But God is the one who made the seed grow. So the one who plants is not important, and the one who waters is not important. Only God is important because He is the one who makes things grow. The one who plants and the one who waters have the same purpose. And each one will be rewarded for his own work. We are workers together for God, and you are like a vineyard that belongs to God.”⁹

This certainly echoed what Jesus told His disciples: “I tell you, open your eyes, and look at the fields. They are ready for harvesting now. Even now, the people who harvest the crop are being paid. They are gathering crops for eternal life. So now the people who plant can be happy together with those who harvest.”¹⁰ So, no doubt Paul took these words of Jesus to heart: “You did not choose me. I chose you. And I gave you this work: to go and produce fruit—fruit that will last. Then the Father will give you anything you ask for in my name.”¹¹ So he was able to write the Colossians: “Throughout the world, this Good News is spreading and bearing fruit.”¹²

Yet, Paul’s attention was focused on the non-Jews. This was his mission from the beginning. After Paul and Barnabas went around preaching and teaching in Asia, they returned to the body of believers in Antioch, Syria. Luke then tells us: “They gathered the believers together. They told them everything God had used them to do. They said, ‘God opened a door for the non-Jewish people to believe!‘”¹³ Later, when Paul visited the apostles and elders in Jerusalem, Luke explains: “They listened while Paul and Barnabas told about all the miraculous signs and wonders that God had done through them among the non-Jewish people.”¹⁴

It is important to note that Paul refers to his reading audience as being the same as, “other non-Jewish people.” It would, therefore, appear that many of the converts in Rome were from pagan Greeks and Romans. In so doing he left no doubt as to his desire to visit them. This is what motivated him since he left Ephesus.¹⁵ It seems that Paul planned all of his trips based on what he had to share with the people he would be visiting.¹⁶ But this was not the first time Paul had been hindered in visiting a community of believers he longed to teach and minister to.¹⁷ When he couldn’t visit Thessalonica, he blamed it on the devil.¹⁸

But not all was well with Paul’s missionary efforts among the non-Jews. While he was in Jerusalem, he visited with the apostle James. One of the leaders present at the meeting said to Paul: “Brother, you can see that thousands of Jews have become believers, but they think it is very important to obey the Law of Moses. However, they have been told that you teach the Jews who live in non-Jewish regions to stop following the Law of Moses. They have heard that you tell them not to circumcise their sons or follow our other customs. What do you have to say?”¹⁹ Paul had an answer: “We will not boast about anything outside the work that was given us to do. We will limit our boasting to the work God gave us²⁰.” It was clear, that Paul would not be dissuaded from carrying out the mission given to him by his heavenly Father and Messiah Jesus of Nazareth. And it is also apparent that had the Gospel not been taken outside the confines of Jerusalem and Israel, the Christian church today would be nothing more than another branch of Judaism along with the Orthodox Jews, Reformed Jews, and Conservative Jews.

Several early church scholars speak about Paul’s reasons for why he had until now not been able to visit the Romans. For instance, Chrysostom makes this point about yielding to God’s providence: “For it is the master’s place to command and the servant’s to obey. This is why he says that he was prevented without giving the reason because he did not know it himself.… So if you do not know why something has happened, do not be discouraged, for this is a main feature of faith, to receive what is told to us of God’s providence even when we are ignorant of the way in which it is being dispensed.”²¹ Then another scholar says: “The Romans would have learned of Paul’s plans through the brothers who were constantly coming and going. Prevented here means “busy,” because he was busy preaching in other provinces.”²² Also, Bishop Theodoret talks about how God sometimes overrules our will in favor of His will: “Paul declares both his own plan and God’s overruling. For God’s grace was fully in control of his life.”²³ And finally, early church scholar Gennadius points out the benefits of the gospel: “Paul tells the Romans that it will benefit him to come to them, saying that the nations which received the gospel through him had clearly added to his own riches.”²⁴

Martin Luther sees a possible conflict of interest as the reason for Paul’s expressed desire to come and visit the believers in Rome: “Paul here meets two objections which secretly might be raised against him. In the first place, he might be charged with arrogance for extending his apostolic ministry beyond the Greek areas into those where Latin was used, and indeed even beyond these. Others might accuse him of presumption for attempting to instruct those who already were wise and instructed in the faith, and to these belonged the Christians at Rome. In the same way, he might be criticized for his boldness in forcing his teachings upon the wise of this world. To these objections he replies: I do this not be chance, but to pay a debt that I owe.”²⁵ It does appear that Luther’s feelings of contempt for the Roman Catholic leaders in Rome and their bias against his reformation effort influenced this satirical commentary as a replication of Paul’s feelings of contempt for the Jewish leaders in the church at Rome and their bias against Gentiles.