The holy spirit of holiness

THE HOLY SPIRIT OF HOLINESS
EDITED BY GLENN PEASE
Romans 1:4 and who through the Spirit of holiness
was declaredwith power to be the Son of God by His
resurrectionfrom the dead: Jesus Christ our Lord.
BIBLEHUB RESOURCES
Pulpit Commentary Homiletics
The CharacterizationOf "the GospelOf God," To Which Paul Was
Separated
Romans 1:2-4
T.F. Lockyer
The awfulness of a commissionof doom. Jonah. But to herald forth God's
goodtidings to a sorrowing world! This is the crownof all Christian ministry.
The angels might wellsing and be glad when ushering this gospelinto the
world (Luke 2:9-14); and Paul is rejoicedthat he canstrike this note of
gladness. There might wellbe preludes to this burst of joy: so the words,
"which he promised afore," etc. For all the indications of God's purposes of
love, from Genesis 3. to Malachi, did but prepare the way for the completed
announcement in "the fulness of the time." And so virtually they all were
Divine promises of a fuller gospel. The two main thoughts - God's gospel;its
contents.

I. GOD'S GOSPEL.
1. A gospelcarries the implication of a want, and, it may be, of a sorrow and a
loss. So do the goodtidings of God to man assume that man has lost his God,
and with God all things good.
(1) Man knew not, surely, the reality of his sin; was deceivedby the tempter;
but awokefrom his dream to find that God was gone!And this is the great
loss of the world. Tim voices cry, "Where is thy God?" And he? The Good
One - the light, the joy, the song of his creation. So man has blotted out his
own heavens, and the earth thereby has lostits lustre and its grace.
(2) But the estrangedGodis a condemning God. He may not abdicate his
essentialrelationshipto the world as God, and if the love be lost it is replaced
by wrath! So man's consciencetestifies:stricken, sore, andbleeding.
2. A gospelcarries the implication of a desire to have the want supplied, the
sorrow and the loss removed. So man's sin has not hopelesslyruined him, else
there could be no salvation. Roomfor God to work, and God does work.
(1) The historical preparation: God teaching the world to desire salvation.
The Jews by direct dealings, a positive discipline; the Gentiles by indirect, a
negative discipline. So, "the desire of all nations."
(2) The individual preparation: God's Spirit in the heart. Only the grace of
God can bring us to God. And now God's gospelmeans, in general, that the
condemning God will pardon, and the estrangedGodbe a Father and a
Friend again;that the yearnings towards himself which he has called forth
shall thus find their full satisfaction, which is nothing other than the peace of
forgiveness and the joy of adopting love.
II. ITS CONTENTS. Butthis generalmessagehas specialterms. God's love is
manifested, proved, accomplished, in his Son.
1. "His Son." Forit is God's own love, his other self, which stoops to save us.
Let us hold fast to this, for herein is the supreme pledge of our salvation.
2. His Son becomes "Jesus Christour Lord."

(1) By the assumption of human nature. "Bornof the seedof David according
to the flesh." That it may be one of ourselves who saves us. (a) A Man, making
atonement to God for men; (b) a human High Priestand Captain of salvation,
himself "perfectthrough sufferings," and therefore "touched with the feeling
of our infirmities" - the oneness with human-kind necessaryforboth the
Godwardand the manward aspects ofthe redeeming work. A Son of David,
according to mere historicallineage and localappearance:"for salvationis of
the Jews."But, grander and more royal than this, a Sonof man - the Son of
man, in his true human fashioning and for his world-wide work (Hebrews
2:14).
(2) By the glorification of human nature. "Declaredto be the Sonof God with
power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection of the dead." A
Redeemerof men must asserttheir redemption in his own Personfirst. "We
see not yet all things put under him [i.e. man]. But we see Jesus... crowned
with glory and honour" (Hebrews 2:8, 9), the archetypal Man. His
resurrection, which the apostle here links on to its world-wide correlative and
consequence,"the resurrectionof the dead," demonstrates the redemptive
powerof Jesus, who is therefore the Christ, our Lord, and therefore Son of
God; for only he who has life in himself can give life to dying men - life from
the death of sin, life from all death which sin has more indirectly wrought. Oh,
let us hearkento such a gospel!God's goodnews to a dying world, spoken
forth with all the powerof One who was God's very Son, and with all the
tender sympathy of One who is our very Brother. And for a proper
hearkening to this goodnews may God, in his love, prepare our hearts! -
T.F.L.
Biblical Illustrator
Who knowing the Judgment of God, that they which commit such things are
worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do
them.

Romans 1:32
The displeasure of God with all who are pleasedwith sin
N. Emmons, D. D.
I. SINNERS DO THINGS WHICH THEY KNOW ARE DISPLEASING TO
GOD. The heathen do things which God has forbidden by the law of nature;
the Jews those whichare forbidden by the God of revelation: both, therefore,
do things which they know must be displeasing to Him. And this is true of all
men now. They know that God forbids them to love themselves and the world
supremely; but they do both. Godforbids them to disobeyHis commands; but
they do disobey them. God forbids them to disbelieve and rejectthe gospel;
but they do disbelieve and rejectit. And they will persistin displeasing Him,
notwithstanding death appears to be their certain doom.
II. THEY TAKE PLEASURE IN SEEING OTHERS TAKE THE SAME
PATH TO RUIN. It will be easyto accountfor this if we consider —
1. That they love one another. They are all by nature possessedofthe same
selfishheart. And it is therefore reasonable to suppose that, notwithstanding
the greatdiversity in their external conduct, they love one another because
they are sinners, and not saints. Christ says repeatedly, "that sinners love
those that love them." And He tells His disciples that this selfishspirit is
essentialto their character. "If ye were of the world, the world would love his
own." Men of the world universally approve the spirit of the world, and are
pleasedto see one another act it out without the leastreserve;though they
know it is infinitely displeasing to God.
2. As sinners possessone and the same selfishand sinful heart, so they are
heartily united in opposing one and the same holy and benevolent cause. The
greatestnations have been, and still are, united in their views, and feelings,
and conduct, towards the Church of Christ. As all sinners wish that God's
gracious designs may be defeated;so they have pleasure in seeing any of their
fellow men doing what they think has a tendency to frustrate them.
3. Those who do things which they know are displeasing to God, take pleasure
in seeing others do the same. Those who disbelieve the existence of God are

pleasedto hear others say that they believe there is no God. Those who
disbelieve the inspiration of the Bible are pleasedto hear others say that they
believe it is a cunningly devised fable. Those who disbelieve the doctrines of
the Trinity, of atonement, of total depravity, of regeneration, etc., are always
pleasedto hear others say that they disbelieve all these doctrines. Those who
disbelieve in the Sabbath, who practise tavern haunting, vain and sinful
amusements, like others to do the same. Those who are ambitious love to see
others ambitious. Those who are worldly minded love to see others worldly
minded. Those who despise all religion love to see others despise it.
III. IMPROVEMENT.
1. If sinners love to do things which they know are displeasing to God, then
they never refrain from doing anything merely because they know it will be
displeasing to Him. They know what is pleasing to themselves, and they mean
to do what is pleasing to themselves, though they know it will be displeasing to
God. They are like disobedient children and servants, who will always do
what is agreeable to their own corrupt heart, though they know it will be
disagreeable to their parents or masters, unless they feartheir displeasure. It
is the fearand not the love of God that restrains sinners from doing any evil
actionor pursuing any evil course.
2. If sinners love to do things which they know are displeasing to God, then,
though they do a greatmany things which He has required, yet they never do
anything merely for the sake ofobeying or pleasing Him. They labour to
please themselves, and not Him.
3. If sinners love to do things that they know are displeasing to God, and take
pleasure in seeing others act from the same principle, then no external means
nor motives are sufficient to restrain them from sin, and induce them to love
and please God. They sin with their eyes wide open. They know what would
please God, but they do not desire to please Him.
4. If sinners not only do things which they know are displeasing to God, but
take pleasure in seeing others do the same things, then they are guilty not only
of their own sins, but of all the sins of others, which they see and approve. And
the approvers are often more guilty and criminal than the actors. Parents who

allow their children to profane the Sabbath, to game, to attend balls and
haunt taverns, are more guilty than their children that do these things.
Executive officers, who see and approve of those who break the laws of the
land, are more guilty than the actual transgressors.The reasonis, that in all
these cases the approvers know more than the actors, and are under stronger
obligations to condemn and restrain those who are under their care, than the
transgressors are to refrain from their evil courses.
5. If men are guilty of all the sins which they know and approve of, then we
may see what it is to be guilty of national sins. It is to approve of those sins,
which the majority of a nation commit and approve of. And, in this view, it is
easyto see that one nation may be guilty of the sins of another nation.
(N. Emmons, D. D.)
The heinous guilt of taking pleasure in other men's sins
R. South, D. D.
From the beginning of ver. 18 to the end of ver. 31 we have an abridgment of
the lives and practices of the whole heathen world. And yet, as comprehensive
as this catalogue ofsin is, it is but of sin under a limitation; sins of direct and
personalcommission. Is not this a sufficient comprehension? Foris not a
man's person the compass ofhis actions? Or, canhe operate further than he
does exist? Yes; he may not only commit sins, but also take pleasure in the
sins of others. Which implies, first, that thus to take pleasure in other men's
sins is a distinct sin from all the former; and, secondly, that it is much greater
— the furthest that human pravity can reach. Forsurely, that sin that exceeds
idolatry, monstrous unnatural lusts, etc., must needs be such a one as must
nonplus the devil himself to proceedfurther.
I. WHAT IT IS THAT BRINGS A MAN TO SUCH A DISPOSITIONOF
MIND AS TO TAKE PLEASURE IN OTHER MEN'S SINS.
1. In order to show this I shall premise —(1) That every man naturally has a
distinguishing sense ofwhat is fit, and what is not fit to be done — the candle

of the Lord, which discovers to him both what he is to do and what to
avoid.(2) That there is consequentlyupon this an inward satisfaction, or
dissatisfaction, aftera good or an evil action. And this, no doubt, proceeds not
only from the realunsuitableness of sin to the nature of man, but also from a
foreboding fear, that evil will follow the doing of that which conscience
disallows, which, no question, is the voice of God Himself, speaking in the
hearts of men, and by secretintimations giving the sinner a foretaste of that
direful cup, which he is like to drink more deeply hereafter.(3)That this
distinguishing sense ofgoodand evil, and this satisfactionand dissatisfaction
is a principle not easilyextinguished. It is founded in nature, and the great
important end that God designs it for shows the necessityof its being put
beyond the danger of being torn up by ordinary violence.(4)That that which
weakensthis principle is an inferior, sensitive principle, which receives its
gratifications from objects cleancontrary to the former, and which affecta
man much more warmly and vividly than those which affectonly his nobler
part, his mind.
2. From these considerations we naturally infer —(1) That no man is easily
brought to take a full pleasure in his own sins. For though sin offers itself in
never so alluring a dress at first, yet the remorse of the soul, upon the
commissionof it, infinitely overbalances those transientgratifications it
affords the senses. The fine colours of the serpentby no means make amends
for the smart and poison of his sting.(2)That as no man is easilybrought to
take a full pleasure in his own sins, so much less easilycan he be brought to
take pleasure in those of others. The reasonis because the chief motive that
induces a man to sin — the gratification of his sensitive part — cannotbe had
from the sins of another. For certainly another man's intemperance cannot
affectmy sensualityany more than the meat and drink that I take into my
mouth canplease his palate.
3. What, then, are the causes that corrupt the mind of man as to take pleasure
in other men's sins?(1)A commissionof the same sins. This is imported in the
words, "They not only do the same things." It is acquaintance that must give
delight in actions, as wellas in persons. And it is trial that must begin the
acquaintance. None look with so much pleasure upon the works ofart as
artists. In like manner no sober man canlook with complacencyon

drunkenness. No; he must first be a practitioner. It is possible, indeed, that a
soberor a chaste person, through ill will, envy, or spiritual pride, may be glad
to see the intemperance and debauchery of some about him, but he rejoices
not in it, as in a delightful object, but as in a means of his neighbour's ruin.(2)
A commissionof them againstthe convictionof conscience.The persons
chargedin the text are such "as knew the judgment of God, that they who
committed such things were worthy of death," such as broke through all
mounds of law, and laughed at the sword of vengeance,whichDivine justice
brandished in their faces. ForGod has set a flaming swordnot only before
paradise, but before hell; and conscience is the angelinto whose hand this
swordis put. But if now the sinner shall not only wrestle with this angel, but
throw him too, his heart lies open, like a broad road, for all the sin in the
world freely to pass through.(3) Continuance in them. ForGod forbid that
every single commissionof a sin should so far deprave the soul and bring it to
such a condition. David and Petersinned againstthe dictates of their
conscience;yet we do not find that either of them delighted in their own sins,
and much less in other men's. Before a man cancome to be pleasedwith sin,
because he sees his neighbour commit it, he must have had such a long
acquaintance with it as to create a kind of friendship; and we know a man is
naturally glad to see his old friend wheresoeverhe meets him. It is generally
the property of an old sinner to find a delight in reviewing his own villainies in
the practice of other men. An old wrestlerloves to look on the lists, though
feebleness willnot let him offer at the prize. An old huntsman finds a music in
the noise of hounds, though he cannot follow the chase. An old drunkard loves
a tavern, though he cannot go to it, but as he is supported by another, just as
some are observedto come from thence. And an old wantonwill be doting
upon women when he can scarce seethem without spectacles. Theirgreat
concernis, that the vice may still go on.(4) That meanness and poor
spiritedness that naturally and inseparably accompanies allguilt. Whosoever
is conscious ofsin, feels, whether he will own it or not, shame and depression
of spirit. And this is so irksome that he is restless to rid himself from it; for
which he finds no way so effectualas to getcompany in the same sin. A vicious
person, like the basestsortof beasts, neverenjoys himself but in the herd.
Company, he thinks, abates the torrent of a common odium by deriving it into
many channels; and, therefore, if he cannotwholly avoid the eye of the

observer, he hopes to distract it at leastby a multiplicity of the object.(5)A
certain, peculiar, unaccountable malignity. This we see in those who secretly
rejoice when they hear of the calamity of their neighbour, though no
imaginable interest canbe servedthereby. And as this occurs in temporals, so
there is no doubt but that with some it acts the same way also in spirituals. So
he acted who made a poor captive renounce his religion, in order to the saving
of his life; and when he had so done, presently ran him through, glorying that
he had thereby destroyedhis enemy, both body and soul.
II. THE REASONS A MAN'S BEING DISPOSEDTO DO SO COMES TO
BE ATTENDEDWITH SUCH AN EXTRAORDINARYGUILT.
1. That naturally there is no motive to tempt a man to it. The lesserthe
temptation the greaterthe sin. For in every sin, the freer the will the more
sinful the act. If the objectbe extremely pleasing, though the will has still a
powerof refusing it, yet it is not without some difficulty. Now this pleasure
springs from the gratification of some desire founded in nature. An irregular
gratificationit is often; yet still the foundation of it is, and must be, something
natural. Thus drunkenness is an irregular satisfactionofthe appetite of thirst;
and covetousnessa boundless, unreasonable pursuit of the principle of self-
preservation. There is hardly any one vice but what is the abuse of one of
those two grand natural principles; namely, that which inclines a man to
preserve himself, or to please himself. But now, what is, or can be, gratified by
another man's pursuit of his own vice? All the pleasure that naturally can be
receivedfrom a vicious actioncan immediately affectnone but him who does
it. And therefore the delight that a man takes for another's sin canbe nothing
else but a fantastical, preternatural love of vice, as such, a delighting in sin for
its own sake. "Ifa man plays the thief," says Solomon, "and steals to satisfy
his hunger," though it cannot wholly excuse the fact, yet it sometimes
extenuates the guilt. But when a man shall, with a sober, diabolical rancour,
enjoy himself in the sight of his neighbour's sin and shame, can he plead the
instigation of any appetite in nature inclining him to this? No, for he may as
well carry his eyes in another man's head, and run races with another man's
feet, as directly and naturally taste the pleasures that spring from the
gratificationof another man's appetites. Norcan that person, who accounts it
his recreationto see a man wallowing in his filthy revels, allege for a reasonof

his so doing that it leaves the leastrelish upon the tip of his tongue. What can
we then assignfor the cause ofthis monstrous disposition? Why, that the devil
and long customof sinning have superinduced upon the soul new, unnatural,
and absurd desires, that relish things not at all desirable. In fine, there is as
much difference betweenthe pleasure a man takes in his own sins, and that
which he takes in other men's, as there is betweenthe wickedness ofa man
and the wickedness ofa devil.
2. A secondreasonis, from the boundless nature of this wayof sinning. For by
this a man contracts a kind of a universal guilt, and, as it were, sins overthe
sins of others; so that while the actis theirs, the guilt of it is equally his.
Personalpowers and opportunities of sinning comparatively are not great; for
at greatest, they must still be limited by the measure of a man's acting, and the
term of his duration. But now, for the way of sinning which we have been
speaking of, it is neither confined by place nor weakenedby age;but the
bedrid and the lethargic may, upon this account, equalthe activity of the
strongestsinner. A man, by delight and fancy, may graspin the sins of
countries and ages, andby an inward liking of them communicate in their
guilt.
3. It presupposes and includes in it the guilt of many preceding sins. For a
man must have passedmany periods of sin before he can arrive to it, and have
served a long apprenticeship to the devil before he can come to such a
perfection and maturity in vice as this imports. It is the wickednessofa whole
life, discharging all its foulness into this one quality, as into a greatsink. So
that nothing is, or can be, so properly and significantly calledthe "very
sinfulness of sin," as this.
III. WHAT KIND OF PERSONSARE TO BE RECKONED UNDER THIS
CHARACTER? In generalwhosoeverdraws others to sin. But to
particularise —
1. Those who teachdoctrines directly tending to a sinful course (Matthew
5:19; cf. 15:5, 6). Now these are of two sorts.(1) Such as representactions that
are sinful, as not so — e.g., Antinomians, who assertthat believers cannot

sin.(2) Such as represent many sins much less than they are — e.g., those who
assertthat all sins committed by believers to be but infirmities.
2. Such as endeavour to allure men to sin, either by formal persuasions
(Proverbs 7:13-22), or by administering objects and occasions fit to draw
forth a man's corrupt affections;such as are the inflaming of a choleric
person into a fit of rage againsthis neighbour, the provoking of a lustful
person by filthy discourse, books, andpictures.
3. Such as affectthe company of vicious persons. Forotherwise, what is there
in such men, which they can pretend to be pleasedwith? For generallysuch
sots have neither parts nor wits. It is clear, therefore, that where a man can
like the conversationof debauched persons, amidst all the natural grounds of
dislike, it can proceedfrom nothing but the inward affectionhe bears to their
lewd humour. It is this he enjoys; and for the sake ofthis the rest he endures.
4. Such as encourage men in their sins. This may be done —(1) By
commendation. No man commends another any further than he likes him. He
who writes an encomium Neronis is but a transcript of Nero. From whence we
see the reasonof some men's giving such honourable names and appellations
to the worstof men and actions, and base, reproachful titles to the best.(2)By
preferment. None certainly can love to see vice in power, but such as love to
see it also in practice.
IV. THE EFFECTSOF THIS SIN.
1. Upon particular persons.(1)It quite alters and depraves the natural frame
of a man's heart.(2)It peculiarly indisposes a man to repent and recover
himself from it. Forthe first step to repentance is a man's dislike of his sin;
and how canwe expectthat a man should dislike that which has takensuch
possessionofhis affections, that he loves it, not only in his own practice, but
also in other men's?(3) The longera man lives the wickederhe grows, and his
last days are certainly his worst. To delight in other men's sins is most
properly the vice of old age, and may be truly calledthe old age of vice. For,
as first, old age necessarilyimplies a man's having lived many years, and
withal, this sort of viciousness supposesthe precedentcommissionof many
sins, so it has this further property that, as when a man comes once to be old,

he grows every day older and older; so when a man comes to such a degree of
wickedness, as to delight in the wickednessofothers, it is more than ten
thousand to one if he ever returns to a better mind. Tiberius is a notable
instance, who was bad enough in his youth, but monstrously so in his old age;
and the reasonof this was because he took a particular pleasure in seeing
other men do vile things. And, therefore, let not men flatter themselves that
though they find it difficult to combat an ill practice, yet that old age shalldo
that for them which they in their youth could never find in their heart to do
for themselves, fora habit may continue when it is no longerable to act. The
longera blot continues the deeper it sinks. And it will be found a work of no
small difficulty to dispossess andthrow out a vice from that heart where long
possessionbegins to plead prescription.(4)Many perish eternally who never
arrived at such a pitch of wickedness as to take any pleasure in, or indeed to
be at all concernedabout, the sins of other men. But they perish in the pursuit
of their own lusts, and often not without a considerable mixture of dislike of
themselves for what they do.
2. Upon communities. Some men's taking pleasure in other men's sins will
cause many men to sin to do them a pleasure, for —(1) It is seldomor never
that any man comes to such a degree of impiety as to take pleasure in other
men's sins, but he also shows the world, by his actions and behaviour, that he
does so.(2)There are few men in the world so inconsiderable, but there are
some who have an interest to serve by them.(3) The natural course that one
man takes to serve his interest by another is by applying himself to him in
such a way as may most gratify and delight him.
(R. South, D. D.).
The Witness of the Resurrection
Alexander Maclaren
Romans 1:4

And declaredto be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of
holiness, by the resurrectionfrom the dead:
Declaredto be the Son of God with power, ... by the resurrectionof the dead.'
-- ROMANS i.4 (R.V.).
It is a greatmistake to treat Paul's writings, and especiallythis Epistle, as
mere theology. They are the transcript of his life's experience. As has been
well said, the gospelof Paul is an interpretation of the significance ofthe life
and work of Jesus basedupon the revelation to him of Jesus as the risen
Christ. He believed that he had seenJesus on the road to Damascus, andit
was that appearance whichrevolutionised his life, turned him from a
persecutorinto a disciple, and united him with the Apostles as ordained to be
a witness with them of the Resurrection. To them all the Resurrectionof Jesus
was first of all a historical factappreciatedchiefly in its bearing on Him. By
degrees they discernedthat so transcendent a factbore in itself a revelationof
what would become the experience of all His followers beyond the grave, and
a symbol of the presentlife possible for them. All three of these aspects are
plainly declaredin Paul's writings. In our text it is chiefly the first which is
made prominent. All that distinguishes Christianity; and makes it worth
believing, or mighty, is inseparably connectedwith the Resurrection.
I. The Resurrectionof Christ declares His Sonship.
Resurrectionand Ascensionare inseparably connected. Jesus does notrise to
share againin the ills and wearinessofhumanity. Risen, 'He dieth no more;
death hath no more dominion over Him.' 'He died unto sin once';and His
risen humanity had nothing in it on which physical death could lay hold. That
He should from some secludeddimple on Olivet ascendbefore the gazing

disciples until the bright cloud, which was the symbol of the Divine Presence,
receivedHim out of their sight, was but the end of the process whichbegan
unseen in morning twilight. He laid aside the garments of the grave and
passedout of the sepulchre which was made sure by the greatstone rolled
againstits mouth. The grand avowaloffaith in His Resurrectionloses
meaning, unless it is completed as Paul completed his 'yea rather that was
raisedfrom the dead,' with the triumphant 'who is at the right hand of God.'
Both are supernatural, and the Virgin Birth corresponds atthe beginning to
the supernatural Resurrectionand Ascensionat the close. Bothsuchan
entrance into the world and such a departure from it, proclaim at once His
true humanity, and that 'this is the Son of God.'
Still further, the Resurrectionis God's solemn'Amen' to the tremendous
claims which Christ had made. The fact of His Resurrection, indeed, would
not declare His divinity; but the Resurrectionof One who had spokensuch
words does. If the Cross and a nameless grave had been the end, what a
reductio ad absurdum that would have been to the claims of Jesus to have
ever been with the Father and to be doing always the things that pleasedHim.
The Resurrectionis God's lastand loudest proclamation, 'This is My beloved
Son: hear ye Him.' The Psalmistof old had learnedto trust that his sonship
and consecrationto the Fathermade it impossible that that Father should
leave his soulin Sheol, or suffer one who was knit to Him by such sacred
bonds to see corruption; and the unique Sonship and perfect self-consecration
of Jesus wentdown into the grave in the assuredconfidence, as He Himself
declared, that the third day He would rise again. The old alternative seems to
retain all its sharp points: Either Christ rose againfrom the dead, or His
claims are a series of blasphemous arrogancesand His characterirremediably
stained.
But we may also remember that Scripture not only represents Christ's
Resurrectionas a divine act but also as the actof Christ's own power. In His
earthly life He assertedthat His relation both to physical death and to

resurrectionwas an entirely unique one. 'I have power,' said He, 'to lay down
my life, and I have powerto take it again'; and yet, even in this tremendous
instance of self-assertion, He remains the obedient Son, for He goes onto say,
'This commandment have I receivedof My Father.'If these claims are just,
then it is vain to stumble at the miracles which Jesus did in His earthly life. If
He could strip it off and resume it, then obviously it was not a life like other
men's. The whole phenomenon is supernatural, and we shall not be in the true
position to understand and appreciate it and Him until, like the doubting
Thomas, we fall at the feetof the risen Son, and breathe out loyalty and
worship in that rapturous exclamation, 'My Lord and my God.'
II. The Resurrectioninterprets Christ's Death.
There is no more striking contrastthan that betweenthe absolute non-
receptivity of the disciples in regardto all Christ's plain teachings about His
death and their clearperception after Pentecostof the mighty powerthat lay
in it. The very factthat they continued disciples at all, and that there
continued to be such a community as the Church, demands their belief in the
Resurrectionas the only cause which canaccountfor it. If He did not rise
from the dead, and if His followers did not know that He did so by the plainest
teachings of common-sense,they ought to have scattered, andborne in
isolatedhearts the bitter memories of disappointed hopes; for if He lay in a
nameless grave, and they were not sure that He was risen from the dead, His
death would have been a conclusive showing up of the falsity of His claims. In
it there would have been no atoning power, no triumph over sin. If the death
of Christ were not followedby His Resurrectionand Ascension, the whole
fabric of Christianity falls to pieces. As the Apostle puts it in his greatchapter
on resurrection, 'Ye are yet in your sins.' The forgiveness whichthe Gospel
holds forth to men does not depend on the mercy of God or on the mere
penitence of man, but upon the offering of the one sacrifice for sins in His
death, which is justified by His Resurrectionas being acceptedby God. If we

cannot triumphantly proclaim 'Christ is risen indeed,' we have nothing worth
preaching.
We are told now that the ethics of Christianity are its vital centre, which will
stand out more plainly when purified from these mystical doctrines of a Death
as the sin-offering for the world, and a Resurrectionas the greattokenthat
that offering avails. Paul did not think so. To him the morality of the Gospel
was all deduced from the life of Christ the Sonof God as our Example, and
from His death for us which touches men's hearts and makes obedience to
Him our joyful answerto what He has done for us. Christianity is a new thing
in the world, not as moral teaching, but as moral power to obey that teaching,
and that depends on the Cross interpreted by the Resurrection. If we have
only a dead Christ, we have not a living Christianity.
III. Resurrectionpoints onwards to Christ's coming again.
Paul at Athens declaredin the hearing of supercilious Greek philosophers,
that the Jesus, whom he proclaimed to them, was 'the Man whom God had
ordained to judge the world in righteousness,'andthat 'He had given
assurance thereofunto all men, in that He raisedHim from the dead.' The
Resurrectionwas the beginning of the process which, from the human point of
view, culminated in the Ascension. Beyondthe Ascensionstretches the
supernatural life of the glorified Son of God. Olivet cannot be the end, and the
words of the two men in white apparel who stoodamongstthe little group of
the upward gazing friends, remain as the hope of the Church: 'This same
Jesus shallso come in like manner as ye have seenHim go into heaven.' That
greatassurance implies a visible corporealreturn locallydefined, and having
for its purpose to complete the work which Incarnation, Death, Resurrection,
and Ascension, eachadvanceda stage. The Resurrectionis the corner-stone of
the whole Christian faith. It seals the truths that Jesus is the Son of God with
power, that He died for us, that He has ascendedon high to prepare a place

for us, that He will come againand take us to Himself. If we, by faith in Him,
take for ours the women's greeting on that Easter morning, 'The Lord hath
risen indeed,' He will come to us with His own greeting, 'Peacebe unto you.'
Paul's Separation
T. Robinson, D. D.
Romans 1:1-7
Paul, a servantof Jesus Christ, calledto be an apostle, separatedto the gospel
of God,…
I. WHAT. Set apart to a specialpurpose, sanctified (Jeremiah1:5).
II. HOW.
1. In God's purpose from the womb (Galatians 1:15).
2. Actually and generallyat his conversion(Acts 9:15).
3. Speciallyas apostle of the Gentiles at Antioch (Acts 13:2). The first
separationprecededthe call;the others followed it. Before his conversionPaul
separatedhimself and became a Pharisee;after it he was separatedby God
and became a Christian and an apostle. The first separationby human pride;
the secondby Divine grace.

III. WHAT TO.
1. The gospel.
(1) Goodnews (Luke 2:10) concerning Christ and His salvation.
(2) Foretoldby Isaiahunder this term (Isaiah 52:7; Romans 10:15).
(3) Called gospel —
(a) Of the kingdom (Matthew 4:2).
(b) Of the grace of God(Acts 20:24).
(c) Of salvation (Ephesians 1:13).
(d) Of peace (Ephesians 6:15).
(e) Glorious of the blessedGod (1 Timothy 1:11).
(f) Everlasting (Revelation14:6).

(4) It is goodnews in respectto past, present, and future.
2. Of God. God is its Author and subjectmatter (John 3:16). It is the product
of His wisdom and love (Ephesians 3:10; Titus 3:4). Hence —
(1) Its excellence,preciousness,and authority; for the gospelof God must be
—
(a) True;
(b) Important;
(c) Full of authority.
(2) The guilt and danger of neglecting it (Hebrews 12:25;1 Thessalonians 4:8;
Luke 10:16).
(3) God speaks in the gospel, therefore it must be heard with —
(a) Earnestness;
(b) Reverence;
(c) Thankfulness.

(d) Obedience.
(T. Robinson, D. D.)
The Characterizationof The Gospelof God, to Which Paul was Separated
T.F. Lockyer
Romans 1:2-4
(Which he had promised before by his prophets in the holy scriptures,)
The awfulness of a commissionof doom. Jonah. But to herald forth God's
goodtidings to a sorrowing world! This is the crownof all Christian ministry.
The angels might wellsing and be glad when ushering this gospelinto the
world (Luke 2:9-14); and Paul is rejoicedthat he canstrike this note of
gladness. There might wellbe preludes to this burst of joy: so the words,
"which he promised afore," etc. For all the indications of God's purposes of
love, from Genesis 3. to Malachi, did but prepare the way for the completed
announcement in "the fulness of the time." And so virtually they all were
Divine promises of a fuller gospel. The two main thoughts - God's gospel;its
contents.
I. GOD'S GOSPEL.

1. A gospelcarries the implication of a want, and, it may be, of a sorrow and a
loss. So do the goodtidings of God to man assume that man has lost his God,
and with God all things good.
(1) Man knew not, surely, the reality of his sin; was deceivedby the tempter;
but awokefrom his dream to find that God was gone!And this is the great
loss of the world. Tim voices cry, "Where is thy God?" And he? The Good
One - the light, the joy, the song of his creation. So man has blotted out his
own heavens, and the earth thereby has lostits lustre and its grace.
(2) But the estrangedGodis a condemning God. He may not abdicate his
essentialrelationshipto the world as God, and if the love be lost it is replaced
by wrath! So man's consciencetestifies:stricken, sore, andbleeding.
2. A gospelcarries the implication of a desire to have the want supplied, the
sorrow and the loss removed. So man's sin has not hopelesslyruined him, else
there could be no salvation. Roomfor God to work, and God does work.
(1) The historical preparation: God teaching the world to desire salvation.
The Jews by direct dealings, a positive discipline; the Gentiles by indirect, a
negative discipline. So, "the desire of all nations."
(2) The individual preparation: God's Spirit in the heart. Only the grace of
God can bring us to God. And now God's gospelmeans, in general, that the
condemning God will pardon, and the estrangedGodbe a Father and a
Friend again;that the yearnings towards himself which he has called forth
shall thus find their full satisfaction, which is nothing other than the peace of
forgiveness and the joy of adopting love.

II. ITS CONTENTS. Butthis generalmessagehas specialterms. God's love is
manifested, proved, accomplished, in his Son.
1. "His Son." Forit is God's own love, his other self, which stoops to save us.
Let us hold fast to this, for herein is the supreme pledge of our salvation.
2. His Son becomes "Jesus Christour Lord."
(1) By the assumption of human nature. "Bornof the seedof David according
to the flesh." That it may be one of ourselves who saves us. (a) A Man, making
atonement to God for men; (b) a human High Priestand Captain of salvation,
himself "perfectthrough sufferings," and therefore "touched with the feeling
of our infirmities" - the oneness with human-kind necessaryforboth the
Godwardand the manward aspects ofthe redeeming work. A Son of David,
according to mere historicallineage and localappearance:"for salvationis of
the Jews."But, grander and more royal than this, a Sonof man - the Son of
man, in his true human fashioning and for his world-wide work (Hebrews
2:14).
(2) By the glorification of human nature. "Declaredto be the Sonof God with
power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection of the dead." A
Redeemerof men must asserttheir redemption in his own Personfirst. "We
see not yet all things put under him [i.e. man]. But we see Jesus... crowned
with glory and honour" (Hebrews 2:8, 9), the archetypal Man. His
resurrection, which the apostle here links on to its world-wide correlative and
consequence,"the resurrectionof the dead," demonstrates the redemptive
powerof Jesus, who is therefore the Christ, our Lord, and therefore Son of
God; for only he who has life in himself can give life to dying men - life from
the death of sin, life from all death which sin has more indirectly wrought. Oh,
let us hearkento such a gospel!God's goodnews to a dying world, spoken

forth with all the powerof One who was God's very Son, and with all the
tender sympathy of One who is our very Brother. And for a proper
hearkening to this goodnews may God, in his love, prepare our hearts! -
T.F.L. '
STUDYLIGHT RESOURCES
Explanatory - Unabridged • Ellicott's Commentary • Treasury of Knowledge •
Hodge's Commentary
Other Authors
Range Specific
BirdgewayBible Commentary
Constable's ExpositoryNotes
Expositor's Greek Testament
Meyer's Commentary
Gaebelein's Annotated
Everett's Study Notes
Meyer's Commentary
Mahan's Commentary
The Bible Study New Testament
Ironside's Notes
Beet's Commentary on the New Testament
Gray's Commentary

Kretzmann's Popular Commentary of the Bible
Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures
Wells of Living Water
Henry's Complete
Henry's Concise
Peake'sBible Commentary
Preacher's HomileticalCommentary
Hawker's PoorMan's Commentary
People's New Testament
Benson's Commentary
Spurgeon's Verse Expositions
Biblical Illustrator
Expositor's Bible
Newell's Commentary
Chapter Specific
Adam Clarke Commentary
And declaredto be the Son of God - See the note on Acts 13:33, where this
subject is consideredat large. The word ορισθεντος, which we render
declared, comes from οριζω, to bound, define, determine, or limit, and hence
our 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 subjectas to render it indubitable.
The resurrectionof 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.

With power - εν δυναμει, With a miraculous display of Divine energy; for,
how could his body be raised again, but by the miraculous energy of God?
Some apply the word here to the proof of Christ's sonship; as if it were said
that he was most manifestly declaredto be the Son of God, with such powerful
evidence and argument as to render the truth irresistible.
According to the spirit of holiness - There are many differences of sentiment
relative to the meaning of this phrase in this place; some supposing that the
spirit of holiness implies the Divine nature of Jesus Christ; others, his
immaculate sanctity, etc. To me it seems that the apostle simply means that
the personcalled Jesus, latelycrucified at Jerusalem, and in whose name
salvationwas preachedto the world, was the Son of God, the very Messiah
promised before in the holy Scriptures;and that he was this Messiahwas
amply demonstrated.
1st, By his resurrectionfrom the dead, the irrefragable proof of his purity,
innocence, and the Divine approbation; for, had he been a malefactor, as the
Jews pretended, the miraculous powerof God would not have been exerted in
raising his body from the dead.
2nd, He was proved to be the Sonof God, the promised Messiah, by the Holy
Spirit, (called here the spirit of holiness), which he sent down upon his
apostles, andnot on them only, but on all that believed on his name; by whose
influence multitudes were convinced of sin, righteousness, andjudgment, and
multitudes sanctifiedunto God; and it was by the peculiar unction of this
spirit of holiness, that the apostles gave witness ofthe resurrectionof the Lord
Jesus, Acts 4:33.
Thus, then, Christ was proved to be the true Messiah, the sonof David
according to the flesh, having the sole right to the throne of Israel;and God
recognizedthis character, and this right, by his resurrectionfrom the dead,

and sending forth the various gifts and graces ofthe Spirit of holiness in his
name.
Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.
Bibliography
Clarke, Adam. "Commentary on Romans 1:4". "The Adam Clarke
Commentary". https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/acc/romans-
1.html. 1832.
return to 'Jump List'
Albert Barnes'Notes onthe Whole Bible
And declared- In the margin, “determined.” Τοῦ ὁρισθέντος Tou
horisthentosThe ancientSyriac has, “And he was knownto be the Son of God
by might and by the Holy Spirit, who rose from the house of the dead.” The
Latin Vulgate, “Who was “predestinated” the Son of God,” etc. The Arabic,
“The Son of God destined by powerspecialto the Holy Spirit,” etc. The word
translated “declaredto be” means properly “to bound, to fix limits to,” as to a
field, to determine its proper limits or boundaries, to “define,” etc. Acts 17:26,
“and hath determined the bounds of their habitation.” Hence, it means to
determine, constitute; ordain, decree;i, e. to fix or designate the proper
boundaries of a truth, or a doctrine; to distinguish its lines and marks from
error; or to show, or declare a thing to be so by any action. Luke 22:22, “the
Son of man goethas it was determined, as it was fixed; purposed, defined, in
the purpose of God, and declaredin the prophets. Acts 2:23, “him being
delivered by the determinate counsel, the definite. constituted will, or design,
of God. Acts 11:29;Hebrews 4:7, “he limiteth a certain day,” fixes it, defines
it. In this sense it is clearly used in this place. The act of raising him from the
dead designatedhim, or constitutedhim the Son of God. It was suchan actas
in the circumstances ofthe case showedthat he was the Sonof Godin regard
to a nature which was not “according to the flesh.” The ordinary resurrection

of a man, like that of Lazarus, would not show that he was the Son of God;
but in the circumstances ofJesus Christ it did; for he had claimed to be so; he
had taught it; and God now attestedthe truth of his teaching by raising him
from the dead.
The Son of God - The word “son” is used in a greatvariety of senses, denoting
literally a son, then a descendant, posterity near or remote, a disciple or ward,
an adopted son, or one that imitates or resembles another;see the note at
Matthew 1:1. The expression“sons ofGod,” or “sonof God,” is used in an
almost equal latitude of signification. It is:
(1) Applied to Adam, as being immediately createdby God without an earthly
father; Luke 3:38.
(2) it is applied to saints or Christians, as being adopted into his family, and
sustaining to him the relation of children; John 1:12-13;1 John 3:1-2, etc.
This name is given to them because they resemble him in their moral
character;Matthew 5:45.
(3) it is given to strong men as resembling God in strength; Genesis 6:2, “The
sons of God saw the daughters of men,” etc. Here these men of violence and
strength are calledsons of God, just as the high hills are calledhills of God,
the lofty trees of Lebanon are calledcedars of God, etc.
(4) kings are sometimes calledhis sons, as resembling him in dominion and
power, Psalm 82:6.
(5) the name is given to angels because theyresemble God; because he is their
Creatorand Father, etc., Job 1:6; Job 2:1; Daniel3:25.
But the name the “Sonof God” is in the New Testamentgivenby way of
eminence to the Lord Jesus Christ. This was the common and favorite name
by which the apostles designatedhim. The expression“Sonof God” is applied
to him no less than 27 times in the Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles, and
15 times in the Epistles and the RevelationThe expressionmy Son, and his
Son, thy Son, etc. is applied to him in his specialrelation to God, times almost
without number. The other most common appellation which is given to him is
“Sonof man.” By this name he commonly designatedhimself. There can be no

doubt that that was assumedto denote that he was a man, that he sustaineda
specialrelation to man, and that he chose to speak ofhimself as a man. The
first, the most obvious, impression on the use of the name “Sonof man” is that
he was truly a man, and was useddoubtless to guard againstthe impression
that one who manifested so many other qualities, and did so many things like
a celestialbeing, was not truly human being.
The phrase “Son of God” stands in contrastwith the title “Sonof man,” and
as the natural and obvious import of that is that he was a man, so the natural
and obvious import of the title “Sonof God” is that he was divine; or that he
sustainedrelations to God designatedby the name Sonof God, corresponding
to the relations which he sustainedto man designatedby the name Son of
Man. The natural idea of the phrase, “Sonof God,” therefore is, that he
sustaineda relation to Godin his nature which implied more than was human
or angelic;which implied equality with God. Accordingly, this idea was
naturally suggestedto the Jews by his calling God his Father;John 5:18, “But
said also that God was his Father, “making himself equal with God.” This
idea Jesus immediately proceededto confirm; see the note at John 5:19-30.
The same idea is also suggestedin John 10:29-31, John10:33, John10:36,
“Sayye of him whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world,
Thou blasphemest: “becauseI said I am the Son of God?” There is in these
places the fullest proof that the title suggestednaturally the idea of equality
with God; or the idea of his sustaining a relation to God corresponding to the
relation of equality to man suggestedby the title Son of man.
This view is still further sustainedin the first chapterof the Epistle to the
Hebrews, Romans 1:1-2, “Godhath spokenunto us by His Son.” He is the
brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, Romans 1:3. He is
higher than the angels, and they are required to worship him, Romans 1:4-6.
He is called“God,” and his throne is forever and ever, Romans 1:8. He is “the
Creatorof the heavens and the earth,” and is immutably the same, Romans
1:10-12. Thus, the rank or title of the “Sonof God” suggests the ideas and
attributes of the Divinity. This idea is sustainedthroughout the New
Testament. See John14:9, “He that hath seenme hath seenthe Father;”
Romans 1:23, “Thatall men shall honor the Son even as they honor the
Father;” Colossians1:19, “It hath pleasedthe Father that in him should all

fulness dwell;” Colossians 2:9, “Forin him dwelleth all the fulness of the
Godheadbodily:” Philemon 2:2-11;Revelation5:13-14;Revelation2:23. It is
not affirmed that this title was given to the secondpersonof the Trinity before
he became incarnate; or to suggestthe idea of any derivation or extraction
before he was made flesh. There is no instance in which the appellation is not
conferredto express his relation after he assumedhuman flesh. Of any
derivation from God, or emanationfrom him in eternity, the Scriptures are
silent. The title is conferredon him, it is supposed, with reference to his
condition in this world, as the Messiah. And it is conferred, it is believed, for
the following reasons, orto denote the following things, namely.
(1) to designate his unique relation to God, as equal with him, John 1:14, John
1:18; Matthew 11:27; Luke 10:22;Luke 3:22; 2 Peter1:17, or as sustaining a
most intimate and close connectionwith him, such as neither man nor angels
could do, an acquaintance with his nature Matthew 11:27, plans, and counsels,
such as no being but one who was equal with God could possess. In this sense,
I regard it as conferredon him in the passage under consideration.
(2) it designateshim as the anointed king, or the Messiah. In this sense it
accords with the use of the word in Psalm 82:6. See Matthew 16:16, “Thou art
“the Christ, the Sonof the living God.” Matthew 26:63, “I adjure thee by the
living God, that thou tell us whether “thou be the Christ, the Sonof God.”
Mark 14:61; Luke 22:70;John 1:34; Acts 9:20, “he preachedChrist in the
synagogues, thathe is the Son of God.”
(3) it was conferredon him to denote his miraculous conceptionin the womb
of the Virgin Mary. Luke 1:35, “the Holy Ghostshall come upon thee,
therefore διό dioalso that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called
the “Sonof God.”
(It is readily admitted, that on the subject of the “eternalSonship” very much
has been said of an unintelligible kind. Terms applicable only to the relation
as it exists among people have been freely applied to this mystery. But
whatevermay be thought of such language as “the eternal generation,” “the
eternal procession,” and“the subordination” of the Son; the doctrine itself,
which this mode of speaking was invented to illustrate, and has perhaps

served to obscure, is in no way affected. The question is not, Have the friends
of the doctrine at all times employed judicious illustration? but, What is the
“Scripture evidence” on the point? If the eternal Sonship is to be discardedon
such grounds, we fear the doctrine of the Trinity must share a similar fate.
Yet, those who maintain the divinity of Christ, and notwithstanding deny the
eternal Sonship, seemgenerally to found their objections on these
incomprehensible illustrations, and from thence leap to the conclusionthat the
doctrine itself is false.
That the title Son of God, when applied to Jesus, denotes a natural and not
merely an official Sonship, a real and not a figurative relation; in other words,
that it takes originfrom the divine nature, is the view which the Catholic
Church has all along maintained on this subject: no explanation which falls
short of divinity will exhaust the meaning of the title. Christ is indeed called
the Sonof Godon accountof his miraculous conception;“That holy thing,”
said the angel to the Virgin, “whichshall be born of thee, shall be calledthe
Son of the Highest.” But the creationof Adam, by the immediate powerof
God, without father or mother, would constitute him the Son of God, in a
sense equally or even more exalted than that in which the title is applied to
Jesus, if the miraculous conceptionwere allowedto exhaust its meaning. Nor
will an appeal to the resurrectionof Christ serve the purpose of those who
deny the divine origin of the title, since that is assignedas the evidence only,
and not the ground of it.
The Redeemerwas not constituted, but declaredor evidenced to be, “the Son
of God with power by the resurrectionfrom the dead.” In the searchfor a
solution short of divine Sonship, recourse is next had to the office of Christ as
Mediator. Yet though the appellation in question be frequently given in
connectionwith the official characterof Jesus, a carefulexamination of some
of these passageswilllead to the conclusion, that “though the Son of God hold
the office, yet the office does not furnish the reasonor ground of the title.”
The name is given to distinguish Jesus from all others who have held office,
and “in such a way as to convince us that the office is rendered “honorable”
by the exalted personage discharging its duties, and not that the personmerits
the designationin virtue of the office.” “Whenthe fulness of the time was
come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman,” etc. “Godso loved the world

that he gave his “only begottenSon,” etc. Now the glory of the mission in the
first of these passages,and the greatness ofthe gift in the second, is founded
on the original dignity of the person sent and given. But if the person derive
his title from the office only, there would seemto be comparatively little
grandeur in the mission, and small favor in the gift. The passagesquoted
would more readily prove that God had bestowedfavor on Jesus, by giving
him an office from which he derived so much “personaldignity!”
The following are some of the passagesin which the appellation “Sonof God”
is found connectedwith the office of Christ. “These are written that ye might
believe that Jesus is the Christ, (an official term signifying “anointed
Saviour”), the Son of God;” “He answeredand said, I believe that Jesus
Christ (the official designation)is the Son of God;” “Whom say ye that I am?
And Simon Peter answeredand said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living
God” Now it is reasonable to suppose, that these declarations and confessions
concerning the person of Christ, contain not only an acknowledgmentof his
official character, but also of his personaldignity. “Thou art Jesus the
Christ,” is the acknowledgmentof his office, and “thou art the Sonof God,” is
an acknowledgmentofhis natural dignity. The confessionof the Ethiopian
eunuch, and of Peter, would be incomplete on any other supposition. It should
be borne in mind also, that the question of Christ to Peterwas not, What
office do ye suppose I hold? but, “Whom say ye that I am?” See Haldane on
Romans 1:4.
If, then, the miraculous conception, the resurrection, and the office of Christ,
do not all of them togetherexhaust the meaning of the appellation, we must
seek forits origin higher still - we must ascendto the divine nature. We may
indeed take one step more upward before we reachthe divine nature, and
suppose, with ProfessorStuartand others, that the name denotes “the
complex person of the Saviour,” as God and man, or in one word, “Mediator.”
Comment on Heb. Exe. 2. But this is just the old resolution of it into official
character, and is therefore liable to all the objections statedabove. Forwhile
it is admitted by those who hold this view, that Christ is divine, it is distinctly
implied, that the title Sonof God would not have been his but for his office.

In the end therefore we must resolve the name into the divine nature. That it
implies equality with God is clearlyproved in this commentary. So the Jews
understood it, and the Saviour tacitly admitted that their constructionwas
right. And as there is no equality with Godwithout divinity, the title clearly
points to such a distinction in the Godhead as is implied in the relative terms,
Father and Son. Indeed it is not easyto understand how the doctrine of the
Trinity canbe maintained apart from that of the eternalSonship. If there be
in the Godheada distinction of persons, does not that distinction belong to the
nature of the Godhead, independent of any officialrelations. Or will it be
maintained, that the distinction of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, arises entirely
from the scheme of redemption, and did not exist from eternity? We may find
fault with Dr Owen, and others, who speak of a “hypostaticalsubordination of
persons in the Godhead.” Prof. Stuart, Com. Heb. Exe. 1. Yet, the distinction
itself, through we cannot explain it, “must” be allowedto exist.
The remaining evidence of the eternal Sonship may be thus stated.
1. Christ is called God‘s “ownSon,” his “beloved,” and “wellbeloved,” and
“only begottenSon.‘ So strong and specialadjuncts seemintended to prevent
any such idea as that of figurative Sonship. If these do not express the natural
relationship, it is beyond the power of language to do it. Moreover, correct
criticism binds us to adopt the natural and ordinary significationof words,
unless in such casesas plainly refuse it,
2. In a passagealreadyquoted, God is said “to have sentforth His Son to
redeem us,” etc. And there are many passages to the same effect, in which is
revealed, not only the pre-existence ofChrist, but the capacityin which he
originally moved, and the rank which he held in heaven. “God sentforth his
Son,” implies that he held that title prior to his mission. This at leastis the
most obvious sense ofthe passage, andthe sense whichan ordinary reader
would doubtless affix to it. The following objection, however, has been
supposedfatal to this argument: “The name Son of God is indeed used, when
speaking ofhim previous to his having assumedhuman nature, but so are the
names of Jesus and the Christ, which yet we know properly to belong to him,
only as united to humanity.” It is readily allowedthat the simple fact of the
name being given prior to the incarnation proves nothing of itself. But the

case is altered when this factis viewed in connectionwith the difficulty or
impossibility of resolving the Sonship into an officialrelation. No such
difficulty exists in regardto the terms “Jesus” and“Christ,” for they are
plainly officialnames, signifying “anointed Saviour.”
3. Romans 1:3-4. If in this passagewe understand the apostle to declare, that
Christ was ofthe seedof David, according to his human nature, the rule of
antithesis demands, that we understand him next to assertwhathe was
according to his divine nature, namely, the Son of God.
The views given in this Note are those adopted by the most eminent orthodox
divines. The language of the Westminster divines is well known; “The only
Redeemerof the covenant of grace is the Lord Jesus Christ, who being the
eternal Sonof God, of one substance etc.” “LargerCatechism.”Mr. Scott“is
decidedly of opinion, that Christ is calledthe only Son of God in respectof his
divine nature.” Commentary, Hebrews 1:3-4.” The late Principal Hill, in his
TheologicalSystem, having exposedwhat he deemed erroneous views on this
subject, adds, “there is a more ancient and a more exaltedtitle to this name
(Son of God), which is inseparable from the nature” of Christ. “3rd edition,
vol. i., page 363.)”
With power - ἐν δυνάμει en dunameiBy some this expressionhas been
supposedto mean in power or authority, after his resurrection from the dead.
It is said, that he was before a man of sorrows; now he was clothedwith power
and authority. But I have seenno instance in which the expressionin power
denotes office, or authority. It denotes physical energy and might, and this
was bestowedonJesus before his resurrectionas well as after; Acts 10:38,
“Godanointed Jesus of Nazarethwith the Holy Spirit, and with power;
Romans 15:19; 1 Corinthians 15:43. With such powerJesus will come to
judgment: Matthew 24:30. If there is any passagein which the word “power”
means authority, office, etc., it is Matthew 28:18, “All power in heaven and
earth is given unto me.” But this is not a power which was given unto him
after his resurrection, or which he did not possessbefore. The same authority
to commissionhis disciples he had exercisedbefore this on the same ground,
Matthew 10:7-8. I am inclined to believe, therefore, that the expressionmeans
“powerfully, efficiently;” he was with greatpower, or conclusiveness,shown

to be the Son of God by his resurrectionfrom the dead. Thus, the phrase “in
power” is used to qualify a verb in Colossians 1:29, “Whichworkethin me
mightily,” “Greek,”in power, that is, operating in me effectually, or
powerfully. The ancient versions seemto have understood it in the same way.
“Syriac,” “He was knownto be the Son of God by power, and by the Holy
Spirit.” “AEthiopic,” “Whom he declaredto be the Son of God by his own
power, and by his Holy Spirit,” etc. “Arabic,” “Designatedthe Son of God by
powerappropriate to the Holy Spirit.”
According to the spirit of holiness - κατά πνεῦμα ἁγιωσύνης kata pneuma
hagiōsunēsThisexpressionhas been variously understood. We may arrive at
its meaning by the following considerations.
(1) it is not the third person in the Trinity that is referred to here. The
designationof that person is always in a different form. It is “the Holy Spirit,”
the Holy Ghost, πνεῦμα ἅγιονpneuma hagionor τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον to pneuma
to hagionnever“the spirit of holiness.”
(2) it stands in contrastwith the flesh; Romans 1:3, “According to the flesh,
the seedof David: according to the spirit of holiness, the Son of God.” As the
former refers doubtless to his human nature, so this must refer to the nature
designatedby the title Son of God, that is, to his superior or divine nature.
(3) the expressionis altogetherunique to the Lord Jesus Christ. No where in
the Scriptures, or in any other writings, is there an affirmation like this. What
would be meant by it if affirmed of a mere man?
(4) it cannotmean that the Holy Spirit, the third personin the Trinity, showed
that Jesus was the Son of God by raising him from the dead because that actis
no where attributed to him. It is uniformly ascribedeither to God, as God
Acts 2:24, Acts 2:32; Acts 3:15, Acts 3:26; Acts 4:10; Acts 5:30; Acts 10:40;
Acts 13:30, Acts 13:33-34;Acts 17:31; Romans 10:9; Ephesians 1:20, or to the
Father Romans 6:4, or to Jesus himself John 10:18. In no instance is this act
ascribedto the Holy Spirit.

(5) it indicates a state far more elevate than any human dignity, or honor In
regard to his earthly descent, he was of a royal race;in regard to the Spirit of
holiness, much more than that, he was the Son of God.
(6) the word “Spirit” is used often to designate God, the holy God, as
distinguished from all the material forms of idol worship, John 4:24.
(7) the word “Spirit” is applied to the Messiah, in his more elevatedor divine
nature. 1 Corinthians 15:45, “the last Adam was made a quickening Spirit.” 2
Corinthians 3:17, “now the Lord (Jesus)is that Spirit.” Hebrews 9:14, Christ
is said to have offered himself through the eternal Spirit. 1 Peter3:18, he is
said to have been “put to death in the flesh, but quickenedby the Spirit.” 1
Timothy 3:16, he is said to have been “justified in the Spirit.” In most of these
passagesthere is the same contrastnoticed betweenhis flesh, his human
nature, and his other state, which occurs in Romans 1:3-4. In all these
instances, the designis, doubtless, to speak of him as a man, and as something
more than a man: he was one thing as a man; he was another thing in his
other nature. In the one, he was of David; was put to death, etc. In the other,
he was of God, he was manifested to be such, he was restoredto the elevation
which he had sustainedbefore his incarnation and death, John 17:1-5;
Philemon 2:2-11. The expression, “according to the Spirit of holiness,” does
not indeed of itself imply divinity. It denotes that holy and more exalted
nature which he possessedas distinguished from the human. What that is, is
to be learnedfrom other declarations. “This expressionimplies simply that it
was such as to make proper the appellation, the Son of God.” Other places, as
we have seen, show that that designationnaturally implied divinity. And that
this was the true idea couchedunder the expression, according to the Spirit of
holiness, appears from those numerous texts of scripture which explicitly
asserthis divinity; see John 1:1, etc., and the note on that place.
By the resurrectionfrom the dead - This has been also variously understood.
Some have maintained that the word “by,” ἐξ exdenotes after. He was
declaredto be the Son of God in power after he rose from the dead; that is, he
was solemnly invested with the dignity that became the Son of God after he
had been so long in a state of voluntary humiliation. But to this view there are
some insuperable objections.

(1) it is not the natural and usual meaning of the word “by.”
(2) it is not the object of the apostle to state the time when the thing was done,
or the order, but evidently to declare the fact, and the evidence of the fact. If
such had been his design, he would have said that previous to his death he was
shown to be of the seedof David, but afterwardthat he was invested with
power.
(3) though it must be admitted that the preposition “by, ἐξ exsometimes means
after (Matthew 19:20; Luke 8:27; xxiii. 8, etc.), yet its proper and usual
meaning is to denote the efficient cause, orthe agent, or origin of a thing,
Matthew 1:3, Matthew 1:18; Matthew 21:25; John 3:5; Romans 5:16; Romans
11:36, “OF him are all things.” 1 Corinthians 8:6, “one God, the Father, of
whom are all things,” etc. In this sense, I suppose it is used here; and that the
apostle means to affirm that he was clearlyor decisivelyshown to be the Son
of God by his resurrectionfrom the dead.
But here will it be asked, how did his resurrectionshow this? Was not
Lazarus raisedfrom the dead? And did not many saints rise also after Jesus?
And were not the dead raised by the apostles;by Elijah, by the bones of
Elisha, and by Christ himself? And did their being raisedprove that they
were the sons of God? I answerthat the mere fact of the resurrectionof the
body proves nothing in itself about the characterand rank of the being that is
raised. But in the circumstances in which Jesus was placedit might show it
conclusively. When Lazarus was raised, it was not in attestationof anything
which he had taught or done. It was a mere display of the powerand
benevolence ofChrist. But in regardto the resurrectionof Jesus, let the
following circumstances be taken into the account.
(1) he came as the Messiah.
(2) he uniformly taught that he was the Son of God.
(3) he maintained that Godwas his Fatherin such a sense as to imply equality
with him, John 5:17-30;John 10:36.

(4) he claimed authority to abolish the laws of the Jews, to change their
customs, and to be himself absolvedfrom the observance ofthose laws, even
as his Fatherwas, Mark 2:28.
(5) when God raisedhim up therefore, it was not an ordinary event. It was “a
public attestation, in the face of the universe, of the truth of his claims to be
the Sonof God.” Godwould not sanction the doings and doctrines of an
impostor. And when, therefore he raised up Jesus, he, by this act, showedthe
truth of his claims, that he was the Sonof God.
Further, in the view of the apostles, the resurrection was intimately connected
with the ascensionand exaltationof Jesus. The one made the other certain.
And it is not improbable that when they spoke ofhis resurrection, they meant
to include, not merely that single act, but the entire series ofdoings of which
that was the first, and which was the pledge of the elevationand majestyof
the Sonof God. Hence, when they had proved his resurrection, they assumed
that all the others would follow. That involved and supposedall. And the
series, ofwhich that was the first, proved that he was the Son of God; see Acts
17:31, “He will judge the world in righteousness,by that man whom he hath
ordained, whereofhe hath given assurance to all people, “in that he hath
raisedhim from the dead.” The one involves the other; see Acts 1:6. Thus,
PeterActs 2:22-32 having proved that Jesus was raisedup, adds, Acts 2:33,
“therefore, being by the right hand exalted, he hath shed forth this,” etc.; and
Acts 2:36, “therefore, letall the house of Israelknow assuredly that God hath
made that same Jesus whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.”
This verse is a remarkable instance of the “apostle” Paul‘s manner of writing.
Having mentioned a subject, his mind seems to catchfire; he presents it in
new forms, and amplifies it, until he seems to forgetfor a time the subject on
which he was writing. It is from this cause that his writings abound so with
parentheses, and that there is so much difficulty in following and
understanding him.

Copyright Statement
Bibliography
Barnes, Albert. "Commentaryon Romans 1:4". "Barnes'Notes onthe New
Testament". https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/bnb/romans-
1.html. 1870.
Coffman's Commentaries on the Bible
Who was declaredto be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of
holiness, by the resurrectionfrom the dead; even Jesus Christour Lord.
This verse is the antithesis of the preceding verse, that dealing with the human
nature of Christ, and this with his heavenly nature.
Declaredto be the Son of God with power ... The key words in this passageare
"with power." It is not affirmed that Christ was declaredthe Sonof God,
merely, but that he was declaredso with power. As Greathouse expressedit:
Paul does not saythat Jesus was appointed Sonof Godbut that he was
appointed Sonof God with power. Nygrenbrings all these ideas into focus:
"To be sure, from the beginning, he was the Son of God, but in weaknessand
lowliness. The divine glory which formerly was hidden was manifest after the
resurrection. From that hour, he is the Son of God in a new sense:he is the
Son of God in power."[6]
According to the spirit of holiness ... By capitalizing "Spirit of holiness," the
RSV identifies the Spirit mentioned here as the Holy Spirit; and, although
Paul nowhere else uses this designationof the Holy Spirit, there seems to be no
goodreasonfor denying that he did so here. Certainly, it was by the powerof

the Holy Spirit that the gospelwas proclaimed, including the goodnews of the
resurrection, which is an essentialpart of it.
By the resurrectionfrom the dead ... should be translated"by the resurrection
of the dead," the change to "from" having been made by the translators for
the purpose of giving a more accurate presentationof what they consideredto
be the meaning, most of them thinking that the resurrectionof Christ was
referred to; but the alternative translation in the English RevisedVersion
(1885)margin is undoubtedly correct. This difficult passagewas translated
"afterthe resurrectionfrom the dead" by Luther, Erasmus, and others.[7]
Barrett translates it "after his resurrectionfrom the dead."[8]Greathouse,
however, protestedsuch translations, writing:
Literally the phrase means "resurrectionof those who are dead." Paul says
actually that Christ was designatedthe Son of God with power "by a
resurrectionof dead ones." Nygrenunderstands Paul to mean: "Through
Christ the resurrectionage has burst upon us."[9]
Whosoeverbelieves that Christ is the Son of God has passedfrom death unto
life (John 5:24), and thus the expression"resurrectionofthe dead" is the
reference to the power of the gospelto awakeninto new life them that were
formerly dead in trespassesand sins. Thin does not exclude the resurrection of
Christ, but goes beyond it to make the world-shaking powerof the gospelto
be included also as part of the declarative power demonstrating and
advertising Christ as Sonof God with power.
Any further pursuit of the meaning of this difficult phrase would only
multiply supporting reasons forvarious positions of scholars;and we shall,
accordingly, construe the place as ambiguous, perhaps designed that way by
the Holy Spirit, and content ourselves with a few certainties:(1) Christ was
Son of God long before his resurrection, and was so confessedby the apostles.
(2) Any declarationof Christ, and appointment of him to be the Son of God
with power, by means of any such thing as the resurrection, would of necessity

apply to some more powerful phase of his Sonship, rather than marking the
absolute initiation of it. (3) The resurrectionhere mentioned, whateverwas
intended, is indeed one of the centers of the Christian faith. The resurrection
of Christ, particularly, is the cornerstone and foundation of the Christian
religion. It is the resurrection of Christ that gives credibility to the Gospels,
explains the virgin birth, thrills the heart with the conviction that Jesus Christ
is indeed God come in the flesh; and, without the hope of the resurrection,
Paul himself declaredthat, "We are of all men most pitiable" (1 Corinthians
15:19). With the sure and certainhope of the resurrection, as set forth in the
New Testament, the Christian is endowed with sufficient strength to meet all
of life's challenges. It is surely true, as Paul said in another place, that "Christ
brought life and immortality to light through the gospel" (2 Timothy 1:10).
Even Jesus Christ our Lord ... There canbe no doubt that Paul accepted
Christ as far more than a mere human being. This salutation, had there been
nothing else, would make that certain. Paul presents himself as the bondslave
of Jesus Christ in the very first line of the epistle, and it is impossible to think
of Paul's subjectionto any person of mere mortal dignity. Here, Jesus Christ
is adored as Lord.
[6] William M. Greathouse, Commentary on Romans (Kansas City, Missouri:
BeaconHill Press ofKansas City, 1968), p. 31.
[7] Charles Hodge, op. cit., p. 20.
[8] C. K. Barrett, op. cit., p. 20.
[9] Wm. M. Greathouse, op. cit., p. 31.
Copyright Statement
James Burton Coffman Commentaries reproduced by permission of Abilene
Christian University Press, Abilene, Texas, USA. All other rights reserved.
Bibliography

Coffman, James Burton. "Commentary on Romans 1:4". "Coffman
Commentaries on the Old and New Testament".
https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/bcc/romans-1.html. Abilene
Christian University Press, Abilene, Texas, USA. 1983-1999.
John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible
And declaredto be the Son of God,.... Notmade as he is said to be before,
when his incarnation is spokenof; nor did he begin to be the Son of God,
when he was made of the seedof David, but he, the Son of God, who existed as
such, from everlasting, was manifestedin the flesh, or human nature: and this
his divine sonship, and proper deity, are declaredand made evident,
with, or "by"
his power;which has appeared in the creationof all things out of nothing; in
upholding all things in their beings; in the government of the world, and
works of Providence;in the miracles he wrought; in his performing the great
work of redemption; in the successofhis Gospel, to the conversionof sinners;
and in the preservationof his churches and people:here it seems chiefly to
regard the power of Christ in raising the dead, since it follows, and which is to
be connectedwith this clause,
by the resurrectionfrom the dead; and designs either the resurrectionof
others, as of Lazarus, and some other persons, in his lifetime, and of some at
his resurrection, and of all at the lastday: or the resurrectionof his own body,
which dying he had powerto raise up again, and did; and which declaredhim
to be, or clearlymade it appear that he was the Sonof God, a divine person,
truly and properly God: and this was done
according to the Spirit of holiness;which may be understood of the Holy
Spirit, the third personin the Trinity, who is holy in himself, and the author
of holiness in the saints; and who is the declarerof Christ's sonship, partly by
bearing a testimony to it in the word, and in the hearts of believers, and
chiefly by being concernedin the resurrectionof the body of Christ from the
dead; or else by the Spirit of holiness may be meant the divine nature of

Christ, which, as it is holy, so by it Christ offeredhimself to God, and by it
was quickened, or made alive, when he had been put to death in the flesh; and
which must be a clearand strong proof of his being truly the Son of God.
Copyright Statement
The New John Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible Modernisedand adapted
for the computer by Larry Pierce of Online Bible. All Rightes Reserved,
Larry Pierce, Winterbourne, Ontario.
A printed copy of this work can be ordered from: The Baptist Standard
Bearer, 1 Iron Oaks Dr, Paris, AR, 72855
Bibliography
Gill, John. "Commentary on Romans 1:4". "The New John Gill Exposition of
the Entire Bible".
https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/geb/romans-1.html. 1999.
Geneva Study Bible
And g declared[to be] the Sonof God with h power, according to the spirit of
(g) Shown and made manifest.
(h) The divine and mighty power is setagainstthe weaknessofthe flesh, for it
overcame death.
Copyright Statement

Text Courtesyof BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.
Bibliography
Beza, Theodore. "Commentaryon Romans 1:4". "The 1599 Geneva Study
Bible". https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/gsb/romans-1.html.
1599-1645.
Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
And declared— literally, “markedoff,” “defined,” “determined,” that is,
“shown,” or“proved.”
to be the Son of God — Observe how studiously the language changeshere.
He “was MADE [says the apostle]of the seedof David, according to the flesh”
(Romans 1:3); but He was not made, He was only “declared[or proved] to BE
the Sonof God.” So John 1:1, John 1:14, “In the beginning WAS the Word …
and the Word was MADE flesh”; and Isaiah9:6, “Unto us a Child is BORN,
unto us a Son is GIVEN.” Thus the Sonship of Christ is in no proper sense a
born relationship to the Father, as some, otherwise sounddivines, conceive of
it. By His birth in the flesh, that Sonship, which was essentialand uncreated,
merely efflorescedinto palpable manifestation. (See on Luke 1:35; see Acts
13:32, Acts 13:33).
with power— This may either be connectedwith “declared,” andthen the
meaning will be “powerfully declared” [Luther, Beza, Bengel, Fritzsche,
Alford, etc.]; or (as in our version, and as we think rightly) with “the Son of
God,” and then the sense is, “declaredto be the Son of God” in possessionof
that “power” whichbelonged to Him as the only-begottenof the Father, no
longershrouded as in the days of His flesh, but “by His resurrectionfrom the
dead” gloriously displayed and henceforth to be for ever exerted in this nature
of ours [Vulgate, Calvin, Hodge, Philippi, Mehring, etc.].
according to the spirit of holiness — If “according to the flesh” means here,
“in His human nature,” this uncommon expressionmust mean “in His other
nature,” which we have seento be that “ofthe Son of God” - an eternal,

uncreated nature. This is here styled the “spirit,” as an impalpable and
immaterial nature (John 4:24), and “the spirit of holiness,” probably in
absolute contrastwith that “likeness, ofsinful flesh” which He assumed. One
is apt to wonder that if this be the meaning, it was not expressedmore simply.
But if the apostle had said “He was declaredto be the Sonof Godaccording to
the Holy Spirit,” the readerwould have thought he meant “the Holy Ghost”;
and it seems to have been just to avoid this misapprehension that he used the
rare expression, “the spirit of holiness.”
Copyright Statement
These files are a derivative of an electronic edition prepared from text
scannedby Woodside Bible Fellowship.
This expanded edition of the Jameison-Faussett-BrownCommentary is in the
public domain and may be freely used and distributed.
Bibliography
Jamieson, Robert, D.D.;Fausset,A. R.; Brown, David. "Commentary on
Romans 1:4". "CommentaryCritical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible".
https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/jfb/romans-1.html. 1871-8.
Robertson's WordPictures in the New Testament
Who was declared(του οριστεντος — tou horisthentos). Articular participle
(first aoristpassive)of οριζω — horizō for which verb see note on Luke 22:22
and note on Acts 2:23. He was the Son of God in his preincarnate state (2
Corinthians 8:9; Philemon 2:6) and still so after his Incarnation (Romans 1:3,
“of the seedof David”), but it was the Resurrectionof the dead (εχ
αναστασεως νεκρων — ex anastaseōs nekrōnthe generalresurrectionimplied
by that of Christ) that definitely marked Jesus off as God‘s Sonbecause of his
claims about himself as God‘s Son and his prophecy that he would rise on the

third day. This event (cf. 1 Corinthians 15)gave God‘s seal“with power” (εν
δυναμει — en dunamei), “in power,” declaredso in power(2 Corinthians
13:4). The ResurrectionofChrist is the miracle of miracles. “The resurrection
only declaredhim to be what he truly was” (Denney).
According to the spirit of holiness (κατα πνευμα αγιωσυνης — kata pneuma
hagiōsunēs). Notthe Holy Spirit, but a description of Christ ethically as κατα
σαρκα — kata sarka describes him physically (Denney). αγιωσυνη —
Hagiōsunē is rare (1 Thessalonians 3:13;2 Corinthians 7:1 in N.T.), three
times in lxx, eachtime as the attribute of God. “The πνευμα αγιωσυνης —
pneuma hagiōsunēs though not the Divine nature, is that in which the Divinity
or Divine PersonalityResided” (Sandayand Headlam).
Jesus Christ our Lord (Ιησου Χριστου του κυριου ημων — Iēsou Christou tou
kuriou hēmōn). These words gatherup the total personality of Jesus (his deity
and his humanity).
Copyright Statement
The Robertson's WordPictures of the New Testament. Copyright �
Broadman Press 1932,33,Renewal1960. All rights reserved. Used by
permission of Broadman Press (Southern BaptistSunday SchoolBoard)
Bibliography
Robertson, A.T. "Commentary on Romans 1:4". "Robertson's WordPictures
of the New Testament".
https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/rwp/romans-1.html.
Broadman Press 1932,33.Renewal1960.
Vincent's Word Studies

Declared( ὁρισθέντος )
Rev., in margin, determined. The same verb as in the compound separatedin
Romans 1:1. Bengelsays that it expressesmore than “separated,”since one of
a number is separated, but only one is defined or declared. Compare Acts
10:42;Acts 17:31. It means to designate one for something, to nominate, to
instate. There is an antithesis betweenborn (Romans 1:3) and declared. As
respectedChrist's earthly descent, He was born like other men. As respected
His divine essence, He was declared. The idea is that of Christ's instatement or
establishment in the rank and dignity of His divine sonship with a view to the
conviction of men. This was required by His previous humiliation, and was
accomplishedby His resurrection, which not only manifested or demonstrated
what He was, but wrought a real transformation in His mode of being.
Compare Acts 2:36; “God made,” etc.
With power ( ἐν δυνάμει )
Lit., in power. Construe with was declared. He was declaredor instated
mightily; in a striking, triumphant manner, through His resurrection.
Spirit of holiness
In contrastwith according to the flesh. The reference is not to the Holy Spirit,
who is nowhere designatedby this phrase, but to the spirit of Christ as the
seatof the divine nature belonging to His person. As God is spirit, the divine
nature of Christ is spirit, and its characteristic quality is holiness.
Resurrectionfrom the dead ( ἀναστάσεως νεκρῶν )
Wrong, since this would require the preposition ἐκ fromRev., correctly, of the
dead. Though this resurrection is here representedas actually realized in one
individual only, the phrase, as everywhere in the New Testament, signifies the
resurrectionof the dead absolutely and generically - of all the dead, as
exemplified, included, and involved in the resurrectionof Christ. See on
Philemon 3:11.
Copyright Statement

The text of this work is public domain.
Bibliography
Vincent, Marvin R. DD. "Commentaryon Romans 1:4". "Vincent's Word
Studies in the New Testament".
https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/vnt/romans-1.html. Charles
Schribner's Sons. New York, USA. 1887.
Wesley's ExplanatoryNotes
And declaredto be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of
But powerfully declaredto be the Son of God, according to the Spirit of
Holiness — That is, according to his divine nature.
By the resurrectionfrom the dead — For this is both the fountain and the
objectof our faith; and the preaching of the apostles was the consequenceof
Christ's resurrection.
Copyright Statement
These files are public domain and are a derivative of an electronic edition that
is available on the Christian ClassicsEtherealLibrary Website.
Bibliography
Wesley, John. "Commentary on Romans 1:4". "John Wesley's Explanatory
Notes on the Whole Bible".
https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/wen/romans-1.html. 1765.
Abbott's Illustrated New Testament
According to the Spirit of holiness. A greatdegree of uncertainty has been felt
among commentators in respectto the precise import of the term Spirit of

holiness, as used in this connection;and, in fact, also in respectto the other
clauses ofthis verse. Some considerthis expressionas referring to the Holy
Spirit, others to the divine Word which became flesh in the person of Jesus.
(John 1:1,14.)Others still understand it to denote those spiritual influences
affused by the Savior, after his resurrection, upon the apostles, andother
members of the early church. In fact, in regardto the whole verse, the best
authorities among commentators express their opinions of the specific sense in
which its severalclausesare to be understood with greathesitation. Its general
import is clear, viz., that Jesus, who, in respectto his human powers and
station, was a descendantof David, was proclaimed the Sonof Godby divine
indications of the highestand most unquestionable character.
Copyright Statement
Bibliography
Abbott, John S. C. & Abbott, Jacob. "Commentaryon Romans 1:4".
"Abbott's Illustrated New Testament".
https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/ain/romans-1.html. 1878.
Calvin's Commentary on the Bible
4.Declared(19)the Sonof God, etc.: or, if you prefer, determined (definitus);
as though he had said, that the power, by which he was raised from the dead,
was something like a decree by which he was proclaimedthe Son of God,
according to what is said in Psalms 2:7, “I have this day begottenthee:” for
this begetting refers to what was made known. Though some indeed find here
three separate evidences ofthe divinity of Christ — “power,” understanding
thereby miracles — then the testimony of the Spirit — and, lastly, the
resurrectionfrom the dead — I yet prefer to connectthem together, and to
reduce these three things to one, in this manner — that Christ was declared

the Sonof Godby openly exercising a real celestialpower, that is, the power
of the Spirit, when he rose from the dead; but that this power is
comprehended, when a convictionof it is imprinted on our hearts by the same
Spirit. The language ofthe Apostle well agreeswith this view; for he says that
he was declaredby power, because power, peculiarto God, shone forth in
him, and uncontestably proved him to be God; and this was indeed made
evident by his resurrection. Paul says the same thing in anotherplace; having
stated, that by death the weaknessofthe flesh appeared, he at the same time
extols the powerof the Spirit in his resurrection; (2 Corinthians 13:4) This
glory, however, is not made knownto us, until the same Spirit imprints a
conviction of it on our hearts. And that Paul includes, togetherwith the
wonderful energyof the Spirit, which Christ manifested by rising from the
dead, the testimony which all the faithful feel in their hearts, is even evident
from this — that he expressly calls it the Spirit of Holiness;as though he had
said, that the Spirit, as far as it sanctifies, confirms and ratifies that evidence
of its powerwhich it once exhibited. For the Scripture is wont often to ascribe
such titles to the Spirit, as tend to illustrate our present subject. Thus He is
calledby our Lord the Spirit of Truth, on accountof the effectwhich he
mentions; (John 14:17)
Besides, a divine poweris saidto have shone forth in the resurrectionof
Christ for this reason— because he rose by his own power, as he had often
testified:
“Destroythis temple, and in three days
I will raise it up again,” (John 2:19;)
“No man takethit from me,” etc.;(John 10:18)
For he gained victory over death, (to which he yielded with regard to the
weakness ofthe flesh,) not by aid soughtfrom another, but by the celestial
operationof his own Spirit.
Professor[Hodge ] gives what he conceivesto be the import of the two verses
in these words, “Jesus Christ was, as to his human nature, the Sonof David;

but he was clearlydemonstrated to be, as to his divine nature, the Sonof God,
by the resurrectionfrom the dead.” This view is takenby many, such as
[Pareus ], [Beza ], [Turrettin ], etc. But the words, “according to the Spirit of
Holiness ” — κατὰ πνεῦμα ἁγιωσύνης, are takendifferently by others, as
meaning the Holy Spirit. As the phrase is nowhere else found, it may be taken
in either sense. Thatthe divine nature of Christ is calledSpirit, is evident. See
1 Corinthians 15:45; 2 Corinthians 3:17; Hebrews 9:14, 1 Peter3:18
[Doddridge ], [Scott], and [Chalmers ], consider The Holy Spirit to be
intended. The lastgives this paraphrase: — “Declared, ordeterminately
marked out to be the Sonof God and with power. The thing was
demonstrated by an evidence, the exhibition of which required a putting forth
of power, which Paul in another place represents as a very greatand
strenuous exertion, ‘According to the working of his mighty power when he
raisedhim from the dead.’ — The Spirit of Holiness, or the Holy Spirit. It was
through the operationof the Holy Spirit that the divine nature was infused
into the human at the birth of Jesus Christ; and the very same agent, it is
remarkable, was employed in the work of the resurrection. ‘Put to death in
the flesh,’says Peter, and ‘quickened by the Spirit.’ We have only to do with
the facts of the case. He was demonstrated to be the Son of God by the power
of the Holy Spirit having been put forth in raising him from the dead.” As to
the genitive case after“resurrection,” see a similar instance in Acts 17:32
The idea deduced by [Calvin ], that he is calledhere “the Spirit of Holiness,”
on accountof the holiness he works in us, seems not well-founded, though
advancedby [Theodoret] and [Augustine ]. — Ed.
Copyright Statement
Bibliography
Calvin, John. "Commentary on Romans 1:4". "Calvin's Commentary on the
Bible". https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/cal/romans-1.html.
1840-57.

John Trapp Complete Commentary
4 And declaredto be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of
Ver. 4. Declaredto be, &c.]Gr. ορισθεντος, defined; for definitions explain
obscurities.
With power] For, Superas evadere ad auras, Hic labor, hoc opus est -a work
befitting a God. See Ephesians 1:20. {See Trapp on "Ephesians 1:20"}
The Spirit of holiness] The divine essenceofChrist, 2 Corinthians 13:4, which
sanctifieth the human nature assumedby him.
Copyright Statement
Bibliography
Trapp, John. "Commentary on Romans 1:4". John Trapp Complete
Commentary. https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/jtc/romans-
1.html. 1865-1868.
Thomas Coke Commentary on the Holy Bible

Romans 1:4. With power— See on Romans 1:16. He who will read in the
original what St. Paul says, Ephesians 1:19-20 concerning the power which
God exerted in raisingChristfrom the dead, will hardly avoid thinking that he
there sees St. Paul labouring for words to express the greatness ofit. The
word declareddoes not exactly answerthe original, nor is it perhaps easyto
find a word in English which perfectly answers to the Greek wordορισθεντος,
in the sense the Apostle uses it here. The original word 'Οριζειν signifies
properly to bound, terminate, or circumscribe; by which termination the
figure of things sensible is made,—and they are known to be of this or that
species, andso distinguished from others. Thus St. Paul takes Christ's
resurrectionfrom the dead and entering into immortality to be the most
eminent and characteristicalmark whereby Christ is certainly known, and as
it were determined, to be the Son of God; and undoubtedly his resurrection
amply rolled awayall the reproachof his cross, and intitled him to the honour
of the first-born among many brethren. The phrase according to the Spirit of
holiness, says Mr. Locke, is here manifestly opposedto according to the flesh
in the foregoing verse, and so must mean his divine nature; unless this be
understood, the antithesis is lost. Dr. Doddridge, however, and others think,
that it appears little agreeable to the style of Scripture in general, to callthe
divine nature of Christ the Spirit of holiness, and therefore they rather refer it
to the operationof the Spirit of God, in the production of Christ's body; by
which means the opposition betweenthe flesh and the Spirit will be preserved,
the one referring to the materials actedupon, the other to the divine and
miraculous agent. Compare Luke 1:35. The sense ofthe verse maybe
expressedthus: "But determinately and in the most convincing manner
marked out to be the Sonof God, as to that spiritual part in him, which
remained perfectly holy and spotless under all temptations, by his being
raisedfrom the dead to universal dominion."
Copyright Statement

Bibliography
Coke, Thomas. "Commentaryon Romans 1:4". Thomas Coke Commentary
on the Holy Bible.
https:https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/tcc/romans-1.html. 1801-1803.
Greek TestamentCriticalExegeticalCommentary
4.] The simple antithesis would have been, τοῦ μὲν γενομένου … ὄντος δὲ υἱοῦ
θεοῦ κατὰ πνεῦμα, see 1 Timothy 3:16. But (1) wonderful solemnity is given by
dropping the particles, and taking up separatelythe human and divine nature
of Christ, keeping ὁ υἱὸς αὐτοῦ as the greatsubject of both clauses, andthus
making them, not contrasts to one another, but correlative parts of the same
greatwhole. And (2) the Apostle, dwelling here on patent facts,—the
announcements of prophecy,—the history of the Lord’s Humanity,—does not
deal with the essentialsubsistentGodheadof Christ, but with that
manifestation of it which the greatfact of the Resurrectionhad made to men.
Also (3) by amplifying πνεῦμα into πν. ἁγιωσύνης, he characterizes the Spirit
of Christ as one of absolute holiness, i.e. as divine and partaking of the
Godhead: see below.
ὁρισθέντος]“Multo plus dicit quam ἀφωρισμένος, Romans 1:1; nam
ἀφορίζεται unus e pluribus, ὁρίζεται unicus quispiam.” Bengel. See reff. Nor
does it = προορισθέντος, as vulg. prœdestinatus, and as Irenæus (iii. 22. 1, p.
219)and Augustine de Prædest(1)Sanctorum, c. 15, vol. x. p. 982:—
“Prædestinatus estergo Jesus, ut qui futurus erat secundum carnemfilius
David, essettamen in virtute Filius Deisecundum Spiritum Sanctificationis:
quia natus est de Spiritu Sancto et Virgine Maria.” But this is one of the
places where Augustine has been misled by the Latin:—the text speaks, notof
the factof Christ’s being the Son of God barely, but of the proof of that fact
by His Resurrection. Chrysostomhas given the right meaning: τί οὖν ἔστιν
ὁρισθέντος;τοῦ δειχθέντος, ἀποφανθέντος, κριθέντος, ὁμολογηθέντος παρὰ
τῆς ἁπάντωνγνώμης καὶ ψήφου.… Hom. ii. p. 432. Thatan example is
wanting of this exactuse of the word, is, as Olsh. has shewn, no objection to
such use; the ὁρίζειν here spokenof is not the objective ‘fixing,’ ‘appointing’

The holy spirit of holiness

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to The holy spirit of holiness

Similar to The holy spirit of holiness (20)

More from GLENN PEASE

More from GLENN PEASE (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

The holy spirit of holiness