ROMANS 1 COMMENTARY

ROMAS 1 COMMETARY
Written and edited by Glenn Pease
PREFACE
The following commentary consists of my own thoughts combined with the thoughts
of the many authors both ancient and modern who have made comments on this
most important letter of Paul. I have quoted so many others because I have found in
each a unique way to convey the ideas that Paul is seeking to communicate.
Sometimes I have not been able to give credit, and if anyone discovers the name of
the author quoted and lets me know, I will gladly give credit where credit is due. If
anyone does not want their quotes expressed in this commentary, they can let me
know as well, and I will delete them. My e-mail is glenn_p86@yahoo.com
The purpose of this commentary is to bring the thoughts of many authors together
in one place in order to save the Bible student a lot of time in research. All of the
comments are available to anyone, but it takes an enormous amount of time to read
all of the resources. I have brought together what I feel are the best thoughts on the
text in this one place to save others the time. It is my pleasure to do so, and I use
these studies myself to teach a class of about 20 people. The numbering system uses
letters as well as numbers because it gives me the freedom to add new material I
discover without doing the numbers all over. I welcome any comments, and I will
add them to this commentary if they contribute new and valued insight. I share
comments of scholars who differ in their views, and leave the reader to decide which
are most consistent with God's full revelation. Some of the material is copied as is
with its mistakes and strange breaks, but it is still of value in getting insights into the
text. Each of the authors I quote has much more than what is here, and so for more
study look up each of those that impresses you for more details.
Prof. James M. Stifler wrote a small book of comments on Romans, and he had a
paragraph of introduction I share here, for it conveys my attitude as well. He wrote,
“THIS book has no other aim than to make the somewhat difficult Epistle to the
Romans better understood to report to the reader what the apostle has written. It is
not put forth in the interest of any theological system ; it has no theory of any kind
to advocate and no point to make, except by dispassionate study to ascertain the
meaning of Paul's language. The commentator, even more than the preacher of the
gospel, is under solemn obligation not to bear false witness against the sacred
penman, not to misinterpret him, not to overlay his thought with personal views ;
the commentator's work is to follow down the stream of the inspired text, to
measure its width and if possible its depth, but not to dig new channels for it and not
to divert its flow to water his own garden.”

ITRODUCTIO
1. William Barclay wrote, “There is an obvious difference between Paul's Letter to
the Romans and any other of his letters. Anyone coming from, say, a reading of the
Letters to the Corinthians, will immediately feel that difference, both of atmosphere
and of method. A very great part of it is due to one basic fact--when Paul wrote to
the Church at Rome he was writing to a Church with whose founding he had had
nothing whatever to do and with which he had had no personal contact at all. That
explains why in Romans there are so few of the details of practical problems which
fill the other letters. That is why Romans, at first sight, seems so much more
impersonal. As Dibelius put it, It is of all Paul's letters the least conditioned by the
momentary situation. We may put that in another way. Romans, of all Paul's
letters, comes nearest to being a theological treatise. In almost all his other letters he
is dealing with some immediate trouble, some pressing situation, some current
error, some threatening danger, which was menacing the Church to which he was
writing. Romans is the nearest approach to a systematic exposition of Paul's own
theological position, independent of any immediate set of circumstances.”
2. Barclay continues, “All his life Paul had been haunted by the thought of Rome. It
had always been one of his dreams to preach there. When he is in Ephesus, he is
planning to go through Achaea and Macedonia again, and then comes a sentence
obviously dropped straight from the heart, After I have been there, I must also see
Rome (Acts 19:21). When he was up against things in Jerusalem, and the situation
looked threatening and the end seemed near, he had one of those visions which
always lifted up his heart. In that vision the Lord stood by him and said, Take
courage, Paul. For as you have testified about me at Jerusalem, so you must bear
witness also at Rome (Acts 23:11). In the very first chapter of this letter Paul's
desire to see Rome breathes out. I long to see you that I may impart to you some
spiritual gift to strengthen you (Rom. 1:11). So, I am eager to preach the gospel to
you also who are in Rome (Rom. 1:15). It might well be said that the name Rome
was written on Paul's heart.”
3. Greg Herrick, “Paul’s letter to the Romans is probably the most systematic
presentation of the gospel in all of his writings, and indeed in all of the T. The
letter can be broken down into two major sections, namely, doctrine (1:18-11:36)
and then application (12:1-15:13). This large body of material is bracketed by an
introduction (1:1-17) and a postscript (15:14-16:27).”
4. Mike Ramsey, “To Martin Luther he loved his wife Catherine Von Bora, he
said of the Book of Romans… “It is my Catherine Von Bora”.Paul gives the
grandest presentation of Christian Doctrine found anywhere in Scripture. In this

book, Augustine, Luther, Wesley all came to assured faith through the impact of
Romans. John Chrysostom (5th century’s greatest preacher) had Romans read aloud
to him once a week! Kent Hughes, “it is…grace-filled, God-exalting theology that
beckons the mind to stretch, the heart to soar, the soul to sing.” “Romans is no
light snack for the soul. It’s a full-course meal meant to be savored over time.”
5. John Calvin, “With regard to the excellency of this Epistle, I know not whether it
would be well for me to dwell long on the subject; for I fear, lest
through my recommendations falling far short of what they ought to be,
I should do nothing but obscure its merits: besides, the Epistle
itself, at its very beginning, explains itself in a much better way
than can be done by any words which I can use. It will then be better
for me to pass on to the Argument, or the contents of the Epistle; and
it will hence appear beyond all controversy, that besides other
excellencies, and those remarkable, this can with truth be said of it,
and it is what can never be sufficiently appreciated -- that when any
one gains a knowledge of this Epistle, he has an entrance opened to him
to all the most hidden treasures of Scripture.”
6. Alan Carr, “Romans is, without question, the greatest theological work of the
Apostle Paul. This book has been called The Constitution Of Christianity; The
Christian Manifesto; and The Cathedral Of The Christian Faith. Without a
doubt, this book has been responsible for more change in the church than any other.
It was this book that in September of 386 AD touched the heart of a orth African
native who was a professor in the city of Milan, Italy. As Augustine sat weeping in
the garden of a friend while contemplating the wickedness of his life, he heard a
child singing, Tolle, lege. Tolle, lege. These words from Latin mean, Take up
and read. Take up and read. Beside of Augustine was an open scroll of the Book of
Romans. He picked it up and read the first verses that caught his eyes. They were
Rom. 13:13-14. These verse brought about the conversion of Augustine and he
became, in the mind of many, one of the greatest theologians and leaders in the
history of the church.
1,000 years later, a Roman Catholic monk of the Augustinian Order named Martin
Luther, who was a professor at the University of Wittenburg in Germany, was
teaching his students the Book of Romans. As he studied the text, his heart was
arrested by the theme of justification by faith, Rom. 1:17. The Holy Spirit used this
verse to bring Luther to Christ and the Reformation to the world.
A few hundred years later, an ordained minister in the Church of England named
John Wesley was repairing to take the Gospel to America as a missionary. However,
even though Wesley was a preacher and was going to cross the Atlantic as a
missionary, he was confused about the Gospel and was seeking a genuine conversion
experience of his own. Then, one Wednesday evening, he attended a Bible Study in
London. While there, he heard some of Luther's comments on Romans being read
and this brought about his conversion to Christ. Then John, along with his brother

Charles, would be the tolls God would use to bring the great Wesleyan revivals to
the world.”
7. David Guzik, “Consider the testimony of these men regarding Romans:
a. Martin Luther praised the Book of Romans: It is the chief part of the
ew Testament and the perfect gospel . . . the absolute epitome of the
gospel.
b. Philip Melancthon called Romans, The compendium of Christian
doctrine.
c. John Calvin said of Romans, When any one understands this Epistle, he
has a passage opened to him to the understanding of the whole Scripture.
d. Samuel Coleridge, English poet and literary critic said Paul's letter to
the Romans is The most profound work in existence.
e. Frederick Godet, 19th Century Swiss theologian called the Book of
Romans The cathedral of the Christian faith.
f. G. Campbell Morgan said Romans was The most pessimistic page of
literature upon which your eyes ever rested and at the same time, the
most optimistic poem to which your ears ever listened.
g. Richard Lenski wrote Romans is Beyond question the most dynamic of
all ew Testament letters even as it was written at the climax of Paul's
apostolic career.
i. It is almost universally agreed that Paul wrote Romans from the city of Corinth as
he wintered there on his third missionary journey as described in Acts 20:2-3. This
is based on Romans 16:1 and 16:23 along with 1 Corinthians 1:14. A variety of
commentators pick the date of writing anywhere from 53 to 58 A.D.
ii. By the time Paul wrote Romans, he had been a Christian preacher for some 20
years. In Corinth, on his way to Jerusalem, he had three months without any
pressing duties. He perhaps thought this was a good time to write ahead to Rome, a
church he planned to visit after Jerusalem.
iii. As Paul endeavored to go to Rome, the Holy Spirit warned him about the peril
awaiting him in Jerusalem (Acts 21:10-14). What if he were unable to make it to
Rome? Then he must write them a letter so comprehensive that the Christians in
Rome had the gospel Paul preached, even if Paul himself were not able to visit them.
iv. Because of all this, Romans is different than other letters Paul wrote to ew
Testament churches. Other ew Testament letters focus more on the church and its
challenges and problems. The letter to the Romans focuses more on God and His
great plan of redemption.

v. We know the letter to the Romans was prized by the Christians in Rome; Clement
of Rome's letter in 96 A.D. shows great familiarity with Paul's letter. It may be that
he had memorized it, and that the reading of it became a part of virtually every
meeting of the Roman church. As well, many scholars (Bruce and Barclay among
them) believe that an edited version of Romans - without the personal references in
Romans 16 - was distributed widely among early churches, as a summary of
apostolic doctrine.
8. Morris, “The gospel of God: Other ew Testament letters focus more on the
church and its challenges and problems; Romans focuses more on God. God is the
most important word in this epistle. Romans is a book about God. o topic is
treated with anything like the frequency of God. Everything Paul touches in this
letter he relates to God. In our concern to understand what the apostle is saying
about righteousness, justification, and the like we ought not to overlook his
tremendous concentration on God. Guzik adds, “The word God occurs 153
times in the book; an average of once every 46 words - this is more frequently than
in any other ew Testament book. In comparison, note the frequency of other words
used in Romans: law (72), Christ (65), sin (48), Lord (43), and faith (40). Romans
deals with many different themes, but as much as a book can be, it is a book about
God.”
9. John Piper, “Leon Morris is exactly right when he says, God is the most
important word in this epistle. Romans is a book about God. o topic is treated with
anything like the frequency of God. Everything Paul touches in this letter he relates
to God. In our concern to understand what the apostle is saying about
righteousness, justification and the like we ought not to overlook his tremendous
concentration on God. There is nothing like it elsewhere Indeed there isn't. This is
why the epistle has had the effect it has. It is from God and through God and to
God. God chose the author before he was born. God purchased his freedom by the
death of his Son. God called him to be an apostle. And then God gave him a gospel -
the Gospel of God himself. So God is at the bottom and God is at the top and God is
in the middle.”
10. William Tyndale, wrote in the preface to the Book of Romans in his 1534 edition
of the English ew Testament: “Forasmuch as this epistle is the principal and most
excellent part of the ew Testament, and most pure gospel, and also a light and a
way in unto the whole Scripture, I think it meet that every Christian man not only
know it by rote and without the book, but also exercise himself therein evermore
continually, as with the daily bread of the soul. o man verily can read it too oft or
study it too well; for the more it is studied the easier it is, the more it is chewed the
pleasanter it is, and the more groundly it is searched the preciouser things are found
in it, so great treasure of spiritual things lieth hid therein.”
11. James M. Stifler, “ THE ORIGI OF THE ROMA CHURCH is historically
obscure. There is no record, and little from which a record can be constructed,
either of the date of its beginning or of the agent or agents of its founding.

When the Epistle to the Romans was written the church had already a
world- wide reputation (i. 8). But little can be inferred from this as to
the length of time which the church had already existed. In five years it
might have become known ' ' throughout the whole world. The Thessa-lonian
church in less than a year after Paul's first visit was widely known ;
for Paul writes them from Corinth (A.D. 52 or 53) : In every place your
faith to Godward is spread abroad ; so that we need not to speak anything
( I Thess. i. 8). That the Roman church was not much if any older than
the earlier Gentile churches is probable. It was a Gentile church. It is
not easy to conceive how such a one could have come into existence before
the church in Antioch in Syria (Acts xi. 19-21), many years after Pente-cost.
And this first Gentile church did not get its authority to be strictly
such until after the council in Jerusalem (A.D. 50). The matter and the
spirit of the Epistle to the Romans show that the latter were thoroughly
settled on the question of their right to be just what they were a Gentile
church, grounded on faith in Christ. ow who made them such? Who
was qualified to teach them that in Christ there was no distinction between
Jew and Gentile, a doctrine that was not promulgated before Peter's visit
to the household of Cornelius (Acts x.), and that did not gain authoritative
recognition until a good while (Acts xv.) afterward? It seems almost
necessary to believe that the Roman church was founded by teachers from
some of the Gentile centers, and that, too, after such teachers had come
to clear vision of the intent of the gospel for Gentiles as such, and that
they could be saved as Gentiles. The Gentile character of the church is
now pretty generally admitted, and this admission makes necessary the
other, that its founders must have been men of Paul's way of presenting
the gospel.
This disposes of two theories in reference to the establishment of the
gospel in the imperial city. First, it could not have been carried thither
by the strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes (Acts ii. 10), who
were present at Pentecost. How could these men have founded a Gentile
church? The door to the heathen was not opened until years after the
descent of the Spirit. It would be a much better guess to say that some
from the household of Cornelius (Acts x.) carried to Rome the news of a
Savior for the Gentiles.”
12. Mike Taylor, “The church in Rome was a mixture of Gentiles and Jews,
dominated by the former. There was conflict between them, not ethnic in basis, but
doctrinal: the Jews considered Christianity as merely a ``denomination'' of
Judaism, and believed that Christians - including non-Jewish Christians - were
required to keep the law of Moses; but the Gentiles believed they were free from
Jewish law. This conflict underlies much of Romans.” John Stott says: ``Paul is
seen from beginning to end as an authentic peacemaker, pouring oil on troubled
waters, anxious to preserve both truth and peace without sacrificing either to the
other.''

13. Given Blakely, “Throughout Divine history, there have been men who
have so distinguished themselves in their service to God, that their names
have been sanctified. It is, after all, the person who makes the name, and not
the name who makes the person. Think of the renowned names of Abel,
Enoch, oah, Abraham, Job, Joseph, David, Peter, John, and others. Who
can forget such names as Sarah, Miriam, Rahab, Deborah, Mary, and
Elizabeth. Their faith and manner of life made those names significant to the
entire world. Others have brought reproach upon names through their
unbelief and sin-people like Cain, imrod, Aachan, Korah, Herod, and Judas.
The power of character can thus be seen-power to cause honor or reproach to
be brought upon a name.
The name Paul has been recognized by saints and sinners alike from the
beginning of his life in Christ Jesus. The distinction given to that name is
owing to his faith, and the aggressive manner in which he served the Lord
Jesus Christ. This name is mentioned no less than 156 times in Scripture, and
every single time it refers to the same individual.
Formerly, Paul was known as Saul, of Tarsus (Acts 9:11). The name
Saul means Desired,Strongs certainly befitting of one so eagerly sought
by the Lord Jesus Himself. Precisely when he began to be known exclusively
as Paul is not clear. The first reference to the Apostle of the Gentiles as
Paul is found in Acts 13:9, around A.D. 46, or nine years after his
conversion. Then Saul, (who also is called Paul,). From that point on, he is
referred to as Paul. The only reference to Saul after that is when Paul
recounts the appearance of Jesus to him in his call to the apostleship (Acts
22:7,13,14).
The name Paul means Small, or Little.Strongs By way of comparison,
when Samuel upbraided king Saul for his flagrant disobedience, he referred
to the time when he was in God's favor. When thou wast LITTLE in thine
own sight, wast thou not made the head of the tribes of Israel, and the LORD
anointed thee king over Israel? (1 Sam 15:17). In the case of Paul, his
commendable smallness was the latter part of his life, as compared with king
Saul, whose latter life was his worst time. Paul's smallness consisted of his
renunciation of everything that was gain to him. He did this in order to win
Christ and be found in Him not having a righteousness of his own (Phil
3:7-14). Everywhere his name is mentioned, his zeal for the Lord is what
comes to mind.”

1 Paul, a servant of Christ Jesus, called to be an
apostle and set apart for the gospel of God--
1. A servant of Christ Jesus.
a. The word for servant is the word for slave as well, and though masses of slaves in
the Roman empire were like most slaves in history, in suffering great abuse, some of
them took places of power and authority because of their knowledge and skills. Paul
was that kind of slave to Jesus. He was a great asset to the kingdom of Christ
because of his knowledge of the Word. He also had a knowledge of the Gentile
world, and made a great servant to reach that segment of the population. He was a
Roman citizen, which gave him an advantage with the Gentiles, and he was a
Pharisee, which gave him and advantage with the Jews. Jesus did not choose him
haphazardly, but with great wisdom, and he proved to be one of the greatest
servants of Christ in all of history.
b. Gill, “The name of the author of this epistle is Paul, who formerly was called
Saul. Some think his name was changed upon his own conversion; others, upon the
conversion of the Roman deputy Sergius Paulus, Act_13:7; others, that he was so
called from the littleness of his stature; but rather it should seem that he had two
names, which was usual with the Jews; one by which they went among the Gentiles,
and another by they were called in their own land.
c. Clarke, “The word δουλος, which we translate servant, properly means a slave,
one who is the entire property of his master; and is used here by the apostle with
great propriety. He felt he was not his own, and that his life and powers belonged to
his heavenly owner, and that he had no right to dispose of or employ them but in the
strictest subserviency to the will of his Lord. In this sense, and in this spirit, he is the
willing slave of Jesus Christ; and this is, perhaps, the highest character which any
soul of man can attain on this side eternity. “I am wholly the Lord’s; and wholly
devoted in the spirit of sacrificial obedience, to the constant, complete, and energetic
performance of the Divine will.” A friend of God is high; a son of God is higher; but
the servant, or, in the above sense, the slave of God, is higher than all; - in a word,
he is a person who feels he has no property in himself, and that God is all and in
all.”
d. Barnes, “The name Saul was Hebrew; the name Paul was Roman. In addressing a
letter to the Romans, he would naturally make use of the name to which they were
accustomed, and which would excite no prejudice among them. The ancient custom
was to begin an epistle with the name of the writer, as Cicero to Varro, etc. We
record the name at the end. It may be remarked, however, that the placing the name
of the writer at the beginning of an epistle was always done, and is still, when the

letter was one of authority, or when it conferred any special privileges. Thus, in the
proclamation of Cyrus Ezr_1:2, “Thus saith Cyrus, king of Persia,” etc.; see also
Ezr_4:11; Ezr_7:12. “Artaxerxes, king of kings, unto Ezra the priest,” etc. Dan_4:1.
The commencement of a letter by an apostle to a Christian church in this manner
was especially proper as indicating authority.
This name was what the Lord Jesus himself directed His disciples to use, as their
general appellation; Mat_10:25; Mat_20:27; Mar_10:44. And it was the customary
name which they assumed; Gal_1:10; Col_4:12; 2Pe_1:1; Jud_1:1; Act_4:29;
Tit_1:1; Jam_1:1. The proper meaning of this word servant, δοῦλος doulos, is slave,
one who is not free. It expresses the condition of one who has a master, or who is at
the control of another. It is often, however, applied to courtiers, or the officers that
serve under a king: because in an eastern monarchy the relation of an absolute king
to his courtiers corresponded nearly to that of a master and a slave. Thus, the word
is expressive of dignity and honor; and the servants of a king denote officers of a
high rank and station. It is applied to the prophets as those who were honored by
God, or especially entrusted by him with office; Deu_34:5; Jos_1:2; Jer_25:4. The
name is also given to the Messiah, Isa_42:1, “Behold my servant in whom my soul
delighteth,” etc.; Isa_53:11, “shall my righteous servant justify many.” The apostle
uses it here evidently to denote his acknowledging Jesus Christ as his master; as
indicating his dignity, as especially appointed by him to his great work; and as
showing that in this Epistle he intended to assume no authority of his own, but
simply to declare the will of his master, and theirs.”
e. Greg Herrick, “First, Paul considered himself a slave (dou`lo) of Christ Jesus.
While it was unthinkable to a cultured Greek that a relationship with a deity would
involve the concept of slavery, it was not at all uncommon for a Jew. Undoubtedly
the background for the use of the expression “a servant of…” is to be found in the
Jewish Old Testament scriptures so that it does not connote drudgery, but honor
and privilege. It was used of Israel in general at times (Isa 43:10), but was especially
associated with famous OT personalities including such great men as Moses (Joshua
14:7), David (Ps 89:3; cf. 2 Sam 7:5, 8) and Elijah (2 Kings 10:10): all these men were
servants of the Lord. Though there is indeed much honor in the use of the expression,
for it was an extreme privilege to serve YHWH, it was not Paul’s desire in this
context to simply place himself among venerated OT saints, or express his gratitude
to be a servant of Christ Jesus (though both are true), but rather to communicate in
plain terms his commitment and devotion to the Messiah Jesus. Though there are
several reasons for his allegiance to Christ, it is ultimately due to his recognition of
who Jesus is. Paul’s insertion of “Christ Jesus” into the OT formula “a servant of
YHWH” shows the high view of Jesus that he maintained. He considered Jesus
worthy of the same obedience and devotion as YHWH.”
f. Barclay, “He calls himself the slave (doulos) of Jesus Christ. In this word slave
there are two backgrounds of thought.

(a) Paul's favourite title for Jesus is Lord (kurios). In Greek the word kurios
describes someone who has undisputed possession of a person or a thing. It means
master or owner in the most absolute sense. The opposite of Lord (kurios) is slave
(doulos). Paul thought of himself as the slave of Jesus Christ, his Master and his
Lord. Jesus had loved him and given himself for him, and therefore Paul was sure
that he no longer belonged to himself, but entirely to Jesus. On the one side slave
describes the utter obligation of love.
(b) But slave (doulos) has another side to it. In the Old Testament it is the regular
word to describe the great men of God. Moses was the doulos of the Lord (Josh.
1:2). Joshua was the doulos of God (Josh. 24:29). The proudest title of the prophets,
the title which distinguished them from other men, was that they were the slaves of
God (Am. 3:7; Jer. 7:25). When Paul calls himself the slave of Jesus Christ he is
setting himself in the succession of the prophets. Their greatness and their glory lay
in the fact that they were slaves of God, and so did his. So then, the slave of Jesus
Christ describes at one and the same time the obligation of a great love and the
honor of a great office.
g. Greg Burdine, “A Successful Christian is a Servant of Jesus Christ.
The Romans knew what a slave was. Of the 120 million people in the Roman
Empire, 60 million were slaves. Of the six Greek words Paul could have used, he
used doulos. It is the lowest slave. A doulos slave was one who was totally controlled
by his Master. He was usually bought in the slave market and was brought as a
captive from an enemy nation. We are slaves of Jesus Christ. He bought us with His
blood from the enemy (Satan). We belong to Him totally and completely. 1 Cor. 6:19
– “What! Know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in
you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own? For ye are bought with a
price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God’s.”
A Jewish slave could only be held for 7 years. The seventh year he was set free.
However, if he wanted to stay with the family voluntarily, he could have his ear
pierced, identifying him with that family till death. He would be a lifetime slave.
Paul was a lifetime slave. His heart had been captured by the love Christ had for
him? 2 Cor. 5:14 – “For the love of Christ constraineth me…” We know what a
constraint is. It is a device that holds someone or something. Paul was a slave of love
to Jesus Christ.”
h. Waggoner, “It makes a vast difference whom one serves. The servant derives his
importance from the dignity of the one served. Paul served the Lord Jesus Christ.
Everybody may serve the same Master. Know ye not, that to whom ye yield
yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey? Rom. 6:16. Even
the ordinary house servant who yields to the Lord is the servant of the Lord, and
not of man. Servants, obey in all things your masters according to the flesh; not
with eye service, as menpleasers; but in singleness of heart, fearing God; and
whatsoever ye do, do it heartily, as to the Lord, and not unto men; knowing that of
the Lord ye shall receive the reward of the inheritance; for ye serve the Lord Jesus

Christ. Col. 3:22-24. Such a consideration as this can not fail to glorify the most
menial drudgery.”
iRobert Haldane, “Paul was of unmingled Jewish descent, a Hebrew of the Hebrews,
born at Tarsus in Cilicia, but educated at Jerusalem ; a Pharisee by profession, and
distinguished among the disciples of Gamaliel, one of the most celebrated teachers
of his age and nation. Before his conversion, he was an ardent and bigoted
supporter of the traditions of his fathers violently opposed to the humbling
doctrines of Christianity, and a cruel persecutor of the Church. From the period of
his miraculous conversion from the hour when Jesus met him on the road to
Damascus-down to the moment when he sealed his testimony with his blood, his
eventful life was devoted to the promulgation of the faith which once he destroyed
Throughout the whole of his long and arduous course, he experienced a continual
alternation of trials and graces, of afflictions and benedictions ; always borne down
by the hand of man, always sustained by the hand of God....
A servant of Jesus Christ. Paul, who once verily thought that he ought to do many
things contrary to the name of Jesus of azareth, now subscribes himself His
servant literally, slave. This is an expression both of humility and of dignity of
humility, to signify that he was not his own, but belonged to Jesus Christ ; of
dignity, to show that he was accounted worthy to be His minister, as Moses and
Joshua are called the servants of God. In the first sense, it is an appellation common
to believers, all of whom are the slaves, or exclusive property of Jesus Christ, who
has purchased them for Himself by the right of redemption, and retains them by the
power of His word and Holy Spirit. In the second view, it denotes that Jesus Christ
had honored Paul by employing him in His Church, and making use of his services
in extending the interests of His kingdom. He assumes this title to distinguish
himself from the ministers or servants of men, and in order to command respect
for his instructions, since he writes in the name and by the authority of Jesus Christ.
2. Called to be an apostle.
a. It was never Paul's plan for his life to be an Apostle. It means to be one sent on
behalf of another to carry a message. An Apostle was an ambassador of the
kingdom of Christ to bring about a peaceful relationship with the people of other
nations. It was by means of the Gospel that this peace was to be achieved, for when
people received the Gospel, and put their faith in Jesus Christ, they achieved a state
of peace between themselves and God.
b. Paul did not decide to do this for Jesus. He was called by Jesus, and in his case
practically forced to become an Apostle. The other Apostles that Jesus chose were
also called, or chosen, by him, but they had all kinds of freedom to follow or forsake
him. Paul was lassoed like a steer on the run and brought to his knees, and then told
what he was going to be for Jesus. He was more than called, for he was also pushed
and pulled. He was a hand picked man to serve a special role in building the church

of Jesus Christ. Jesus said by the way he brought him into the kingdom that he was
a man he needed, for only a Jewish man with his unique gifts would be successful in
reaching the Gentile world.
c. Gill, “called to be an apostle: an apostle was one that was immediately sent by
Christ, and had his authority and doctrine directly from him, and had a power of
working miracles from him, in confirmation of the truth of his mission, authority,
and doctrine; all which were to be found in the author of this epistle, who did not
thrust himself into this office, or take this honor to himself, of which he always
judged himself unworthy, but was called to it according to the will, and by the
grace of God.”
d. Barnes, “Called to be an apostle - This word called means here not merely to be
invited, but has the sense of appointed. It indicates that he had not assumed the
office himself, but that he was set apart to it by the authority of Christ himself. It
was important for Paul to state this,
(1) Because the other apostles had been called or chosen to this work Joh_15:16,
Joh_15:19; Mat_10:1; Luk_6:13; and,
(2) Because Paul was not one of those originally appointed.
It was of consequence for him therefore, to affirm that he had not taken this high
office to himself, but that he had been called to it by the authority of Jesus Christ.
His appointment to this office he not infrequently takes occasion to vindicate;
1Co_9:1, etc.: Gal_1:12-24; 2Co_12:12; 1Ti_2:7; 2Ti_1:11; Rom_11:13.”
e. Barclay, “Paul describes himself as called to be an apostle. In the Old Testament
the great men were men who heard and answered the call of God. Abraham heard
the call of God (Gen. 12:1-3). Moses answered God's call (Exo. 3:10). Jeremiah and
Isaiah were prophets because, almost against their will, they were compelled to
listen to and to answer the call of God (Jer. 1:4-5; Isa. 6:8-9). Paul never thought of
himself as a man who had aspired to an honour; he thought of himself as a man who
had been given a task. Jesus said to his men, You did not choose me, but I chose
you (Jn. 15:16). Paul did not think of life in terms of what he wanted to do, but in
terms of what God meant him to do.
f. Robert Haldane, “Every qualification of an Apostle centered in Paul, as he shows
in various places. He had seen the Lord after His resurrection, 1 Cor. ix. 1. He had
received his commission directly from Jesus Christ and God the Father, Gal. i. 1. lie
possessed the signs of an Apostle, 2 Cor. xii. 12. He had received the knowledge of
the Gospel, not through any man, or by any external means, but by the revelation of
Jesus Christ, Gal. i. 11, 12 ; and although he was as one born out of due time, yet,
by the grace vouchsafed to him, he labored more abundantly than all the rest. When
he here designates himself a called Apostle, he seems to refer to the insinuations of
his enemies, who, from his not having been appointed during the ministry of our
Lord, considered him as inferior to the other Apostles. The object of nearly the
whole of the Second Epistle to the Corinthians is to establish his apostolic authority.

g. Dr. Daniel Hill, “The word CALLED can be used for an official or royal
invitation and for the discharging of the duties of an office. Both aspects are in view
here. Paul was called or invited by Christ to this office and as a servant he would
then discharge the duties of this office. This word CALLED which is KLEITOS is
an adjective which is descriptive of the one who is called. It is found 10 times in the
T, three times in the salutation of this epistle. We are all as believers called by
Jesus Christ (v 6) and we all are called to a position, that of Saints (v 7).
This word CALLED and the corresponding verb has three directions:
1) Looks back to our calling at salvation
2) Looks ahead to our calling into eternity
3) Looks now at our calling to service:
PRICIPLE: Our calling or purpose in life is directed by God, we are in his hands.
What he calls us to be and what he calls us to do is far more important than what
man calls us to be and do or even what we call ourselves to be and to do.”
h. Sadler, “Called to be an apostle. St. Paul here asserts that blas
phemer and injurious though he had once been, Christ had seen
fit to call him to exercise that unique ministry to which He had
designated the twelve. To him, as much as to them, belonged the
words As my Father sent me, so send I you ; He that heareth
you heareth me ; and to him there belonged more particularly
and personally the commission, Go ye and teach all nations;
Go ye to all the world ; for he was the Apostle of the Gen
tiles, not of any particular tribe, or race, or nation, but of the
Gentiles.
St. Paul was called at his conversion, for then the Lord said of
him to Ananias, Go thy way ; for he is a chosen vessel unto me,
to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children
of Israel (Acts ix. 15).
3. Set apart for the gospel of God.
a. To be set apart is to be made a specialist in this work for God. If one is set apart
he cannot be involved in everything. Paul did spend time in making tents for his
survival, and many pastors need second jobs to provide for their families. However,
all such men of God called into ministry need to make the Gospel, and all that God
has said to man through his word, the primary focus of their lives. Pastors who
choose to get involved in many other activities tend to become superficial in their
studies and do not feed their people. Some TV pastors and evangelist get so involved
in selling and promoting other things that they have no depth in what they

communicate to the people. When God sets a man or woman apart for the gospel, he
intends that that will be their main focus in life, as it was with Paul.
b. . Spurgeon made a strong statement about this phrase. He wrote, I do not think
that we are called to have anything to do with party politics, or social problems, or
any such questions; we are set apart for this purpose. separated unto the gospel of
God. There are plenty of people who can attend to those things better than we can.
If we mind our own business, or rather, if we mind our Master's business, we who
are ministers will have quite enough to do. Separated unto the gospel of God.
There are some brethren who in preaching are as timid as mice; but on a political
platform they can roar like lions. Had not they better take to what they like best,
and give up the work at which they are not at home? For my part, I believe that I
am like Paul when he says that he was separated unto the gospel of God. I am set
apart unto the gospel, cut off from everything else that I may preach the glorious
gospel of the blessed God to the perishing sons of men.
c. Gospel comes from two words; gode, meaning good, and spell, meaning a story or
tale. The Gospel then means a good story, or a good tale, or as we usually say, good
news. The word was used on an inscription in reference to the birthday of Emperor
Augustus, and it was often used in announcing a victory on the battlefield. Any good
news could use this word, but the greatest news in all of history is the good news of
what Jesus did for all humanity by making it possible to live forever in his kingdom
as a child of God. ever has their been a better story told with a happy ending as
magnificent as the Gospel. It is not just the good news, it is the better and the best
news man is capable of telling and of hearing. o other story in human history has
had the impact of this story of what Jesus achieved for our salvation. What a
privilege it was for Paul to carry this good news to the Gentiles. The religions of the
world are all about man's search for God, but the Gospel is all about God's finding
man and offering him love, hope, joy, and all that goes with eternal life. Religion is
man looking for God; the Gospel is God being found by man. An unknown poet put
it like this-
Do this and live, the law commands,
But gives me neither feet nor hands.
A better word the gospel brings.
It bids me fly and gives me wings
d. Gill, “The phrase used is either in allusion to the priests and Levites, who were
separated from their brethren the children of Israel, to their sacred employments;
or rather to the apostle's having been פרוש , a Pharisee, which signifies one
separated, as he was now; only with this difference, before he was separated to the
law, but now to the Gospel, to preach and defend it, which he did with all
faithfulness and integrity; the excellency of which Gospel is signified by its being
called the Gospel of God: he is the author of it; his grace is the subject of it; and
he it is who commits it to men, qualifies them for the preaching of it, and succeeds
them in it.”

e. Barnes, “The meaning here does not materially differ from the expression, “called
to be an apostle,” except that perhaps this includes the notion of the purpose or
designation of God to this work. Thus, Paul uses the same word respecting himself;
Gal_1:15, “God, who separated me from my mother’s womb, and called me by his
grace,” that is, God designated me; marked me out; or designed that I should be an
apostle from my infancy. In the same way Jeremiah was designated to be a prophet;
Jer_1:5.”
f. E. Stanley Jones, “Religions are man’s search for God; the gospel is God’s search
for man. There are many religions, but one gospel.”
g. Bob Deffinbaugh, “While all of Paul’s epistles have introductions, this particular
introduction is especially important. The church in Rome was not founded by Paul.
The Roman saints had not been brought to faith through the preaching of Paul. He
did not seem to be well-known in Rome. Paul had not yet been to Rome, and most of
the saints there would not recognize him if they saw him. I believe Paul’s
introductory words provide us with a “mentality of ministry,” which is a bench
mark for every believer. Paul’s words describe, as the title of this message indicates,
“Paul’s Motivation for Ministry.” Before we hear so much as one word of preaching
from Paul, he lays out for us his “perspective.” Paul will tell his readers how much
he cares for them, how often he has tried to come to visit them, and how long and
diligently he has prayed for them. Paul will tell all of his readers “where he is
coming from” and “where he is going” in the rest of his epistle.
Have you ever seen one of those long limousines, the “stretch” kind that looks like
the car has been cut in two with a third section sandwiched in between? They are
unusual, and they catch our attention. Paul’s greeting, in verses 1-7, is what I call a
“stretch version” of his usual greeting. It is the longest greeting of any of his epistles.
h. John MacArthur, “God called a unique man, Paul, to be a major spokesman for
the good news. God had committed to him mysteries concerning the church that
had been hidden from past generations but were now to be revealed (cf. Eph. 3:3,
Col. 1:26-27). Paul was God's keynote speaker for the heralding of the good news
to the Gentiles. He had a remarkable Jewish heritage, Greek education, and Roman
citizenship. He had incredible abilities as a leader, fighter, motivator, and
articulator who was specially called and converted by God Himself. From
Jerusalem to Macedonia, Paul had completed three missionary journeys
proclaiming the good news. And even though Paul was mightily gifted by God and
could perform miracles, he could not rid himself of his own thorn in the flesh (2
Cor. 12:7-9). Paul could cause prisons to fall (Acts 16:26), yet became a permanent
prisoner. All the preachers who have ever preached since Paul have depended on
his sermons for their material. Paul left a great legacy of biblical teaching through
the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

The Greek word for gospel in verse 1 is euangelion. It is used over 60 times by Paul
in his epistles. Paul had lived all his life hearing only the bad news, but once he
heard the good news he couldn't help but tell everyone in sight about it. Tyndale
wrote that the word euangelion signifies good, merry, glad and joyful tidings that
makes a man's heart rejoice and makes him sing and dance and leap for joy. The
good news is the merry, glad, and joyful news that God will deliver us from our sin.
The thrust of the Greek text of Romans 1:1 is that the good news is from God. It is
important that Paul distinguished between ordinary good news and good news from
God because euangelion was a common Greek word. In one of its more prominent
occurrences, it was used to precede messages to the people from the emperor. In the
Roman Empire, the people were required to worship the emperor as if he were a
god. Whenever someone from the emperor's official party made an important
announcement, it was called euangelion, or good news. The messenger would
proclaim, Good news, the emperor has given birth to an heir or Good news, a
new emperor has acceded to the throne.
Paul contrasts his good news as if to say, from the emperor by saying, I'm writing
to you at Rome who are used to hearing the euangelion of the empire and I'm telling
you I've got good news not from Caesar, but from God. The really good news is
from God, (most of the Caesars were bad news!). God brings good news to those
who are undeserving.”
i. MacArthur goes on, “ow there's a basic problem. And maybe I can define it for
you in this way. Imagine a little box, a cube--if you will-- utterly closed in on all
sides. That represents man's world. Inside the box man exists. He exists in a time-space
capsule. Outside is the supernatural. Outside is eternity. Outside is God. Man
bangs around inside his little cube, it has no windows. He speculates about what's on
the outside. He plays games with his fantasy. He searches to know God. But it is
impossible for him to escape for by very definition, the natural cannot enter into the
supernatural. That which is confined to time and space cannot escape into eternity
and infinity. And so man is confined in his little cubicle.
But there's something in him that longs to comprehend what's outside. And so, he
invents gods that he thinks exist and he dreams of worlds of fantasy. I believe that
that is the reason we have not only a proliferation of religion in our world, but today
we have a proliferation of interest in the fantasies of space travel, star wars,
extraterrestrial beings. All of these are a part of man's fantasy as he wishes so
desperately so get out of his box. But he can't. All of the religions of the world tell
him he can. You just be a good person and you'll burst out of your little box and
discover God. Just be...be sure that you fulfill these routines and these rituals and
carry out these liturgies and you'll escape and you'll meet God. The pagans used to
say if you just get yourself into ecstasia and enthusiasmas, states of some kind
of high, you'll perceive God.
But it's all a lie because man is confined by his very nature. one of us can go into a

phone booth, take off our clothes and come out Superman. Go into a phone booth
and take off your clothes and you'll come out into jail. obody has that capacity, as
much as we would like to be able to do it. And that's where Christianity enters the
scene. Christianity acknowledges that man can't get out of his box and Christianity
says good news, God has invaded the box from the outside. God has entered in to
tell us what's out there and to tell us how we, too, can dwell out there in His
presence forever. That is good news, folks. Man is a prisoner. He is a captive. And
the end of his captivity is devastation forever unless he escapes. And that's the good
news of Christianity. Man couldn't get out, but God could get in. The natural cannot
come into the supernatural, but the supernatural can condescend to the natural.
And that is exactly what God did. And that is the good news of God that Paul
mentions in verse 1.”
j. Gospel verses that explain what Paul was called to preach.
“Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you,
which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; By which also ye are saved, if ye
keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. For I
delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for
our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again
the third day according to the scriptures” (1 Corinthians 15:1-4).
“For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might
bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit” (1
Peter 3:18).
“For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which
are saved it is the power of God” (1 Cor. 1:18).
“For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him
crucified” (1 Cor. 2:2).
“That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine
heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved” (Rom. 10:9).
“For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of
God: ot of works, lest any man should boast” (Eph. 2:8-9).
“Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus”
(Rom. 3:24).
“For though I preach the gospel, I have nothing to glory of: for necessity is laid
upon me; yea, woe is unto me, if I preach not the gospel” (1 Cor. 9:16).
“But as we were allowed of God to be put in trust with the gospel, even so we speak;

not as pleasing men, but God, which trieth our hearts” (1 Thess. 2:4).
“To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing
their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.
ow then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we
pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God” (2 Cor. 5:19-20).
“And for me, that utterance may be given unto me, that I may open my mouth
boldly, to make known the mystery of the gospel, For which I am an ambassador in
bonds: that therein I may speak boldly, as I ought to speak” (Eph. 6:19-20).
“For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto
salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek”
(Romans 1:16).
The Gospel is a fact; therefore tell it simply.
The Gospel is a joyful fact; therefore tell it cheerfully.
The Gospel is an entrusted fact; therefore tell it faithfully.
The Gospel is a fact of infinite moment; therefore tell it earnestly.
The Gospel is a fact of infinite love; therefore tell it feelingly.
The Gospel is a fact about a Person; therefore preach CHRIST!
–Archibald Brown
k. Robert Haldane, “It is the Gospel of God, inasmuch as God is its author, its
interpreter, its subject : its author, as He has purposed it in His eternal decrees ; its
interpreter, as He Himself hath declared it to men ; its subject, because in the
Gospel His sovereign perfections and purposes towards men are manifested. For the
same reasons it is also called the Gospel of the grace of God, the Gospel of peace, the
Gospel of the kingdom, the Gospel of salvation, the everlasting Gospel, the glorious
Gospel of the blessed God. This Gospel is the glad tidings from God of the
accomplishment of the promise of salvation that had been made to Adam. That
promise had been typically represented by the institution of sacrifice, and
transmitted by oral tradition. It had been solemnly proclaimed by Enoch and by
oah before the flood ; it had been more particularly announced to Abraham, to
Isaac, and to Jacob ; by Moses, it was exhibited in those typical representations
contained in the law, which had a shadow of good things to come. Its fulfillment
was the spirit and object of the whole prophetic testimony, in the predictions
concerning a new covenant, and in all that was foretold respecting the advent of the
Messiah.

l. This first verse could be outlined:
1. His Master-Jesus
2. His Motivation-Called
3. His Mission-Preach the Gospel
2 the gospel he promised beforehand through his
prophets in the Holy Scriptures
1. Paul is saying that the Gospel was long ago proclaimed by God through his
prophets in the holy Scriptures. This means that all Jesus did for us to win our
salvation was known to be coming in the future for those in the Old Testament. This
means that the Bible scholars back then in Israel should have known it and
welcomed Jesus when he came and fulfilled all of those prophecies so completely.
What good is prophecy of the future if you do not decipher it and see it taking place
in your lifetime? There was no excuse for the Jews not to know that Jesus was their
Messiah, for they had in writing, and they still could not see the obvious. It was
promised in the Old Testament, and delivered in the ew Testament. Those who
were looking with the spirit and eyes that G. K. Chesterton wrote about received the
delivered Gospel when they saw Jesus. He wrote,
So with the wan, waste grasses on my spear,
I ride forever seeking after God.
My hair grows whiter than my thistle plume
And all my limbs re loose; but in my eyes
The star of an unconquerable praise;
For in my soul one hope for ever sings,
That at the next white corner of the road
My eyes may look on Him.
In Luke 2:25-32 we see a perfect example: “ow there was a man in Jerusalem
called Simeon, who was righteous and devout. He was waiting for the consolation of
Israel, and the Holy Spirit was on him. 26 It had been revealed to him by the Holy
Spirit that he would not die before he had seen the Lord’s Messiah. 27 Moved by the
Spirit, he went into the temple courts. When the parents brought in the child Jesus
to do for him what the custom of the Law required, 28 Simeon took him in his arms
and praised God, saying:
29 “Sovereign Lord, as you have promised,
you may now dismiss your servant in peace.
30 For my eyes have seen your salvation,

31 which you have prepared in the sight of all nations:
32 a light for revelation to the Gentiles,
and the glory of your people Israel.”
1B. Bob Deffinbaugh, “The Gospel which Paul preached was not one of his own
making. It was the message which was in fulfillment of all that the Old Testament
prophets had promised (v. 2). It was, then, consistent with all that true Judaism
believed and anticipated. It was not a revelation of something entirely new and
unexpected, but a realization of that which had been promised.”
1C. Given Blakely, “From the very beginning, the Gospel was identified with the
message of the prophets. When Jesus first began to preach, announcing His mission,
He said He was doing what Isaiah the Prophet had foretold (Luke 4:18-19). On the
day of Pentecost, Peter distinguished both the happenings of the day and his unique
message with the prophets (Acts 2:16,30). Throughout the book of Acts, the Gospel
was consistently said to be according to the words of the holy Prophets. All the
Prophets . . . have likewise foretold of these days (Acts 3:24). To Him give all the
Prophetswitness (Acts 10:43). And to this agree the words of the Prophets (Acts
15:15). Paul confessed, I continue unto this day, witnessing both to small and great,
saying none other things than those which the Prophets and Moses did say should
come (Acts 26:22). From morning until evening he expounded and testified the
kingdom of God, persuading them concerning Jesus, both out of the law of Moses,
and out of the Prophets (Acts 28:23). Peter affirmed the salvation declared in the
Gospel had been announced beforehand by the Prophets (1 Pet 1:10). There is no
question about this.
As the Author of eternal salvation (Heb 5:9), the Lord Jesus Himself was the
theme of the Prophets. His birth (Matt 2:6; Mic 5:2), life (Lk 2:40; Isa 53:2),
ministry (Lk 4:18-19; Isa 62:1-3), death (1 Pet 2:24; Isa 53:4-6), resurrection (Acts
2:27; Psa 49;15), ascension (Eph 4:8; Psa 68:18), and high priestly ministry (Heb
5:6; Psa 110:4), were foretold by the Prophets. Thus the heart of the Gospel, the Son
of God, was declared by the Prophets.”
2. In Gal. 3:8 Paul wrote, the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the
Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, All the
nations shall be blessed in you. He was quoting Gen. 12:3 where God made it clear
to Abraham that through his blood line God would send someone who would do
something so spectacular that the entire world of humanity would be benefited by it.
Old Testament saints were saved by their faith in this promise of God, just as we are
saved today by our faith in the fulfillment of that promise in Christ. Salvation has
always been based on faith in the promise of God.
2B. Spurgeon, “otice, brethren, how reverent the apostles were to Holy Scripture.
They had no doubt about its inspiration. They quoted the old Testament, and

delighted to make it a kind of basis for the ew Testament: which he had promised
afore by his prophets in the Holy Scriptures.
The Bible contains the mind of God, the state of man, the way of salvation, the doom
of sinners, and the happiness of believers. Its doctrines are holy, its precepts are
binding, its histories are true, and its decisions are immutable. Read it to be wise,
believe it to be safe, and practice it to be holy. It contains light to direct you, food to
support you, and comfort to cheer you.
It is the traveler's map, the pilgrim's staff, the pilot's compass, the soldier's sword,
and the Christian's charter. Here Paradise is restored, Heaven opened, and the
gates of hell disclosed. Christ is its grand subject, our good the design, and the glory
of God its end.
It should fill the memory, rule the heart, and guide the feet. Read it slowly,
frequently, and prayerfully. It is a mine of wealth, a paradise of glory, and a river of
pleasure. It is given you in life, will be opened at the judgment, and be remembered
forever. It involves the highest responsibility, will reward the greatest labor, and
will condemn all who trifle with its sacred contents.
2C. Dr. Daniel Hill, “Paul uses three prepositions in this verse to make three
points about the Gospel. He uses through, in, and concerning to tell us
the how of the Gospel, the where of the Gospel, and the who of the Gospel.
1.How the Gospel came to us - God promised it previously in the Old Testament
through His prophets. God predicted it and we now see a continuity and unity of
the Old Testament and the New. Promises were made through men who also, as
Paul, were called by God. The Gospel did not just suddenly burst upon the scene
of history with the advent of Christ. It was the theme of words of the prophets
and the works of Christ.
2. How was the Gospel given to man? In the holy Scriptures.
The word SCRIPTURES is the word GRAFW, a word that was never used for
oral communication, only that which was written down and could be read and
studied. This statement prepares his readers for the extensive reference Paul
will make to the OT in this epistle.
We see a channel of inspiration: From the ultimate source of God, through His
prophets, preserved for mankind in the holy Scriptures.
This verse confronts any who would say that the Bible is inaccurate. It is
accurate because God revealed the Gospel, His Good news, through the
prophets who were under obligation to accurately record what God revealed.
3. The Who of the Gospel is mentioned in verse 3: Concerning His Son...
The preposition is PERI, which means fully around, as in perimeter. Hence,

the Lord Jesus is not just a part of the Gospel, He is the Gospel. He fully
engulfs the Good News of God.
The Gospel in the Old Testament was promised, promises that were revealed
in part. When the part that was revealed was believed by faith, man was saved.
But now all these promises, found in direct statements regarding the Messiah,
in the sacrificial system of the Law, in typology, in analogy, are fulfilled in a
person...God's own Son, Jesus Christ.”
3. Gill, “The Gospel is here further commended from the antiquity it: it was no
novel doctrine, an upstart notion, but what God had conceived in his own breast
from eternity. This mystery was hid in him from the beginning of the world, and
was ordained before the world was; in time God was pleased to make it known to
the sons of men; he promised it, he spoke of it, and declared it by his prophets,
Isaiah and others, afore the Apostle Paul was called forth to be a preacher of it;
which promise, or promises of it, lie in the Holy Scriptures; the books of the Old
Testament, so called from the author, matter, and usefulness of them. The apostle
speaks in the language of his nation, for the Jews frequently call the Bible, writings,
Holy Ones; for, say they,all the Scriptures are holy (c), and style them,
Scriptures of holiness, or holy Scriptures.”
4. Clarke, “Which he had promised afore - Both in the law and in the prophets God
showed his purpose to introduce into the world a more perfect and glorious state of
things; which state was to take place by and under the influence of the Messiah, who
should bring life and immortality to light by his Gospel.
5. Barnes, “Which he had promised afore - Which gospel, or which doctrines, he
had before announced.
By the prophets - The word “prophets” here is used to include those who wrote as
well as those who spake. It included the teachers of the ancient Jews generally.
In the holy scriptures - In the writings of the Old Testament. They were called
holy because they were inspired by the Holy Spirit, and were regarded as separated
from all other writings, and worthy of all reverence. The apostle here declares that
he was not about to advance anything new. His doctrines were in accordance with
the acknowledged oracles of God. Though they might appear to be new, yet he
regarded the gospel as entirely consistent with all that had been declared in the
Jewish dispensation; and not only consistent, but as actually promised there. He
affirms, therefore:
(1) That all this was promised, and no small part of the Epistle is employed to
show this.
(2) That it was confirmed by the authority of holy and inspired men.
(3) That it depended on no vague and loose tradition, but was recorded, so that
people might examine for themselves.
The reason why the apostle was so anxious to show that his doctrine coincided
with the Old Testament was because the church at Rome was made up in part of

Jews. He wished to show them, and the remainder of his countrymen, that the
Christian religion was built on the foundation of their prophets, and their
acknowledged writings. So doing, he would disarm their prejudice, and furnish a
proof of the truth of religion. It was a constant position with the apostle that he
advanced nothing but what was maintained by the best and holiest men of the
nation. Act_26:22-23, “saying none other things than those which the prophets and
Moses did say should come,” etc. There was a further reason here for his appealing
so much to the Old Testament. He had never been at Rome. He was therefore
personally a stranger, and it was proper for him then especially to show his regard
for the doctrines of the prophets. Hence, he appeals here so often to the Old
Testament; and defends every point by the authority of the Bible. The particular
passages of the Old Testament on which he relied will come before us in the course
of the Epistle. See particularly Rom. 3;4; 9; 10; 11. We may see here,
(1) The reverence which Paul showed for the Old Testament. He never
undervalued it. He never regarded it as obsolete, or useless. He manifestly
studied it; and never fell into the impious opinion that the Old Testament is of
little value.
(2) If these things were promised - predicted in the Old Testament, then
Christianity is true. Every passage which he adduces is therefore proof that it
is from God.
6. Look at Lk 24:27: And beginning with Moses and with all the prophets, He
explained to them the things concerning Himself in all of the Scriptures. He goes
back into the Old Testament. The good news didn’t begin when Jesus was born in
Bethlehem. The good news was announced beforehand by God through His
prophets. If we would look to see what they had to say, it all pointed to Jesus Christ,
the good news of God.
Look in John 5:39, 40 Jesus is talking to some of the religious folks there in verses
39-40: You search the Scriptures, because you think that in them you have eternal
life; and it is these that bear witness of Me; and you are unwilling to come to Me,
that you may have life. He is saying, I am the One who gives eternal life and the
Scriptures bear witness of Me.
Look down in Jn 5:46: For if you believed Moses, you would believe Me; for he
[Moses] wrote of Me. But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe My
words? Jesus was saying, I have already been announced. Why do you look at Me
like I am some strange creature? The whole Old Testament pointed to My coming. I
am the good news of God.
7. Bob Deffinbaugh, “Paul highlights several of the fundamental elements of his
gospel:
(1) Paul’s gospel was based upon the belief in a triune God. Paul was a trinitarian.
In verses 2-4, Paul refers to all three members of the Godhead: the Father (verse 2),
the Son, who was of David’s seed, and who is exalted in the heavens, ready to reign

over God’s kingdom (verses 3-4), and the Holy Spirit (verse 4).
(2) Paul’s gospel was established by the resurrection of Christ from the dead (verse
4).
(3) Paul’s gospel was not “new,” but was the fulfillment of that which God had
promised His people through the Old Testament prophets (verse 2).
(4) Paul’s gospel was God’s provision for the salvation of both Jews and Gentiles
(verses 5-6).
(5) Paul’s gospel was a sovereign calling, a calling to salvation, a calling to service,
and a calling to a Christian lifestyle, a lifestyle of obedience (verses 5-7).
8. Robert Haldane, “By declaring that the Gospel had been before promised, Paul
tacitly repels the accusation that it was a novel doctrine. At the same time, he states
its Divine origin as a reason why nothing new is to be admitted in religion. He
further shows in what respect the Old and ew Testaments differ not as containing
two religions essentially dissimilar, but as exhibiting the same grand truth
predicted, prefigured, and fulfilled. The Old Testament is the promise of the ew,
and the ew the accomplishment of the Old. The Gospel had been promised by all
the prophecies which foretold a new covenant, by those which predicted the coming
of the Messiah, by all the observances, under the law, that contained in themselves
the promise of the things they prefigured, by the whole of the legal economy, that
preceded the Gospel, in which was displayed the strictness of Divine justice, which
in itself would have been a ministration only of condemnation, had it not been
accompanied by all the revelations of grace and mercy, which were in substance and
embryo the Gospel itself, and consequently foretold and prepared the way for a
more perfect development.
By His Prophets. Paul here also repels another accusation of the Jews, namely, that
the Apostles were opposed to Moses and the Prophets; and intimates their complete
agreement. He thus endeavors to secure attention and submission to his doctrine, by
removing the prejudices entertained against it, and by showing that none could
reject it without rejecting the Prophets. In addition to this, he establishes the
authority of the Prophets by intimating that it was God Himself who spoke by
them, and consequently that their words must be received as a revelation from
heaven.”
3 regarding his Son, who as to his human nature
was a descendant of David,

1. Matthew traces the genealogy of Jesus back to king David, and that is why Jesus
is called the son of David. He had a human ancestry because he was the product of
human ancestry through Mary plus the Holy Spirit. He had a human nature and a
spiritual nature. He was human, and so he died, but he was deity, and so he rose
again. Here in verses 2 and 3 Paul establishes the dual nature of Christ. Only a man
has a genealogy, for there is no such thing for angels and God. But only deity can
escape death, for no mere man has such power.
2. Gill, “Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord,.... These words are in
connection with the Gospel of God, Rom_1:1, and express the subject matter of it,
the Son of God, Jesus Christ our Lord; for Christ, as the Son of God, the Savior of
sinners, the only Mediator between God and men, who is Lord both of the dead and
living, is the sum and substance of the Gospel: he is here described by his relation to
God, his Son, of the same nature with him, equal to him, and distinct from him; by
his usual names, Jesus Christ, the one signifying a Savior, the other
anointed, and both, that he was anointed of God to be the Savior of his people;
and by his dominion over the saints our Lord, not merely by creation, but by
redemption and grace, and happy is the person that can claim interest in him, as is
here done; and by the distinction of natures in him:
which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh; this respects Christ in
his human nature, who was made flesh, and of a woman; and shows his existence
before his incarnation, and the immediate power and hand of God in it; and which
was done, not by transmutation of him into flesh, but by an assumption of human
nature into union with his divine person: he is said to be made of the seed of
David; this points out the family from whence he sprung; designs the posterity of
David, particularly Mary; has regard to the promise made to David, which God
fulfilled; and shows the royal descent of Christ: it is added, according to the flesh;
that is, according to his human nature; which phrase does not denote the
corruption, but the truth of that nature; and supposes that he had another nature,
otherwise there would have been no need of this limiting and restrictive clause.”
3. Clarke, “Concerning his Son - That is, the Gospel relates every thing concerning
the conception, birth, preaching, miracles, passion, death, resurrection, and
ascension of Jesus Christ, who was of the seed-royal, being, as far as his humanity
was considered, the son of David, and then the only rightful heir to the Israelitish
throne.
4. Barnes, “Concerning his Son - This is connected with the first verse, with the
word “gospel.” The gospel of God concerning his Son. The design of the gospel was
to make a communication relative to his Son Jesus Christ. This is the whole of it.
There is no “good news” to man respecting salvation except what comes by Jesus
Christ.
Which was made - The word translated “was made” means usually “to be,” or “to

become.” It is used, however, in the sense of being born. Thus, Gal_4:4, “God sent
forth his Son made of a woman,” born of a woman. Joh_8:58, “before Abraham was
(born), I am.” In this sense it seems to be used here, who was born, or descended
from the seed of David.
Of the seed of David - Of the posterity or lineage of David. He was a descendant of
David. David was perhaps the most illustrious of the kings of Israel. The promise to
him was that there should not fail a man to sit on this throne; 1Ki_2:4; 1Ki_8:25;
1Ki_9:5; 2Ch_6:16. This ancient promise was understood as referring to the
Messiah, and hence, in the ew Testament he is called the descendant of David, and
so much pains is taken to show that he was of his line; Luk_1:27; Mat_9:27;
Mat_15:22; Mat_12:23; Mat_21:9, Mat_21:15; Mat_22:42, Mat_22:45; Joh_7:42;
2Ti_2:8. As the Jews universally believed that the Messiah would be descended from
David Joh_7:42, it was of great importance for the sacred writers to make it out
clearly that Jesus of azareth was of that line and family. Hence, it happened, that
though our Saviour was humble, and poor, and obscure, yet he had that on which
no small part of the world have been accustomed so much to pride themselves, an
illustrious ancestry. To a Jew there could be scarcely any honor so high as to be
descended from the best of their kings; and it shows how little the Lord Jesus
esteemed the honors of this world, that he could always evince his deep humility in
circumstances where people are usually proud; and that when he spoke of the
honors of this world, and told how little they were worth, he was not denouncing
what was not within his reach.
According to the flesh - The word “flesh,” σάρξ sarx, is used in the Scriptures in a
great variety of significations.
(1) It denotes, as with us, the flesh literally of any living being; Luk_24:39, “A
spirit hath not flesh and bones,” etc.
(2) The animal system, the body, including flesh and bones, the visible part of
man, in distinction from the invisible, or the soul; Act_2:31, “either did his flesh
(his body) “see corruption.” 1Co_5:5; 1Co_15:39.
(3) The man, the whole animated system, body and soul; Rom_8:3, “In the
likeness of sinful flesh. 1Co_15:50; Mat_16:17; Luk_3:6.
(4) Human nature. As a man. Thus, Act_2:30, “God hath sworn with an oath that
of the fruit of his loins according to the flesh, that is, in his human nature, he would
raise up Christ to sit on his throne.” Rom_9:5, “whose are the fathers, and of whom,
as concerning the flesh, Christ came, who is over all, God blessed forever.” The
same is its meaning here. He was a descendant of David in his human nature, or as a
man. This implies, of course, that he had another nature besides his human, or that
while he was a man he was also something else; that there was a nature in which he
was not descended from David.
That this is its meaning will still further appear by the following observations.
(1) The apostle expressly makes a contrast between his condition according to the
flesh, and that according to the spirit of holiness.
(2) The expression “according to the flesh” is applied to no other one in the ew
Testament but to Jesus Christ. Though the word “flesh” often occurs, and is often
used to denote man, yet the special expression, “according to the flesh” occurs in no

other connection.
In all the Scriptures it is never said of any prophet or apostle, any lawgiver or
king, or any man in any capacity, that he came in the flesh, or that he was
descended from certain ancestors according to the flesh. or is such an expression
ever used any where else. If it were applied to a mere man, we should instantly ask
in what other way could he come than in the flesh? Has he a higher nature? Is he an
angel, or a seraph? The expression would be unmeaningful. And when, therefore, it
is applied to Jesus Christ, it implies, if language has any meaning, that there was a
sense in which Jesus was not descended from David. What that was, appears in the
next verse.
5. Henry, “The subject-matter of it: it is concerning Christ, Rom_1:3, Rom_1:4. The
prophets and apostles all bear witness to him; he is the true treasure hid in the field
of the scriptures. Observe, When Paul mentions Christ, how he heaps up his names
and titles, his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, as one that took a pleasure in speaking of
him; and, having mentioned him, he cannot go on in his discourse without some
expression of love and honour, as here, where in one person he shows us his two
distinct natures. (1.) His human nature: Made of the seed of David (Rom_1:3), that
is, born of the virgin Mary, who was of the house of David (Luk_1:27), as was
Joseph his supposed father, Luk_2:4. David is here mentioned, because of the
special promises made to him concerning the Messiah, especially his kingly office;
2Sa_7:12; Psa_132:11, compared with Luk_1:32, Luk_1:33. (2.) His divine nature:
Declared to be the Son of God (Rom_1:4), the Son of God by eternal generation, or,
as it is here explained, according to the Spirit of holiness. According to the flesh, that
is, his human nature, he was of the seed of David; but, according to the Spirit of
holiness, that is, the divine nature (as he is said to be quickened by the Spirit,
1Pe_3:18, compared with 2Co_13:4), he is the Son of God. The great proof or
demonstration of this is his resurrection from the dead, which proved it effectually
and undeniably. The sign of the prophet Jonas, Christ's resurrection, was intended
for the last conviction, Mat_12:39, Mat_12:40. Those that would not be convinced
by that would be convinced by nothing. So that we have here a summary of the
gospel doctrine concerning Christ's two natures in one person.
6. Greg Herrick, “The reference to Jesus as a descendent of David according to the
flesh functions on two levels. First, it makes plain that the eternal son of God took
on full and complete humanity (John 1:1, 14; Phil 2:6-11) without which there can be
no good news for the sons of Adam. Second, the explicit link with David is not just to
suggest his humanity, but also to make clear his special relationship to the line of
promise. Jesus met the qualifications of one to whom the promise of 2 Samuel 7:12-
16 could be made (cf. also Pss 72; 89). This theme of Jesus’ Davidic lineage will
surface again in passages like 15:12.
The promise in 2 Samuel 7:12-16 is extremely important in the ew Testament and
the connection to it here is apparent (e.g., Matt 1:1; Acts 13:34; 2 Cor 6:18). athan
tells David, among other things, that he will never lack a “son” to sit on his throne.
Jesus, by virtue of his obedience and subsequent resurrection, has been appointed

(tou' oJrisqevnto, tou horisthentos; i.e., in keeping with the language of the
appointment of Davidic kings) the “son-of-God-in-power” for eternity (that is, the
new and final Davidic ruler). In short, the resurrected messiah (note the stress on
Christ Jesus in 1:1) fulfills the promise that one of David’s descendants would sit on
David’s throne eternally and rule over the nations. It is likely that OT passages such
as Psalm 2:7 stand behind Romans 1:3-4.”
7. Dr. Daniel Hill, “This unique person, Jesus Christ, was a descendant of David as
we see in Matthew, chapter 1. This looks at Jesus' royalty. He was a King, the King
of kings. In Revelation 22:16 we see that the ew Testament closes with this same
thought, I, Jesus, have sent My angel to testify to you these things for the churches. I am the root
and the offspring of David, the bright morning star. So at the beginning of Matthew, the
beginning of Romans, and at the end of Revelation, across the entire ew
Testament, we are reminded that Jesus is the King. God would never have us forget
that Jesus is the King of all kings. His royalty is from David and from His work on
the Cross in addition to His divine royalty. Every servant needs a master and our
Master is a King.”
8. S. Lewis Johnson, “ow this text that follows, which expands, Concerning his
Son, Jesus Christ our Lord, made of the seed of David according to the flesh, and
so on, is a very difficult Christological text. And I'm going to try to elucidate it as
simply as I possibly can, but it is a very difficult text; a difficult passage. And,
unfortunately, because of its difficulty, it has never been given the place in Pauline
thinking that it should have been given. Luther said, This text has never been
adequately interpreted by anyone and then he proceeded to give the adequate
interpretation. Unfortunately, very few have followed him in his interpretation. So
I'm not going to be so bold as to suggest that I'm giving you the adequate
interpretation. I won't tell you want I think, but nevertheless, I'm not going to say it
is the adequate interpretation. But, almost all of what I will say to you will be in
harmony with the word of God. I hope all of it is.
ow notice what he says. First of all, he says that it concerns his Son who was
made of the seed of David according to the flesh. ow if you have a ew American
Standard Bible, for example, you will find that the term made of the Authorized
Version is rendered by born of the seed of David according to the flesh. That's all
right. That's probably a little more accurate than the expression of the Authorized
Version. But, surely, anyone reading the Authorized Version and reading the words
Who was made of the seed of David according to the flesh understands that this is
of our Lord's birth. So he came to be. That's the force of the Greek expression,
He came to be of the seed of David according to the flesh. In other words, Jesus
Christ entered human existence, the human stage of existence by birth. In the
fullness of time, God sent forth his Son who came to be of a woman, who came to be
under law. Paul says in another place, that he might redeem those who were under
the law that they might receive the adoption of sons. So he was made of the seed of

David according to the flesh. He entered the human stage of existence by birth and
then he was appointed to a further status as the text will point out.
ow this is the first of three obvious antitheses that are found in this expression of
verses 3 and 4. The first, made, declared, or appointed, verse 4. otice the
way in which this statement is constructed. There are three of these antitheses, He
was 'made' of the seed of David according to the flesh, 'appointed' Son of God with
power. Then, Seed of David, Son of God, according to the flesh, according to the
spirit of holiness. So here is a statement constructed by Paul with a great deal of
care expressive of doctrinally important points.
The first has to do with his human existence and his appointment to a higher status.
ow that will be developed when we talk about Son of God and then according to
the spirit of holiness. But let's look at the second of the antitheses. It's seed of
David and Son of God. He said, He was born of the seed of David according to
the flesh and appointed Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness
by the resurrection from the dead. So, on the one hand, we have his Davidic
Sonship. ow that's important.
ow we have seen this recently because we've been expounding the Epistle to the
Romans. And we remember that in the 49th chapter of the Book of Genesis, Jacob
had said with reference to Judah that Judah would be the tribe from which the
Messiah should come. He said that Judah, and he used the expression Shiloh,
remember? That Judah would stand at the top of the tribes so far as position is
concerned. That the ruler would not, well, let's turn to it because I'm not starting it
quite properly, Genesis chapter 49 and verse 10. And the point I want you to notice
is simply the connection with the tribe of Judah. He says, The sceptre shall not
depart from Judah, nor the lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh come; and
unto him shall the gathering of the people be.
Later on, this prophecy is further defined as a reference to the family of David;
Jesse, and his son. And so, we have here beginning in the Book of Genesis, reference
to the Davidic line of our Lord Jesus Christ, The sceptre shall not depart from
Judah, until the one whose name is Shiloh. And that name means him to whom it
all belongs. So he is seed of David. That is part of the apostle's preaching.
He preached the Davidic Sonship of the Lord Jesus Christ. Any preaching of the
gospel to be fully Pauline must be a preaching of the gospel that recognizes the
Davidic Sonship of the Lord Jesus because this is the thing that connects him with
all of those promises of the Old Testament that God has given. But over against
seed of David, he says, we have Son of God, Appointed Son of God with power
according to a spirit of holiness so Davidic Sonship on one side, divine Sonship in
power on the other side.
ow when he says that he was appointed Son of God, we are not to think that Jesus
Christ was not Son of God in the ultimate sense of his essential Sonship until he was

appointed by the Father. At some point in time, here, the resurrection from the
dead. This is not a relationship to his essential Sonship. This is a relationship to his
official work as the Son of God. It's a text that refers to his Lordship and it is by
virtue of the resurrection that our Lord was appointed Son of God with power.
That is the time at which having come forth from the grave, he was marked out as
God's Messianic Son endued with specific power as the Son of God. So the
reference here then is to his official Lordship not his essential Sonship. And this is,
by the resurrection, he says. He was declared to be the Son of God with power,
according to the spirit of holiness by the resurrection from the dead. So then the
reference is to him as the divine Son marked out as Lord of all by the resurrection.
You remember that the Apostle Peter on the day of Pentecost after the resurrection
proclaims him as Lord and calls upon men to believe in him as Lord in that great
sermon. He concludes in the latter part of the 2nd chapter by saying, Therefore let
all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom
ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ. That's what Paul is talking about right
here. He means that he has been appointed to this status by virtue of the
resurrection from the dead. He is the official Lord of all.
ow it is remarkable that the Bible does present these things concerning the Lord
Jesus Christ because what we have is a unique person. He's more than a man. He is
the seed of David, but he is also the Son of God and Lord of all. There are some
who like to think of this text as teaching the human nature of our Lord and the
divine nature of our Lord and, of course, that's true. But, that is not probably what
the apostle is trying to say. He's trying to say just what I've set forth for you. But, it
is true that he is a person who has a human nature and also a divine nature and yet
he is one person.”
4 and who through the Spirit of holiness was
declared with power to be the Son of God by his
resurrection from the dead: Jesus Christ our
Lord.
1. When you can be crucified and buried, and then come back to life, you qualify to
be declared the Son of God with power, and Jesus alone of all men in history
achieved this qualification. There is no competition, for nobody else has been dead
and buried and then come back to cook breakfast for his friends. Jesus is one of a
kind, and that is why the Holy Spirit declares him to be the Son of God. Who else

could he be and have the power to conquer death?
1B. Alan Carr,
A. He is Jesus - This is His human ame. The title of His humiliation. (It is
interesting to note that demons always referred to Jesus Christ by this name alone.)
B. He is Christ - The words means the Anointed. This name is His official
title. It portrays Him as Prophet, Deut. 18:15-19; Priest, Psa. 110:4; and King,
2 Sam. 7:12-13. In Jesus Christ is found the One who had been promised
before the foundation of the world. He is the Messiah and He is Savior of the
world.
C. He is Lord - The third title mentioned by Paul is that of Lord. This is the
title of His exaltation. This word reminds us that He is the victor over death
and the grave and that He is the resurrected and exalted One. He is to be
honored, feared, obeyed and served. He is Lord, Acts 2:36.
1C. Alan Carr,
A. His Human Credentials - Paul tells us that He came from the kingly line of
David. As such, Jesus is qualified to sit upon the throne as the King of the Jews.
When the Bible says that He was made, it literally means to become. Jesus is God,
yet He became a man so that He might live among us and die for us. He walked as
we walk, He suffered as we suffer, He bled as we bleed. Therefore, since He is a
man, and has lived as a man, He is more than qualified to aid us in our times of
difficulty - Heb. 4:15.
B. His Heavenly Credentials - While Paul says that Jesus was the son of David, that
is, a man, he also tells us that there is proof that Jesus is the Son of God. There are 2
proofs given in verse 4 that declare His Heavenly Credentials
1. His Righteousness - The very fact that Jesus was born without sin, that
He lived without sin and that He died without sin proves that He was
heavenly in His origin. (2 Cor. 5:21; Heb. 4:15; Heb. 7:26; 1 Pet. 1:19; 1
Pet. 2:22.)
(Ill. Jesus lived His life as a man by doing what we are expected to do: He
yielded totally to the Spirit of holiness. Everything Jesus did, He did as
a Spirit filled man. He lived a righteous life by the power of the Holy
Ghost, and we can too, if we will yield to God. Will you ever be sinless in
this flesh? Probably not! But, if you yield to the Spirit as you should,
then you will certainly sin less, 1 Cor. 10:13.)
2. His Resurrection - Just as His righteous life proved His heavenly

origin, so too does His resurrection from the dead. You see, death could
never hold Jesus! He was perfectly holy and only submitted to death for
our sakes, John 10:18. All others who have ever lived and died are gone
from this earth forever, but not Jesus! He died and conquered death so
that those who follow Him might enjoy eternal life!”
2. It would not have been such a devastating problem for his disciples when Jesus
was crucified had they listened to him. He told them that he had the power to lay
down his life and then the power to take it again. He told them that they could
destroy his body and he would raise it again in three days. He even said, I am the
resurrection and the life. With all of this information they were still in a state of
unbelief when Jesus died. This became their greatest message after the resurrection,
but they could not grasp it before the resurrection.
2B. Calvin, “Concerning his own Son, etc. -- This is a remarkable passage, by
which we are taught that the whole gospel is included in Christ, so
that if any removes one step from Christ, he withdraws himself from the
gospel. For since he is the living and express image of the Father, it
is no wonder, that he alone is set before us as one to whom our whole
faith is to be directed and in whom it is to center. It is then a
definition of the gospel, by which Paul expresses what is summarily
comprehended in it. I have rendered the words which follow, Jesus
Christ our Lord, in the same case; which seems to me to be most
agreeable with the context. We hence learn, that he who has made a due
proficiency in the knowledge of Christ, has acquired every thing which
can be learned from the gospel; and, on the other hand, that they who
seek to be wise without Christ, are not only foolish, but even completely insane.”
2C. Calvin goes on, “Declared [19] the Son of 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
proclaimed the Son of God, according to what is said in Psalm 2:7, I
have this day begotten thee: for this begetting refers to what was
made known. Though some indeed find here three separate evidences of
the divinity of Christ -- power, understanding thereby miracles --
then the testimony of the Spirit -- and, lastly, the resurrection from
the dead -- I yet prefer to connect them together, and to reduce these
three things to one, in this manner -- that Christ was declared the Son
of God by openly exercising a real celestial power, that is, the power
of the Spirit, when he rose from the dead; but that this power is
comprehended, when a conviction of it is imprinted on our hearts by the
same Spirit. The language of the Apostle well agrees with this view;
for he says that he was declared by power, because power, peculiar to
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 another place; having stated, that by death the weakness of
the flesh appeared, he at the same time extols the power of the Spirit
in his resurrection; (2 Corinthians 13:4) This glory, however, is not
made known to us, until the same Spirit imprints a conviction of it on
our hearts. And that Paul includes, together with the wonderful energy
of 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 power which 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 called by our Lord
the Spirit of Truth, on account of the effect which he mentions; (John
14:17)
Besides, a divine power is said to have shone forth in the resurrection
of Christ for this reason -- because he rose by his own power, as he
had often testified:
Destroy this temple, and in three days
I will raise it up again, (John 2:19;)
o man taketh it from me, etc.; (John 10:18)
For he gained victory over death, (to which he yielded with regard to
the weakness of the flesh,) not by aid sought from another, but by the
celestial operation of his own Spirit.”
3. The Holy Spirit played a major role in what is called the Christ event, meaning
the death, burial and resurrection of Christ. Peter said in I Pet. 3:18, Christ was
put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit. The Spirit was the source of
the power that brought Jesus back from the dead. Paul says in Romans 8:11, If the
Spirit of Him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, He who raised Christ
Jesus from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through His Spirit who
dwells in you. Clearly it is the Holy Spirit who has resurrection power. He raised
Jesus, and he will raise those who are the body and bride of Jesus.
4. Then we read in Heb. 9:14, How much more then will the blood of Christ, who
through the eternal Spirit offered himself unblemished to God cleanse our
consciences from acts that lead to death.... The Holy Spirit was the source of the
power that motivated the human nature of Christ to go to the cross, and the power
of his divine nature to take that body up again in the resurrection. We seldom think
of it that way, but the Holy Spirit is the power behind the death and resurrection of
Jesus Christ. ow Paul says it was the Holy Spirit that declared Jesus to be the Son
of God with power. He always was before his incarnation, but now he is the Son of
God as the Son of man. Jesus is now a man at God's right hand. He is divine as

always, but now he has an added nature that he has incorporated into his deity so
that manhood is now eternal, and if that is not power, what can possibly qualify?
5. We just read above that Jesus said he had the power to lay down his life and take
it up again. Paul here says it was the Spirit that quickened him so he could rise.
Then Paul in Gal 1:1 wrote, Paul, an apostle--sent not from men nor by man, but
by Jesus Christ and God the Father, who raised him from the dead-- It is clear that
all three persons of the Godhead were partners in the greatest events of salvation
history. It is never a contradiction when you read of one of the three doing
something, and then discovering it is stated a different member of the Trinity did it.
You cannot separate the persons of the Godhead, for what one does the others do as
well, for they are one.
6. This is the only place in the ew Testament that the Holy Spirit is called the
Spirit of holiness, and so it is a rare and unusual name. Some have suggested that he
is called this because touching the dead contaminated a person so that they were not
allowed to approach God in worship even until they were cleansed. But the Holy
Spirit was able to enter the dead body of Jesus and raise him up, for he by his power
of holiness kept the body of Jesus from decay. He is incapable of being contaminated
even by death, and he alone could enter the body of Jesus and remain fully holy, and
so in the context of raising Jesus's dead body from the grave he is called the Spirit of
holiness.
7. Gill, “according to the Spirit of holiness; which may be understood of the Holy
Spirit, the third person in the Trinity, who is holy in himself, and the author of
holiness in the saints; and who is the declarer of Christ's sonship, partly by bearing
a testimony to it in the word, and in the hearts of believers, and chiefly by being
concerned in the resurrection of 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 offered himself 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 clear and strong proof of his
being truly the Son of God.”
8. Clarke, “And declared to be the Son of God - See the note on Act_13:33, where
this subject is considered at 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 subject as to render it indubitable. The resurrection of Christ from the dead
was such a manifest proof of our Lord’s innocence, the truth of his doctrine, and the
fulfillment of all that the prophets had spoken, as to leave no doubt on any
considerate and candid mind.
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 declared to be the Son of God, with such powerful evidence and

ROMANS 1 COMMENTARY

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (19)

Similar to ROMANS 1 COMMENTARY

Similar to ROMANS 1 COMMENTARY (20)

More from GLENN PEASE

More from GLENN PEASE (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (17)

ROMANS 1 COMMENTARY