Down an Unfamiliar Road

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

Dr. Robert R. Seyda

EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

CHAPTER ONE (Part VI)

Charles Spurgeon made this observation: “What a glorious Lord we serve! He is God’s Son: ‘Jesus Christ our Lord.’ In His human nature, He is a Man of royal race: ‘of the seed of David.’ He was a man, therefore, He died: but He rose again, for He was more than a man. He is as much the Son of God as He was the Son of man. The humanity is as true as the divinity, the divinity as true as the humanity.”¹ So often the divinity of Christ is expounded on to exhibit His Godly characteristics that awed His followers and even silenced many of His critics. But His human side is important too because we can relate to Him more realistically on that level. Not only that, but all that He went through physically, emotionally, and mentally gives us greater reason to admire Him for enduring what He did just so that we too could partake of His divine nature. Our Lord’s incarnation is an important factor in sharing His story with the world. As Paul told Timothy: “And we all agree, our religion contains amazing revelation: He was revealed in the flesh, vindicated by the Spirit, seen by angels, proclaimed among Gentiles, believed on in the world, taken up in glory.”²

John Stott gives us an interesting comment on this subject: “It seems then that the two expressions ‘according to the flesh’ and ‘according to the Spirit’ refer not only to the two natures of Jesus Christ (human and divine) but to the two stages of His ministry, pre-resurrection and post-resurrection, the first frail and the second powerful through the outpoured Spirit. So here is a balanced statement of both the humiliation and the exaltation, the weakness and the power of God’s Son, His human descent traced to David, His divine Sonship-in-power established by the resurrection and gift of the Spirit.”³ Not only was Christ a divine being before His incarnation, but after His death and resurrection, He received a new spiritual body. Not to make Him better as a celestial being, but that He could pass that same experience on us so that we can now follow Him into His heavenly realm after our time here on earth is finished.

Bible scholar Douglas Moo points out two parallel participial clauses found in verses 3b and 4 (NKJV) to show the effect of His incarnation.

Verse 3b                                                   Verse 4

“who has born”                                   “declared to be”

  “of the seed of David”                       “Son of God in power”

  “according to the flesh”                   “according to the Spirit of holiness”

Moo goes on to say: “This parallelism, coupled with the presence of several words and phrases unique or unusual in Paul, raises the possibility that Paul is here quoting from, or adapting, an earlier tradition. Such use of traditional material is unobjectionable in itself, paralleled in other Pauline texts, and entirely appropriate as a means to establish some common ground with the unfamiliar Roman church.”⁴

Verses 5-6: Through Christ, God’s grace gave me the special calling of an apostle—to lead people of all nations to believe and obey Him. I do all this to honor Christ. You are some of those who have been chosen to belong to Jesus Christ.

Now that Paul introduced himself as to who he is, he continues by defining his mission and why he felt inspired to write this letter. Notice, he says that his “calling” was from God, but it came through the Messiah, Jesus of Nazareth. Paul was not bashful to admit that this gift was all due to God’s grace, not because of who or what he was. He told the Corinthians, the Galatians, and the Ephesians: “By the grace of God I am what I am.”⁵ Paul acknowledged: “We are insufficiently qualified in ourselves to claim anything as coming from us, but our sufficiency and qualifications all come from God.”⁶

Paul describes this calling as being that of an “apostle.” The difference between a “disciple” and an “apostle” is this: a disciple is one who is a “learner, follower, and pupil.” An apostle is one who is “sent out with orders, an emissary, messenger.” This illustrates that one must first learn before they can be sent out to teach. That’s why we see the followers of Jesus called disciples in the Gospels, and apostles in Acts and the writings of Peter and Paul.

But there was also a tradition in the early church that required anyone who was called an apostle to be someone who actually saw Jesus in the flesh. We see this reflected in the qualifications needed for someone to replace Judas Iscariot among the twelve: “He must be a witness of Jesus’ resurrection. He must be one of those men who were part of our group during all the time the Lord Jesus was with us. He must have been with us from the time John was baptizing people until the day when Jesus was carried up from us into heaven.”⁷

So we can see why there were those who questioned Paul’s claim to be an apostle. That’s why he told the Corinthians: “I am an apostle. I have seen Jesus our Lord. You people are an example of my work in the Lord. Others may not accept me as an apostle, but surely you do. You are proof that I am an apostle of the Lord.”⁸ Even when Paul was ministering in Galatia, the Judaizers doubted his claim to be an apostle. So Paul gave this reasoning: “God gave Peter the power to work as an apostle for the Jewish people. God gave me the power to work as an apostle too, but for those who are not Jews.”⁹

Paul did not see this anointing as an apostle of Jesus the Christ anything to brag about, nor did he expect it to place him above others. As far as he was concerned, it only meant that he was to serve as a tool and vessel of the Holy Spirit in delivering the message of salvation available through grace. He tells the Roman believers, it was all intended to lead people to the knowledge of Christ and their submission to obedience to Christ. All that he said and did was to the glory and honor of the One who sent him. It is similar to the role of an ambassador. His pride and prestige are not in himself or his own laurels but in the reputation and honor of the country that sent him.

This was the mission statement that God gave to Malachi: “People all around the world respect my name. All around the world they bring good gifts to me and burn good incense as a gift to Me because My name is important to all of them.”¹⁰ But now that the sacrifice of Christ has replaced such offerings of incense to God, those who accept His Son are showing honor to Him by offering their talents and abilities and openly, with raised hands, offer Him praise and worship. Paul tells the Ephesians: “God decided to make us His own children through Jesus Christ. This was what God wanted, and it pleased Him to do it. And this brings praise to God because of His wonderful grace. God gave that grace to us freely. He gave us that grace in Christ, the one He loves.”¹¹ Should not then that which we received so freely inspire and motivate us to give back to Him freely all that we are, all that we have, and all that we will ever be, in honor to Him who loved us so?

But Paul wants everyone to know that this calling and apostleship was not only for the original twelve, or for him and Barnabas, Mark and Silas. It was for everyone who believes. Paul says: “In Christ, we were chosen to be God’s people. God had already planned for us to be His people because that is what He wanted. And He is the one who makes everything agree with what He decides and wants.”¹² Paul was so excited about what God was doing that he tells the Colossians: “Throughout the world, this Good News is bringing blessings and is spreading. And that’s what has been happening among you since the first time you heard it and understood the truth about God’s grace.”¹³ Giving our talents and abilities to God for His use should not be seen as a burden or some form of spiritual slavery, but an honor and privilege to carry His Name into all the world as ambassadors of His kingdom.

Apparently, Paul saw too many sitting in their pews and not participating in spreading this Good News of Jesus the Anointed One. So he wanted the Roman believers to know that they too were called by Christ to be His apostles. This idea of being chosen was not just for the Roman believers. Paul told the Corinthians: “God is faithful. He is the one who has chosen you to share life with His Son, Jesus Christ our Lord.”¹⁴ He had the same message for the Galatians: “A short time ago God chose you to follow Him. He chose you through His grace that came through Christ.”¹⁵ And to the Thessalonians, he said: “We encouraged you, we comforted you, and we told you to live good lives for God. He’s the One who chose you to be part of His glorious kingdom.”¹⁶ Knowing this should help us better understand what Paul would say later about how all things work together for good to those who are “the called” (also “invited”, “selected”, “appointed”) – Thayer’s Lexicon), according to His purpose.¹⁷

Early church commentator Ambrosiaster had this to say about Paul’s special work as an apostle: “After the resurrection, Christ was revealed as the Son of God in power. He gave grace to make sinners righteous and appointed apostles, of whom Paul says here that he is one so that the apostleship might be granted by the grace of God’s gift and not because the apostles were Jews. They received this authority from God the Father through Christ the Lord, so that as representatives of the Lord they might make his teaching acceptable by signs of power. Unbelieving Jews, who had been jealous of this power when they saw it in the Savior, were all the more tormented at seeing it admired by the masses in His servants. For power bears witness to the teaching, so that although what is preached seems incredible to the world, it might be made credible by deeds. He says that the apostles have been sent to preach the faith to all nations, that they might obey and be saved, that the gift of God may appear to have been granted not only to the Jews but to all the nations, and that this is the will of God, to have pity on all in Christ and through Christ, by the preaching of his ambassadors.”¹⁸ This was said by a Church scholar between 366-384 AD, was considered by many historians to have been a member of the clergy in the Roman church. We must ask ourselves if this message is still preached by those who represent that same church today?

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

Dr. Robert R. Seyda

EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

CHAPTER ONE (Part V)

The Roman believers were not the first congregation to whom Paul expressed his belief in the divinity of Jesus. He told the Corinthians: “God is faithful. He is the one who has chosen you to share life with His Son, Jesus Christ our Lord.”¹ In fact, Paul says something similar to the believers in Galatia as he does here to the Romans: “When the right time came, God sent His Son, who was born from a woman and lived under the law.”² Then to the Colossians Paul wrote: “God made us free from the power of darkness. And He brought us into the kingdom of His dear Son.”³ And Paul is encouraged by what he heard about the Thessalonians: “You began waiting for God’s Son to come from heaven—the Son God raised from death. He is Jesus.”⁴ So we can see that Paul had this sonship of Christ firmly anchored in his soul as a reality.

At the same time, Paul did not want to overlook Jesus’ humanity. It was necessary for the Roman believers to stay focused on the dual nature of the Messiah; that He was both God and man. For their own satisfaction, Paul, a man dedicated to Jewish Scriptures, traced the point he was making back to what the prophets, such as Isaiah, said: “The Lord will still show you this sign: A young woman will become pregnant and will give birth to a son. She will name Him Immanuel… When this special child is born, God will be giving us a son who will be responsible for leading the people. His name will be ‘Wonderful Counselor, Powerful God, Father Who Lives Forever, Prince of Peace.’ ”⁵

Paul also pointed this out to young Timothy: “Christ was shown to us in human form; the Spirit proved that He was right; He was seen by angels. The message about Him was told to the nations; people in the world believed in Him; He was taken up to heaven in glory.”⁶ But the one factor that Paul always wanted to emphasized was this: “Remember Jesus Christ. He is from the family of David. After Jesus died, He was raised from death. This is the Good News that I tell people.”⁷ For Paul, this was the surest and most powerful way that God could prove that Jesus of Nazareth was, in fact, His Son, the true Messiah.

On the Day of Pentecost, when Peter stood up to explain what had just happened in the Upper Room, he made sure to include this in his message that day: “Jesus suffered the pain of death, but God made Him free. He raised Him from death. There was no way for death to hold Him… So Jesus is the one God raised from death. We are all witnesses of this. We saw Him. Jesus was lifted up to heaven. Now He is with God, at God’s right side. The Father has given the Holy Spirit to Him, as He promised.”⁸ So it was not Paul alone who made this point, again and again, it was a big part of the Good News.

No doubt that’s why when Paul and Barnabas were sent out as missionaries, when they reached Antioch in the province of Pisidia and went into the synagogue on the Sabbath, in his message to the Jews there Paul said: “God raised Jesus from death. Jesus will never go back to the grave and become dust.”⁹ And on another missionary trip with Silas and Timothy, when they went up to the Areopagus in Athens and spoke to the council, Paul made sure they understood this about Jesus: “He [God] has decided on a day when He will judge all the people in the world in a way that is fair. To do this He will use a man He chose long ago. And He has proven to everyone that this is the man to do it. He proved it by raising Him from death!”¹⁰

In the death and resurrection of Christ, Paul saw a metaphor of his own life. He told the Corinthians: “It is true that Christ was weak when He was killed on the cross, but He lives now by God’s power. It is also true that we share His weakness, but in dealing with you, we will be alive in Him by God’s power.”¹¹ And when writing to the Ephesians, Paul used Christ’s resurrection again as an example for hope: “You will know that God’s power is very great for us who believe. It is the same as the mighty power He used to raise Christ from death and put Him at His right side in the heavenly places.”¹²

In Paul’s mind, one infallible proof that Jesus was the Son of God, was His resurrection from the dead. The same is true today. It sets Him apart from Buddha, Muhammad, Confucius, and others who are considered divine by their followers. This does not mean that His other claims should be disregarded, rather, they are validated by this act of being raised to life again. Paul was adamant about keeping the resurrection of Christ a centerpiece of the Gospel. As he told the Corinthians: “If Christ has not been raised from the dead, then our preaching is vain, your faith also is vain.”¹³ So let the world attack the other tenets of the Gospel, even calling them myths or allegories. But until they disprove this Passover miracle, every word concerning His divinity will stand forever.

Chrysostom, the great early church preacher, makes this observation of Paul’s human and spiritual genealogy of Jesus: “Paul is here hinting that there is also a generation of Christ according to the Spirit. Why then did he begin from the flesh, and not from the higher principle? First, it was because that was where Matthew, Luke, and Mark started from too. Anyone who wants to lead men by hand to heaven must lead them upward from below. This was the way the actual dispensation [of grace] was ordered. First, they saw Christ as a man on earth, and then later they understood that He is God. His disciple, therefore, followed the same order in which Christ Himself had framed His teaching. Thus the generation according to the flesh comes first, not because it was first in actual fact but because he [Paul] was leading his hearers upward from one thing to the other.”¹⁴

When it comes to how the spiritual side of Christ’s genealogy was confirmed, early church bishop Theodoret says this: “Before His crucifixion and death, the Lord Jesus Christ did not appear to be God either to the Jews or even to the disciples. For they were offended by human things, as when they saw Him eating and drinking and sleeping and urinating, and not even His miracles made them change their minds. So, for instance, when they saw the miracle which He performed with the sea, they said: ‘Who is this, that even the sea and the winds obey Him?’¹⁵ … But after He rose from the dead and ascended into heaven, and the Holy Spirit came, and after miracles of every kind which they performed by calling on His adorable name, all those who believed recognized that He was God and the only begotten Son of God.”¹⁶ As a spokesman for the School of theology in Antioch, Theodoret found himself in the thick of the controversy about Christ’s humanity and divinity and how they were related in the person of Jesus. The emphasis of this early church scholar was on the distinctness and completeness of the human and divine natures of Christ.

Martin Luther gave his assessment of Paul’s wording here: “The meaning of these words, in my opinion, is this: The Content, or Object of the Gospel, or as some put it, the Subject, is Jesus Christ, the Son of God, born of the seed of David, according to the flesh, and now appointed to be King and Lord of all things with power, and this according to the Holy Spirit who raised Him from the dead.”¹⁷ In other words, there is no preaching of the Gospel unless Jesus the risen Christ is the center of the message. Bible scholar Albert Barnes echoes Luther’s words: “The gospel of God concerning his Son. The design of the gospel was to make a communication relative to His Son Jesus Christ. This is the whole of it. There is no good news’ to man respecting salvation except what comes by Jesus Christ.”¹⁸

John Calvin has some views on what Paul means by Christ being shown to be God’s Son. He writes: “[It is] as though he [Paul] had said, that the power, by which He was raised from the dead, was something like a decree by which He was proclaimed the Son of God, according to what is said in Psalms, ‘I have this day begotten thee:’¹⁹ for this begetting refers to what was made known. Though some indeed find here three separate evidences of the divinity of Christ — ‘power,’ understanding thereby miracles — then the ‘testimony of the Spirit’ — and, lastly, ‘the resurrection from the dead’ — I yet prefer to connect them together, and to reduce these three things to one, in this manner — that Christ was declared the Son of God by openly exercising a real celestial power, that is, the power of the Spirit, when He rose from the dead; but that this power is comprehended, when a conviction of it is imprinted on our hearts by the same Spirit.”²⁰

Adam Clark says: “The word which we render ‘declared’, comes from: to bound, define, determine, or limit, and hence our [English] word horizon, the line that determines the farthest visible part of the earth, in reference to the heavens. In this place, the word signifies such a manifest and complete exhibition of the subject as to render it beyond doubt. The resurrection of Christ from the dead was such a manifest proof of our Lord‘s innocence, the truth of His doctrine, and the fulfillment of all that the prophets had spoken, as to leave no doubt on any considerate and candid mind.”²¹

And Charles Hodge says this to those who believe that Jesus was such a holy person that His disciples, like most Jews of their day,²² declared Him to be a Son of God: “Declared to be the Son of God. The word “horizō” means 1. To limit, or bound, and, in reference to ideas, to define. 2. To determine. Luke 22:22, Acts 2:23, Hebrews 4:7. 8. To appoint, or constitute. Acts 10:42; 17:31. The apostle would then say that Christ was appointed, or constituted the Son of God, by or after His resurrection, But this is inconsistent with what he elsewhere teaches, viz that Christ was the Son of God before the foundation of the world.²³ As shown above, Son of God is not a title of office, but of nature, and therefore Christ cannot be said to have been constituted the Son of God. This interpretation also would involve the latter part of the verse in great difficulties. Hence even those commentators who most strenuously insist on adhering to the signification of words, arc constrained to understand “appointed” here declaratively, or in reference to the knowledge of men. That is when Christ is said to be constituted the Son of God, we are not to understand that He became or was made Son, but was, in the view of men, so determined [by the powers He displayed and His being raised from the dead].”²⁴

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

Dr. Robert R. Seyda

EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

CHAPTER ONE (Part IV)

Another early church commentary named for Ambrosiaster has this to say: “In order to prove that the hope of faith was fulfilled and completed in Christ, Paul says that Christ’s Gospel was already promised by God beforehand, so that on the basis of that promise Paul could teach that Christ was the perfect author of [eternal] life. ‘Through His prophets.’ In order to show even more clearly that the coming of Christ was a saving event, Paul also pointed to the people through whom God gave His promise so that it might be seen from them just how true and magnificent the promise is. For nobody uses great forerunners to announce some minor thing. Paul added this on top of his argument in order to give greater confidence to believers and show his approval of the law. The Scriptures are holy because they condemn sins and because in them is contained the covenant of the one God and the incarnation of the Son of God for the salvation of mankind, by the evidence of numerous signs.”¹ It is clear that this early Catholic scholar saw no other path to God except through Jesus Christ. Not through the church nor the saints, but only by way of Christ Jesus.

Reformer Martin Luther focuses on the importance of having witnesses to the Gospel. He writes: “The most convincing and persuasive proof of the Gospel is the fact that it was witnessed by the Law and the Prophets. The Gospel proclaims to us only that which it was to proclaim according to the divine promise. This proves that God’s counsel of salvation was foreordained in detail before it was carried into effect. So all glory for this doctrine must be ascribed to God and none to our merits and efforts; for before we ever existed, it was already ordained according to Proverbs 8:23; ‘I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, before the earth existed.’”² Luther is more or less saying that mankind can add nothing to, nor insert any new steps or requirements to God’s plan of salvation that was written in heaven before the earth was formed and man was created.

Fellow reformer John Calvin comments: “We may learn from this passage what the gospel is: he [Paul] teaches us, not that it was promulgated by the Prophets but only promised. If then the Prophets promised the gospel, it follows, that it was revealed, when our Lord was at length manifested in the flesh. They are then mistaken who confound the promises with the gospel since the gospel is properly the appointed preaching of Christ as manifested, in whom the promises themselves are exhibited.”³ And Wesleyan theologian Adam Clarke says: “Both in the law and in the prophets God showed His purpose to introduce into the world a more perfect and glorious state of things; which state was to take place by and under the influence of the Messiah, who should bring life and immortality to light by His Gospel.”⁴ So when Jesus appeared, the full plan of salvation promised was revealed for the first time. Not only was Christ the light of salvation when He came, but He is the same light today and cannot be replaced.

American scholar Albert Barnes notes: “In the writings of the Old Testament. They were called holy because they were inspired by the Holy Spirit, and were regarded as separated from all other writings, and worthy of all reverence. The apostle here declares that he was not about to advance anything new. His doctrines were in accordance with the acknowledged oracles of God. Though they might appear to be new, yet he regarded the gospel as entirely consistent with all that had been declared in the Jewish dispensation, and not only consistent but as actually promised there.”⁵ And, English evangelical leader John Stott testifies to the same thought by saying: “We have reason, then, to be thankful that the gospel of God has a double attestation, namely the prophets in the Old Testament and the apostles in the New. Both bear witness to Jesus Christ.”⁶ And NT scholar Douglas Moo adds: “It is doubtful whether Paul has any particular OT passages in mind here; his purpose is general and principal, to allay possible suspicion about ‘his’ gospel as new and innovative by asserting its organic relationship to the OT.”⁷ I once heard, and there still may be, some preachers who refused to preach sermons based on OT texts because they believed it was replaced by the NT and therefore irrelevant to the Gospel. They don’t realize that they just called Jesus, Peter, James, John, Paul and others false teachers because that was the Bible from which they preached.

Canadian Bible teacher Harry A. Ironside shares his view of the Gospel: “This gospel is not a new law. It is not a code of morals or ethics. It is not a creed to be accepted. It is not a system of religion to be adhered to. It is not good advice to be followed. It is a divinely given message concerning a divine Person, the Son of God, Jesus Christ our Lord. This glorious Being is true Man, yet very God. He is the Branch that grew out of the root of David, therefore true Man. But He is also the Son of God, the virgin-born, who had no human father, and this His works of power demonstrate. To this blessed fact the Spirit of Holiness bare witness when He raised dead persons to life. The expression, ‘By the resurrection from the dead,’ is literally, ‘By resurrection of dead persons.’ It includes His own resurrection, of course: but it also takes in the resurrection of the daughter of Jairus, of the widow’s son, and of Lazarus. He who could thus rob death of its prey was God and man in one blessed, adorable Person, worthy of all worship and praise, now and for evermore.”⁸

Princeton Presbyterian theologian Charles Hodge makes this observation: “The Gospel which Paul was sent to preach, was the same system of grace and truth, which from the beginning had been predicted and partially unfolded in the writings of the Old Testament. The reason why the apostle here adverts to that fact probably was, that one of the strongest proofs of the divine origin of the gospel is found in the prophecies of the Old Testament. The advent, the character, the work, the kingdom of the Messiah, are there predicted, and it was therefore out of the Scriptures that the apostles reasoned, to convince the people that Jesus is the Christ; and to this connection between the two dispensations they constantly refer, in proof of their doctrines.”⁹

British Independent Baptist preacher Charles Spurgeon makes an interesting point here. He says: “They quoted the old Testament, and delighted to make it a kind of basis for the New Testament: ‘which He [God] had promised before by His prophets in the Holy Scriptures.’ All the gospel is in the Old Testament as well as in the New, for the gospel which Paul was called to preach was promised before by the prophets in the Holy Scriptures.”¹⁰ Scottish Bible scholar F. F. Bruce points out: “This statement is amplified in 1:17; 3:21; 4:3, 6–25; 10:5–20; 15:9–12, 21.”¹¹ This is important to consider that in Paul’s mind whatever he says here in the NT is validated over and over again by what God said through the prophets in the OT.

Verses 3-4: The Good News is about God’s Son, Jesus Christ our Lord. As a human, He was born from the family of David, but spiritually He was shown to be God’s powerful Son when He was raised from death.

Just in case some of his readers were not sure about what he meant by the phrase “Good News,” Paul is happy to explain. He begins by reinforcing what his fellow apostle Peter declared, by way of a revelation from God in heaven, that Jesus of Nazareth was, in fact, the Son of the Living God.¹² He does so by pointing to what, as he just said, the prophets in the Scriptures had to say: “Today I have become your father, and you are my Son.”¹³ But more than that, what the voice from heaven announced: “This is my Son, the one I love. I am very pleased with Him.”¹⁴

For some, this was not enough. As Jesus stood before the high priest he was angrily confronted: “I command you by the power of the living God to tell us the truth. Tell us, are you the Messiah, the Son of God? Jesus answered, ‘Yes, that’s right.’”¹⁵ That authentication by Christ as to His Sonship with God was not lost once the trial was over. While standing by the cross and watching Him suffer, some of those who delighted in His pain and agony said: “So let God save Him now, if God really wants Him. He Himself said, ‘I am the Son of God.’”¹⁶

Whether or not they knew it, they were not just making fun of Jesus, they were calling the angel who visited Mary a liar. The angel told her: “The Holy Spirit will come to you, and the power of the Most High God will cover you. The baby will be holy and will be called the Son of God.”¹⁷ So it should be no surprise when we read about all the positive reactions to the birth of Jesus Mary’s family. Therefore, we must believe that John the Baptizer, the son of Mary’s cousin, Elizabeth, would tell everyone: “He is the Son of God.”¹⁸

Sometime after Jesus’ baptism, Nathanael met Jesus and he too was convinced, and said: “Teacher, you are the Son of God.”¹⁹ But the one declaration that has affected the message of the Gospel more than any other was made by John the disciple of Jesus: “God loved the world so much that He gave His only Son so that everyone who believes in Him would not be lost but have eternal life.”²⁰ But some of the Jewish religious leaders were still not convinced. So when they continued to deride and mock Him, Jesus turned to them and said: “Why do you accuse me of insulting God for saying, ‘I am God’s Son’? I am the one God chose and sent into the world.”²¹ It was with this same conviction that John finished writing his Gospel: “These are written so that you can believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God.”²²

That, then, became the hallmark of the Gospel. When the Ethiopian eunuch asked Philip if he could be baptized, the apostle said to him: “If you believe with all your heart, you may.” And he replied, “I do believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.”²³ So this strong belief in Jesus as God’s Son was already part of the apostolic message, and after his conversion, Paul made it part of his message as well. Luke tells us this about Paul: “Soon he began to go to the synagogues and tell people about Jesus. He told the people, ‘Jesus is the Son of God!’”²⁴ So this brings us full circle back to what Paul is writing to the body of believers in Rome.

“Wise men speak because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something.” This saying has been attributed to Plato, the Greek author & philosopher (427 BC – 347 BC), but a search of his writings did not produce this exact statement. Perhaps the person who coined this phrase realized that with their name next to it there would be little interest for speakers to include it in their speeches, so by attributing it to the highly respected Plato, it got the attention they were hoping for.

Nevertheless, this still does not take away the potency of the claim. As young San Francisco multimedia and communication specialist Ally Leung commented: “We’ve been blessed with a very precious gift, my friends: the gift of talking. The gift of language. The gift of being able to express our feelings, emotions, ideas or plans into something called words. But, alas, as with every gift, overusing it may lead to unexpected results. Speaking and listening in a balanced way are imperative in our world. The noise of useless words that many of us are throwing away in an attempt to get a grip on someone else’s attention, creates a thick fog that makes it really difficult to actually understand each other. Ironically, the more we talk, the less we’re able to communicate.”

But I did find while searching through the works of Plato, that on one occasion Socrates was talking with Critias, and asked whether or not there was any profit to be found in practicing wisdom or self-control and if it was wise to practice them. Socrates says: “If indeed, as we were supposing at first, the wise man had been able to distinguish what he knew and did not know, and that he knew the one and did not know the other, and to recognize a similar faculty of discernment in others, there would certainly have been a great advantage in being wise… and we should not have attempted to do what we did not know, but we should have found out those who knew, and have handed the business over to them and trusted in them.”¹

In any case, the originator of this quote wants us to keep this in mind: When we feel inspired to make a statement about something we are thinking in response to something we’ve heard, just ask ourselves whether or not anyone will really benefit from what we have to say or is it that we just want to get it off our chest. In others words, will it turn on a light for them to see something they otherwise might not have known unless we speak up about it? Then we can share what we have in our heart and on our mind. But if our desire to say something comes only from feeling like we have to contribute because we don’t want to be left out of the conversation, then let’s just smile and keep it to ourselves. As the originator of this quote points out, we can either be considered a wise person who has something important to say, or an unwise person who just wants to say something. – Dr. Robert R Seyda

Watch this video, it may inspire you in some way to be used by God to help others with your story.

http://www.rogerknapp.com/inspire/AMothersLove.htm

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

Dr. Robert R. Seyda

EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

CHAPTER ONE (Part III)

Paul’s mention of the “Good News,” which is often translated as “Gospel,” which comes from the old English combination of god (good) + spel (story or news), is very revealing. The word used in the original Greek is the basis for which we also get the English words “Evangel” and “Evangelism.” You will notice, the word “angel” is part of this word. An angel in Greek means “messenger.” So we could paraphrase “Gospel” as “Good news brought by an angel.” Makes us think of what the angel told Abraham; what the angel told Gideon; and what the angel told the shepherds. No wonder that Paul and the other New Testament writers saw the Gospel as not just “News”, but “angelic news”, or “news from above,” about our Lord and Savior Jesus the Christ.

Reformation leader Martin Luther thought highly of the letter by Paul to the Romans. He begins his commentary with this preface: “This Epistle is really the chief part of the New Testament and the very purest Gospel, and is worthy not only that every Christian should know it word for word, by heart, but occupy himself with it every day, as the daily bread of the soul. It can never be read or pondered too much, and the more it is dealt with the more precious it becomes, and the better it tastes.”¹ Luther was so convinced by what he believed, that he goes on to say: “Therefore, I, too, will do my best, so far as God has given me power, to open the way into it through this preface, so that it may be better understood by everyone. For heretofore it has been evilly darkened with commentaries and all kinds of idle talk, though it is, in itself, a bright light, almost enough to illumine all the Scripture.”

Then, in his general commentary on Chapter One Luther states: “The object of this Epistle is to destroy all wisdom and works of the flesh no matter how important these may appear in our eyes or those of others, and no matter how sincere and earnest we might be in their use. In its place, it implants, deepens and magnifies sin, no matter how little of it there may exist, or how much of it may be there.”²

On this opening verse, Reformist John Calvin had this to say: “He [Paul] signalizes himself with these distinctions for the purpose of securing more authority to his doctrine; and this he seeks to secure by two things — first, by asserting his call to the Apostleship; and secondly, by showing that his call was not unconnected with the Church of Rome: for it was of great importance that he should be deemed an Apostle through God’s call and that he should be known as one destined for the Roman Church. He, therefore, says that he was a servant of Christ, and called to the office of an Apostle, thereby intimating that he had not presumptuously intruded into that office. He then adds, that he was chosen, by which he more fully confirms the fact, that he was not one of the people, but a particular Apostle of the Lord. Consistently with this, he had before proceeded from what was general to what was particular, as the Apostleship was an especial service; for all who sustain the office of teaching are to be deemed Christ’s servants, but Apostles, in point of honor, far exceed all others. But the choosing for the gospel, etc., which he afterward mentions, expresses the end as well as the use of the Apostleship; for he intended briefly to show for what purpose he was called to that function. By saying then that he was servant of Christ, he declared what he had in common with other teachers; by claiming to himself the title of an Apostle, he put himself before others; but as no authority is due to him who willfully intrudes himself, he reminds us, that he was appointed by God.”³

Methodist commentator Adam Clarke makes this observation: “Set apart and appointed to this work, and to this only; as the Israelites were separate from all the people of the earth, to be the servants of God.⁴ St. Paul may here refer to his former state as a Pharisee, which literally signifies a separatist, or one separated. Before he was separated unto the service of his own sect; now he is separated unto the Gospel of God.”⁵ Later on, nineteenth-century Presbyterian scholar Charles Hodge makes this point: “Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called an apostle. Agreeably to the ancient mode of epistolary address, the apostle begins with the declaration of his name and office. It was his office which gave him the right to address the believers at Rome, and elsewhere, with that tone of authority which pervades all his epistles. Speaking as the messenger of Christ, he spake as he spake, as one having authority, and not as an ordinary teacher.”⁶

Harry A. Ironside (1876-1951), an American Bible teacher, pastor, and author of more than 60 volumes as well as many pamphlets and articles on Bible subjects, and for 18 of his 50 years of ministry was pastor of the Moody Memorial Church in Chicago, had this to say: “The Epistle to the Romans is undoubtedly the most scientific statement of the divine plan for the redemption of mankind that God has been pleased to give us. Apart altogether from the question of inspiration we may think of it as a treatise of transcendent, intellectual power, putting to shame the most brilliant philosophies ever conceived by the minds of men.”

Ironside goes on to write: “It is noteworthy that the Holy Spirit did not take up an unlettered fisherman or provincial Galilean to unfold His redemption plan in all its majesty and grandeur. He selected a man of international outlook: a Roman citizen, yet a Hebrew of the Hebrews; a man whose education combined familiarity with Greek and Roman lore, including history, religion, philosophy, poetry, science and music, together with closest acquaintance with Judaism both as a divine revelation and as a body of rabbinical traditions and additions to the sacred deposit of the LAW, the PROPHETS, and the PSALMS. This man, born in the proud educational center, Tarsus of Cilicia, and brought up at the feet of Gamaliel in Jerusalem, was the chosen vessel to make known to all nations for the obedience of faith, the gospel of the glory of the blessed God, as so marvelously set forth in this immortal letter.”⁷

The great British preacher Charles Spurgeon made this comment: “Paul has many titles, and he delights to mention them in writing to these Christians at Rome. He puts first his highest title: ‘A servant of Jesus Christ.’ He glories in being a servant of the crucified Christ, a servant of him who was despised and rejected of men; so do we. Paul was called out from among men, effectually ‘called’ of God ‘to be an apostle, separated’— set apart—’ unto the gospel of God.’ He believed that he was separated for that purpose at his birth; but he was specially ‘separated unto the gospel of God’ on the road to Damascus. It is a happy thing when a minister feels that he has nothing to do with anything else but the gospel; that commands all his thought, all his talent, all his time.”⁸

I like what John Stott says when he quotes Dr. Leon Morris: “Romans is a book about God. No topic is treated with anything like the frequency of God. Everything Paul touches in this letter he relates to God … There is nothing like it elsewhere.’ So the Christian good news is the gospel of God. The apostles did not invent it; it was revealed and entrusted to them by God. This is still the first and most basic conviction which underlies all authentic evangelism. What we have to share with others is neither a miscellany of human speculations, nor one more religion to add to the rest, nor really a religion at all. It is rather the gospel of God, God’s own good news for a lost world. Without this conviction, evangelism is evacuated of its content, purpose, and drive.”⁹

Verse 2: God promised long ago through His prophets in the Holy Scriptures to give this Good News to His people.

Paul also wants it to be known that the Good News he is preaching did not start with him, or even with the other apostles. It was hard for many Jews to accept that their own prophets had talked about this Jesus as the Messiah and that they also spoke of salvation by grace rather than works. Paul reference to the Torah and Prophets as “Holy Scriptures” was a well-known term among Jewish writers. For instance, when copying them in a scroll, if any part of what is written must be erased: “All the Holy Scriptures will render the hands unclean.”¹⁰ However, when talking about how things can be contaminated by so much as a touch they wrote: “If the jar¹¹ touched [unclean] foodstuffs or liquids or the Holy Scripture, it remains clean.”¹² Then, in their commentary on the Mishnah, when discussing where and when the scrolls of the Torah and Prophets should be read, they are referred to as “Holy Scriptures” (“Holy Writings” in some translations).¹³

Early church scholar, Origen, has an interesting take on what is being said here: “You, the reader, must decide whether this is to be understood simply of the gospel which was promised by God through the prophetic Scriptures or whether this is said in order to distinguish it from another gospel, which John calls ‘eternal’ in the book of Revelation.¹⁴ This gospel will be revealed when the shadow passes and the truth comes, when death will be swallowed up and eternity restored. It seems that those eternal years of which the prophet spoke also belong to this eternal gospel: ‘I had the eternal years in mind.’¹⁵ It must be understood that what was predicted by the prophets concerning Christ was also predicted concerning the gospel, although the Evangelist Mark seems to make a distinction between Christ and the gospel when he says: ‘Whoever has left father or mother … for my sake or for the gospel.’¹⁶ But if promises referring specifically to the gospel are what is required, you will find an abundance of them in the prophets, to wit: ‘The Lord will give his word with great power to those who preach the good news,” and: “How beautiful are the feet of those who bring good news.‘¹⁷”¹⁸

Also, the idea of the prophets in the Old Testament foreseeing the passion of the Messiah was not just Paul’s interpretation. He echoes the words of Jesus who said: “The prophets said the Messiah must suffer these things before he begins His time of glory.” Jesus said this to the two men He joined on their walk to Emmaus. Luke goes on to tell us: “Then He began to explain everything that had been written about Himself in the Scriptures. He started with the books of Moses and then He talked about what the prophets had said about Him.”¹⁹ Paul was not alone in such thinking. The apostle Peter also endorsed this doctrine when he told the household of Cornelius: “Everyone who believes in Jesus will have their sins forgiven through His name. All the prophets agree that this is true.”²⁰

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

Dr. Robert R. Seyda

EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

CHAPTER ONE (Part II)

Verse 1: Greetings from Paul, a bond-servant of Christ Jesus. God called me to be an apostle and gave me the work of telling His Good News.

Paul leaves no doubt as to who this letter is from. He had a number of associates, any of which may have been able to write these believers in Rome. But it wasn’t so much that they knew it was the man formerly known as Saul of Tarsus, but that he had been chosen by God for this mission.¹ So in that vein, he refers to himself as a “bond-servant.” Back in those days, a servant was someone who had been purchased, not hired, and therefore belonged to the one they served. As such, they worked without receiving a wage. However, when a servant was freed and voluntarily stayed to serve their former master, they were referred to as bond-servants.

One early church father made this comment: “Some people argue quite pointlessly as to whether the participle called is meant to modify servant or apostle. It applies to both, since everyone is called, and called equally, both to faith and grace and to election and the apostolic order.”² And another early church bishop gave his point of view: “Paul was set apart and dedicated to evangelism, like the offerings which the law says were set apart for God and for the priests.³”⁴ Some years later, another early church scholar makes this point: “He [Paul] was more highly favored than the other apostles, for the Lord called Peter and James and John and made them his disciples; he did not immediately make or call them apostles. But he made Paul an apostle as soon as he called him. Thus the gospel is preached according to the plan of God.”⁵ Then the Bishop of Mopsuestia gives us his commentary: “All things are servants of Christ, and He is Lord of all. Therefore Paul calls himself a servant first of all, thereby encouraging the rest to do likewise. He also recalls the unique lordship of the Son but not in such a way as to deny the lordship of the Father, which is confessed by everybody. In saying that he was set apart, he showed that he was not only called but also chosen from among many as useful for the preaching of the gospel.”⁶

With Paul being Jewish, and many of those to whom he was writing being converted Jews to Christ, He knew they would understand this term from a Jewish perspective. The Hebrew word for bond-servant was, ‘ebed,’ and it was understood the same way. However, the Law of Moses allowed an slave to become a bond-servant voluntarily: “But if the slave decides that he wants to stay with the master, he must say, ‘I love my master. I love my wife and my children. I will not become free—I will stay.’ If this happens, the master will bring the slave before God. The master will take the slave to a door or the wooden frame around the door and pierce the slave’s ear using a sharp tool to show that the slave will serve that master for all his life.”⁷

But Paul was not unique. He was following in the footsteps of many outstanding men of the Old Testament were referred to as servants. God spoke of Abraham as His servant.⁸ Joshua is called the servant of the Lord,⁹ as are David,¹⁰ and Isaiah.¹¹ Even the Messiah is called God’s Servant.¹² In each of these instances the term servant carries means voluntary service. Therefore we could say, being one of God’s servants is a noble position. So we should not be surprised at what Jesus said to those who wanted to follow Him: “Whoever serves me must follow me. My servants must be with me everywhere I am. My Father will give honor to anyone who serves me.”¹³

But Jesus also wanted to know that the same conditions existed between Him and His servants as it did between a student and his teacher: “Servants are not greater than their master. Those who are sent to do something are not greater than the one who sent them.”¹⁴ This was something the apostle Paul would repeat over and over again. Otherwise, he would not keep referring to himself as a bond-servant. But when Jesus chose those who would serve Him willingly, they received a higher status than the average household servant: “I no longer call you servants, because servants don’t know what their master is doing. But now I call you friends, because I have told you everything that my Father told me.”¹⁵ This no doubt was in Paul’s mind the night of the shipwreck when he was on his way to Rome. He told the crew of the ship: “Last night an angel came to me from God—the God I worship and belong to. The angel said, ‘Paul, don’t be afraid!‘”¹⁶

So, the Roman believers were not the only ones Paul introduced himself to as a bond-servant of Christ. He said to the Corinthians: “We don’t tell people about ourselves. But we tell people that Jesus Christ is Lord, and we tell them that we are your servants for Jesus.”¹⁷ Paul knew who the real One was he needed to impress as a faithful servant. He told the Galatian believers: “Now do you think I am trying to make people accept me? No, God is the one I am trying to please. Am I trying to please people? If I wanted to please people, I would not be a servant of Christ.”¹⁸

Paul was not the only one who used this title. James greeted his readers as a servant of God and the Lord Jesus Christ.¹⁹ And Peter sent his greetings as a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ,²⁰ as did Jude in his epistle, when he called himself: “A servant of Jesus Christ.”²¹ And when writing the book on his revelation, John began: “This is a revelation from Jesus Christ, which God gave Him to show His servants what must happen soon. And Christ sent His angel to show it to His servant John.”²² So by calling himself a bond-servant of Christ Jesus, Paul was including himself in good company.

Yet, being part of such an elite group was not based on Paul’s decision alone. He wanted the readers to know that he was invited to join this assembly of bond-servants. He got the word from Ananias in Damascus when he came to see Paul. The only reason why Ananias had gone looking for Paul was because he was told this: “The Lord Jesus said to Ananias, “Go! I have chosen Saul for an important work. I want him to tell other nations, their rulers, and the people of Israel about me. I will show him all that he must suffer for me.”²³

That message was never forgotten by Paul. He bravely told the Corinthians: “I was chosen to be an apostle of Christ Jesus. God chose me because that is what He wanted.”²⁴ And Paul took this calling very seriously. Later he told them: “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.”²⁵ This was not bragging, but humbly admitting that he was somehow favored by God: “All the other apostles are greater than I am. I say this because I persecuted the church of God. That is why I am not even good enough to be called an apostle. But, because of God’s grace, that is what I am.”²⁶

Yet, when his authority was questioned in Galatia, Paul was quick to say: “I was chosen to be an apostle, but not by any group or person here on earth. My authority came from none other than Jesus Christ and God the Father, who raised Jesus from death… I did not get my message from any other human. The Good News is not something I learned from other people. Jesus Christ himself gave it to me. He showed me the Good News that I should tell people.”²⁷ Paul shared the same message with the Colossians: “I became a servant of the church because God gave me a special work to do.”²⁸ And when writing to his young protégé, Paul told him: “I thank Christ Jesus our Lord because he trusted me and gave me this work of serving Him. He gives me strength.”²⁹ And that strength was need because later he tells Timothy: “I suffer now because of that work. But I am not ashamed, because I know the One I have put my trust in. And I am sure that He is able to protect what I have put into His care until that Day.”³⁰

Not only was Paul adamant about the fact that all bond-servants must be chosen, but that accepting such a calling required that they be set aside for His service, and His service alone. Being a Jew, Paul knew how God felt about the Levites He had appointed through Aaron to be priests. Moses kept reminding them about this: “You should be happy that the God of Israel chose you to be different from the rest of the Israelites. He lets you come near to him to do the special work in the Lord’s Holy Tent to help the Israelites worship him.”³¹ This was also given as a reminder to the Kohath family: “Aaron was chosen for a special work. He and his descendants were chosen to always be the ones to do this special work—to prepare the holy things for the Temple service.”³² In other words, it was not a part-time or volunteer position. They were to dedicate their lives to the mission.

And for Paul, his main mission was to spread the Good News about Jesus the Messiah and His plan of salvation through grace. In fact, this was the mission for all of Jesus’ followers to whom He said: “Go everywhere in the world. Tell the Good News to everyone.”³³ And although Paul was called later than they were, he felt his mission was just as important. That’s why he said: “I don’t care about my own life. The most important thing is that I finish my work. I want to finish the work that the Lord Jesus gave me to do—to tell people the Good News about God’s grace.”³⁴

NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXTUAL COMMENTARY

Dr. Robert R. Seyda

EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

CHAPTER ONE (Part I)

INTRODUCTION

Paul spent ten years from 47 to 57 AD in intensive evangelization of the territories east and west of the Aegean Sea. During those years he concentrated in succession on the Roman provinces of Galatia, Macedonia, Achaia and Asia. Along the main roads of these provinces and in their principal cities the gospel had been preached and churches had been planted. Paul took with proper seriousness his commission as Christ’s apostle among the Gentiles, and now he might well contemplate with grateful praise not (he would have said) what he had done, but what Christ had done through him. His first great plan of campaign was concluded. The churches he had planted in Iconium, Philippi, Thessalonica, Corinth, Ephesus and many other cities in those four provinces would be left to the care of their spiritual leaders, under the overruling direction of the Holy Spirit.

But Paul’s task was by no means finished. During the winter of 56–57 AD, which he spent at Corinth in the home of his friend and convert Gaius, he looked forward (with some misgivings) to a visit which had to be paid to Jerusalem in the immediate future – for he had to see to the handing over to the elders of the church there of a gift of money which he had been organizing for some time past among his Gentile converts, a gift which he hoped would strengthen the bond of Christian love between the mother church in Judea and the churches of the Gentiles. During the early days of 57 AD, therefore, he dictated to his friend Tertius – a Christian secretary possibly placed at his disposal by his host Gaius – a letter destined for the Roman Christians. This letter was to prepare them for his visit to their city and to explain the purpose of his visit; and he considered it wise while writing it to set before them a full statement of the gospel as he understood and proclaimed it.¹

The Epistle to the Romans is undoubtedly the most scientific statement of the divine plan for the redemption of mankind that God has been pleased to give us. Apart altogether from the question of inspiration we may think of it as a treatise of transcendent, intellectual power, putting to shame the most brilliant philosophies ever conceived by the minds of men. It is noteworthy that the Holy Spirit did not inspire an uneducated fisherman or provincial Galilean to unfold His redemption plan in all its majesty and grandeur. He selected a man of international outlook: a Roman citizen, yet a Hebrew of the Hebrews; a man whose education combined familiarity with Greek and Roman writings, including history, religion, philosophy, poetry, science and music, together with closest acquaintance with Judaism both as a divine revelation and as a body of rabbinical traditions and additions to the sacred deposit of the LAW, the PROPHETS, and the PSALMS. This man, born in the proud educational center, Tarsus of Cilicia, and brought up at the feet of Gamaliel in Jerusalem, was the chosen vessel to make known to all nations for the obedience of faith, the gospel of the glory of the blessed God, as so marvelously set forth in this immortal letter.²

It is important to make note that this letter, written before the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD, has been commented on as early as St. Ignatius (c. 35–108 AD), also known as Theophorus, bishop of Antioch, the church that sent Paul and Barnabas out on the mission field, who no doubt knew Paul since he was a disciple of the apostle John. It was Ignatius who coined the phrase, “Catholic Church.” He even wrote his own Epistle to the Romans in which he describes himself as a prisoner in Christ Jesus. In Chapter 4 he writes: “I do not, as Peter and Paul, issue commandments to you. They were apostles; I am but a condemned man: they were free, while I am, even until now, a servant. But when I suffer, I shall be the freed-man of Jesus, and shall rise again emancipated in Him.”

Early church preacher Chrysostom said: “Romans is unquestionably the fullest, deepest compendium of all sacred foundation truths.” But over time, the theology of the church and it’s doctrinal foundation based on the Scriptures underwent a grievous evolution. A creed was developed that can be described as: Salvation by sacrament, ritual, and good works, rather than being Christ-centered. It evolved into creating a hierarchy that became an obsessed, self-centered organism.

It wasn’t until the early writings of John Huss, a Bohemian reformer, who was eventually condemned as a heretic, that the seeds of change began to be sown. In fact, we are told that early in his monastic career, Martin Luther, rummaging through the stacks of a library, happened upon a volume of sermons by John Huss. Luther said: “I was overwhelmed with astonishment, I could not understand for what cause they had burnt so great a man, who explained the Scriptures with so much gravity and skill.” From this sea-change in Luther’s thinking, basing doctrine upon Scripture and the understanding of salvation began to emerge was one of: Salvation through grace, faith, and election.

Martin Luther went on to say in the Preface to the Epistle to the Romans written in 1522: “This Epistle is really the chief part of the New Testament and the very purest Gospel, and is worthy not only that every Christian should know it word for word, by heart, but occupy himself with it every day, as the daily bread of the soul. It can never be read or pondered too much, and the more it is dealt with the more precious it becomes, and the better it tastes.”

Fellow reformer John Calvin also gives us some insights that he came across that make this letter even more interesting. He tells us that the first introduction of the Gospel into Rome is involved in uncertainty. The probability is, that some of the “strangers of Rome,” present on the day of Pentecost, were converted, and at their return promoted the spread of the Gospel. Paul mentions two, “Andronicus and Junia,” as having professed the faith before him, and as having been noted among the Apostles. He makes mention, too, of another eminent Christian, “Rufus” whose father, as it is supposed, carried our Savior’s cross (Mark 15:21). It is not improbable, that these were afterwards assisted by those converted under the ministry of Paul; for he speaks of some of those whom he salutes at Rome as being “beloved,” and as having been his “fellow-workers.”

Calvin continues by pointing out that it appears next to a certainty that Peter was not at Rome when Paul wrote his Epistle in 57 or 58, for he sends no salutation to Peter: — And also that he had not been there previous to that time; for it is wholly unreasonable to suppose, that, had he been there, Paul would have made no reference to his labors. It further amounts almost to a certainty, that Peter was not at Rome when Paul was for two years a prisoner there, from 61 to 63; for he makes no mention of him in any way, not even in the four or five Epistles which he wrote during that time: And that Peter was not at Rome during Paul’s last imprisonment in 65 and 66, is evident from the second Epistle to Timothy; for he makes no mention of Peter, and what he says of Christians there, that they “all forsook him,” would have been highly discreditable to Peter, if he was there. So that we have the strongest reasons to conclude, that Peter had no part in forming and establishing a Church in Rome during Paul’s life, whatever share in the work he might have had afterwards. But the first tradition, or the first account, given by Irenœus and Tertullian, refers only to a co-operation: and yet this co-operation is wholly inconsistent with what has been stated, the force of which no reasonable man can resist.³

And William Tyndale (1494-1536), English scholar and translator of the Bible into English wrote this: “This epistle is the principal and most excellent part of the New Testament, and most pure evangelion, that is to say glad tidings and what we call the gospel, and also a light and a way in unto the whole scripture … The sum and whole cause of the writings of this epistle, is, to prove that a man is justified by faith only: which proposition, to him who denies it not only in this epistle and all that Paul writes, but also the whole scripture, so locked up that he shall never understand it to his soul’s health. And to bring a man to the understanding and feeling that faith only justifies, Paul proves that the whole nature of mankind is so poisoned and so corrupt, yea and so dead concerning godly living or godly thinking, that it is impossible for to them to keep the law in the sight of God.”

Some 200 years later, the revival period of the church was ignited by the teaching and preaching of John Wesley. He focused on the importance of sanctification as an important factor in Christian living and service to God. Then at the beginning of the 20th century, the smoldering coals of Pentecostalism burst into flame and brought a new energy to the soul-saving ministry of the Church. By this time there were several doctrinal teachings that became prominent in various branches of the Protestant and Pentecostal movements. There were:

Predestination – Salvation is based on God’s choice not man’s choice.

Free will – Salvation is not imposed on anyone. Each person will be responsible for their own choice to accept salvation.

Salvation by water baptism – Salvation is granted upon being baptized in water, either as an infant or later as an adult.

Eternal Security – Salvation, once given, cannot be canceled. In other words, once saved always saved.

Eternal Insecurity – Salvation can be easily lost when one sins. Such backsliders must come back to God in order to be reinstated. If they do not, they will forever be lost.

Sanctification – A second work of grace apart from the new birth – One can be saved, but they must seek to be sanctified in order to meet God’s expectations and receive the infilling of the Holy Spirit.

Philip Schaff, author of the History of the Christian Church (1910), stated: “It is the most remarkable production of the most remarkable man. It is his heart. It contains his theology, theoretical and practical, for which he lived and died. It gives the clearest and fullest exposition of the doctrines of sin and grace and the best possible solution of the universal dominion of sin and death in the universal redemption by the second Adam.” There are many others, but these are key to understanding Paul’s theology in this epistle. It is best to read and study everything Paul has to say on these subjects before making up one’s mind. It is also important to be open-minded to fully grasp what Paul is saying.

It is said that among the Native American Cherokee Indians, who lived primarily in the southeast region of the United States until they were relocated to Oklahoma and other parts of the SW, they had many sayings and proverbs that became known to European settlers. One of them goes this way: “When you were born, you cried and everyone around you rejoiced. Live your life so that when you die, everyone around you cries and you rejoice.” I’m sure the translation from Cherokee to English would provide a variety of renderings, but the main thought is still very clear.

Someone who read this saying said that what it meant to them was that a person should live their life for others, not just for themselves. We could call this a form of investing in others so that we have the joy of reaping the benefits. Like the story I heard of a Wall Street broker out on a lunch break who saw a veteran selling small items on the street, and out of compassion gave him some money to invest in a kiosk so that it looked more legitimate. After some time the vet disappeared and the broker could only guess what happened until one day he went into a local business establishment and found out that the vet was now the owner, and doing quite well.

Another person who read this saying responded this way: “I was born with a closed hand and I will die with an open hand.” In other words, when we are born we have nothing to give to the one who made it possible for us to have life and live. But as we go through life we have opportunities to acquire things that help us live and enjoy life, but when we die we can’t take them with us. We can be greedy and have them buried with us, or we can give them to others who will use them to help others.

This thought can have no greater meaning than when we apply it to what we received from God as talent, ability, character, and enlightenment upon our new birth through Jesus Christ. I’m sure there were many who rejoiced when we were born-again. But when it comes time to lay our burdens down and go to our heavenly rest to await the resurrection, how many will weep, not only because we will be missed, but also for the joy of having something we invested in their lives that made them a better person? – Dr. Robert R Seyda

Here’s is a story written by Miss Vallie from Mobile, Alabama, that tells us something about God’s caring heart as our heavenly Father. She writes: Recently, as I was having my prayer time with God, I felt prompted by the Holy Spirit to pray that God would bless my life that day. I know after studying the Prayer of Jabez that this is a Biblical prayer and we should pray this every day.¹ But I had not really thought about praying this way for a while until this particular morning.

After my time with God, I went on about my day. That morning as I dressed for work, I put on navy blue pants. I had forgotten that my dog had chewed up my casual navy blue shoes, so I wore navy dress shoes instead, deciding to purchase some casual navy shoes during my lunch break. Arriving at work, I told a co-worker of my plans.

Although my job rarely takes me to the front office, this morning I needed to handle some matters there. As I walked past our reception area, I saw a woman who was working as a volunteer receptionist for the day coming in the front door. I held it open for her as she walked in and made a comment about the great big bag in her hand.

The lady proceeded to tell me that she had some shoes that her daughter wanted to give away and she thought she would bring them into our office and see if anyone there might want them. I looked down into the bag and right on top, I saw a wonderful pair of navy casual shoes that looked as if they had never been worn. Not only that, but they were exactly the style shoe that I was going to buy. By this point, there was no question in my mind as to what size they were going to be. Sure enough, they were exactly my size! As it so happens, also on my wish list was a pair of brown dress shoes. Wouldn’t you know, the perfect brown shoes were also in the bag.

I am just amazed at the hand of God! When I think of the timing and the circumstances that God had planned to get those shoes to me, just so that I could be blessed, I am overwhelmed. First, He had to have this woman’s daughter decide she wanted to get rid of these shoes. Secondly, our receptionist had to be out of town so that this woman would be coming in that day. Thirdly, this volunteer had to have the idea to bring them into the office and finally, I had to be in the office at just the right time to get them. Something so small has made a huge impact on my life. I told everyone I saw that day about how the hand of God had blessed me. What an awesome God!

What happened to this wonderful lady is not to be interpreted that God is some kind of Santa Claus or genie in a bottle who loves granting all our wishes no matter how frivolous. If you’ve had something like this happen to you, as I have, you know it’s God’s way of reminding us that He cares. And if we can trust Him to keep His eye open and ear turned toward us for something as pleasant as this, we must never doubt but that He will be our guide and guard during times of real need. But more than that, since we have such a gracious, caring God, now it’s our turn to show Him what He means to us and give back to Him. Not as a repayment for His goodness, but out of gratitude for His kindness, love, and mercy. So, what have you given Him lately? – Dr. Robert R Seyda