Romans 1:2 - Collection of Commentaries by wanderean

Romans 1:2
1 wanderean ©2024
Romans 1:2
(Which he had promised before by his prophets in the holy
Scriptures,)
This glorious gospel of the Messiah and that salvation through
the Messiah is something that God prophesied through the
prophets. Concerning his Son, Jesus Christ our Lord, which was
made of the seed of David according to the flesh. David came to
Nathan the prophet and said, "I want to build a house for the
Lord. I live in this beautiful palace and God still lives in that
tent. They are still worshipping God in the tabernacle and it isn‘t
right that I should live in this glorious palace while God lives in a
tent. I want to build a house for the Lord, the most glorious
building in the world." Nathan the prophet said, "Oh, that is
great, David, do all that is in your heart."
That night the Lord came to Nathan the prophet and spoke to
him and said, "Nathan, you spoke out of turn, you spoke too
quickly. You are going to have to go back to David and you are
going to have to tell him that he is not going to be able to build
a house for me; his hands are too bloody. He is a man of war; I
can‘t have him building a house for me. But you tell David that I
will build him a house, and there shall not cease from his seed
one to sit upon the throne." David saw Nathan the next day and
Nathan said, "David, I have got some bad news and good
news." The bad news first. "God spoke to me last night and said
you can‘t build a house for Him, your hands are too bloody. You
are a man of war, but your son will be able to rise up and build
a house. But the good news David, God is going to build you a
house, and from your seed there will never cease to be a king
sitting upon the throne of Israel." From which David
immediately understood that the Messiah was to come from
David‘s seed.
This was just overwhelming to David. He went in before the
Lord, and said, "Oh, Lord, You took me from the sheep coat,
from following after the sheep. Lord, I was nothing. I was just a
shepherd, and yet, You took me and You made me the King

Romans 1:2
2 wanderean ©2024
over your people. You have blessed me so much and know You
speak of the years to come, oh God, what can I say?" David was
brought to a place of silence before God, so overwhelmed by the
grace of God. Have you ever been brought to that place? So
overwhelmed by the goodness of God that there is nothing you
can say. Sam Mulolo said, "When prayer reaches its ultimate,
words are impossible." That communion with God when you
really realize what God has promised to do for us, it is so
overwhelming there are times when I just, what can you say?
Too much God. Too much.
According to the promise then, he is come as the seed of David,
there shall come out of Jesse a righteous branch. It is
interesting that in the gospels when they record the genealogies
of Jesus, that though the genealogy of Matthew and Luke are
different, both of them go back to David. But from David they
take different branches, in Matthew‘s genealogy when you get
to David and David begot Solomon of Bathsheba who was the
wife of Uriah, it brings you the genealogy from Solomon on
down to Joseph who was supposed by the people to be the
father of Jesus. Now in the genealogy coming from Solomon you
come to this fellow Jeconiah. The Lord placed a curse upon
Jeconiah from the last verse of the twenty-second chapter of
Jeremiah, where Jeremiah said, "Hear O earth, hear O earth the
word of the Lord, there shall not be a seed of Jeconiah to sit
upon the throne of David forever." If Jesus were the son of
Joseph He could not sit on the throne.
Luke gives us a another genealogy, the genealogy of Mary, of
Joseph who was the son-in-law of Eli. So it is Mary‘s genealogy
in Luke and he traces a different line back to David. He comes
back to Nathan the son of David. So that Jesus through Mary, a
descendant of David, and thus, a claimant to the throne of
David, but not through Jeconiah. If so, He could not be a
claimant to the throne, because of the curse of God that there
should not be any of Jeconiah‘s seed sitting upon the throne of
Israel. The two genealogies show that it was through David.
Romans 1:2

Romans 1:2
3 wanderean ©2024
Had promised afore ( λατ )
Only here in the New Testament. Rev., He promised afore.
Paul's Old Testament training is manifest. Naturally, in
beginning the more precise description of the new revelation, he
refers first to its connection with ancient prophecy. The verb
; means more than to proclaim. It occurs
frequently, and always in the sense of profess or promise. See
Mar 14:11; Act 7:5; 1Ti 2:10; 1Ti 6:21.
Prophets
Not limited to the prophets proper, but including all who, in the
Old Testament, have prophesied the Gospel - Moses, David, etc.
Compare Heb 1:1.
In the holy scriptures ( α α α )
Or, more strictly, in holy writings. The scriptures would require
the article. See on Joh 5:47; see on Joh 2:22. Here again the
absence of the article denotes the qualitative character of the
phrase - books which are holy as conveying God's revelations.
On ς holy, see on Act 26:10. This is the only passage in
which it is applied to scriptures.
Romans 1:2
Which he promised before - Of old time, frequently, solemnly.
And the promise and accomplishment confirm each other. Deu
18:18; Isa 9:6-7; Isa 53:1; Isa 61:1; Jer 23:5.
Romans 1:2
Which he promised before through his prophets in the
Holy Scriptures concerning his Son. Here the parenthetical
passage begins, extending to the end of Romans 1:6. It is
unnecessary to complicate it by connecting του υ ου αυτου
with the previous υα ο ου. It goes more naturally with
ο ατο, denoting the subject of the Old Testament
promises. By οφ τω are meant not only the sacred writers
distinctively so called, but (as in Heb 1:1) all who spoke of old
under Divine inspiration, as by αφα ς α α ς is signified the
Old Testament generally. This intimation of the gospel being the

Romans 1:2
4 wanderean ©2024
fulfilment of prophecy is fitly introduced here, as preparing the
reader for the argument of the Epistle, in the course of which
the doctrine propounded is shown to be in accordance with the
Old Testament, and in fact anticipated therein. This is, indeed, a
prominent point in the general teaching of apostles and
evangelists. They announce the gospel as the fulfilment of
prophecy, and the true completion of all the ancient
dispensation; and it is to the Old Testament that, in addressing
Israelites, they ever in the first place appeal. Thus St. Peter (Act
2:14; Act 3:18; Act 4:11); thus Stephen (Act 7:1-60.); thus St.
Paul at Antioch in Pisidia, at Thessalonica, and before Agrippa
(Act 13:16; Act 17:2; Act 26:6, Act 26:22); thus Philip to the
Ethiopian proselyte (Act 8:35); thus Apollos at Corinth (Act
18:28). Our Lord himself had done the same, as in Mat 5:17;
Luk 4:21; Luk 24:27, Luk 24:44; Joh 5:39. All this is important
as showing how the old and new dispensations are regarded
together as parts of a whole, the old one being but the needful
preparation for a fulfilment in the new, and so becoming
intelligible; and thus how "through all the ages one eternal
purpose runs." There was also a providential preparation in the
Gentile world, though not so direct and obvious, and though, of
course, not similarly noticed in addresses to disciples of the
Law. But St. Paul intimates it; as in his speech on Areopagus,
and also, as will be seen, in this Epistle. Even the gospel is set
forth as but a further stage of progress towards a final
consummation, as the dawn only of a coming daybreak. We
have still but an earnest of our inheritance; the "earnest
expectation of the creature" still awaits "the manifestation of the
sons of God." Meanwhile, in the revelation already made
through Christ, and the redemption accomplished by him, we
are taught to cling to our faith in a Divine purpose throughout
the world‘s perplexing history—that of resolving at last all
discords into eternal harmony, and making manifest "one great
love, embracing all." This grand view of a providential order
leading to a final consummation (though how and when we
know not) pervades St. Paul‘s writings, and should be kept in
mind for a proper understanding of this Epistle. God‘s promises
through his prophets in Holy Scripture are said to have been

Romans 1:2
5 wanderean ©2024
"concerning his Son;" and a question hence arises as to the
exact sense in which "his Son" is to be here understood; a
consideration of which question may help our interpretation of
the expression in the following verse, which is not without
difficulty, Του ο τος υ ου ου υ . We may
distinguish between three senses in which Christ is called "the
Son of God."
(1) With reference to his Divine pre-existence, the term
expressing his relation to the Father from eternity, like the
ος (and probably the ο ο ς υ ος) of St. John.
(2) With reference to his incarnation, as being conceived by the
Holy Ghost; as in Luk 1:35, ο α το ο α ο
τα υ ος ου.
(3) With reference to the position assigned to the Messiah in
psalm and prophecy, as the Son exalted to the right hand of
God, and crowned with glory. It is with the last of these three
references that the title is used in the Epistle to the Hebrews;
where the ideal of sonship, found in the Old Testament, and
imperfectly typified by the theoretic position of the theocratic
kings, is regarded as prophetic, and pointing to Christ, in whom
alone it is shown to be fulfilled. Hence in that Epistle his
exaltation to the rank and dignity of Son is regarded as
subsequent to his human obedience, and even the consequence
and reward of it. It was "because of the suffering of death ( α
το α α του)" that he has been "crowned with glory and
honour" (Heb 2:9); it was after he had made a purification of
sins that he "sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on
high," having "inherited" that "more excellent name"—the name
of Son (Heb 1:4). It is by no means implied that the said Epistle
does not recognize a true Sonship of Christ before his
exaltation; he was all along "the Son" (cf. Heb 5:7, α ω
υ ος α , etc.), though not enthroned as such over mankind
and all creation till after his resurrection; and, further, the
essential doctrine of his pre-existent and eternal Sonship. in the
first of the senses noted above, is distinctly taught (as in Luk

Romans 1:2
6 wanderean ©2024
1:3), though not there by the use of the term "Son." All we say
is that this word is used in the Epistle to the Hebrews to denote
Christ‘s position and office as the royal High Priest of humanity,
exalted, after suffering, to the right hand of God, rather than his
original Divine Personality; such being the significance of the
title in the prophetic anticipations of the Messiah. Now, this
being so, and it being the promises made "through his prophets
in the Holy Scriptures concerning his Son" that are being spoken
of in the passage before us, it may seem at first most probable
that the idea here implied by the word "Son" is the same as in
the Epistle to the Hebrews, and no more. We ought, however, to
take further into account what St. Paul himself seems to signify
by the term when he uses it elsewhere. It does not follow that
his own conception of its significance was confined to what was
apparent in "the prophets." Reading them in the light of the
gospel revelation, he may have seen in their language more
implied than it distinctly expressed, and himself intended to
imply more. The passages in his Epistles, apart from this
chapter, where Christ is called God‘s Son are these:
(1) Romans 5:10, "We were reconciled to God through the
death of his Son;"
(2) Romans 8:3, "Sending his own Son (το αυτου υ ο ) in the
likeness of flesh of sin;"
(3) Romans 8:29, "To be conformed to the image of his Son,
that he might be the Firstborn among many brethren;"
(4) Romans 8:32, "Spared not his own Son (του ου υ ου);"
(5) 2Co 1:19, "The Son of God … was not Yea and Nay;"
(6) Gal 4:4, Gal 4:6, "God sent forth his Son,"—"sent forth the
Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father;"
(7) Col 1:13, "Translates us into the kingdom of the Son of his
love."

Romans 1:2
7 wanderean ©2024
In all these passages—except (3), in which the reference may
be only to Christ in glory—the term "Son" denotes a relation (o
the Father, peculiar to our Lord, previous to the death and
exaltation, and in some of them, (2), (6), (7), previous to the
Incarnation. Such previous relation is especially apparent in the
sequence to (7), where "the Son of his love" is defined not only
as "the Head of the body, the Church," and "the Firstborn from
the dead," but also as "the Image of the invisible God, the
Firstborn of all creation; for in him all things were created, the
things in heaven, and the things on the earth, the things visible
and the things invisible; all things through him and unto him
have been created." With this may be compared
Php 2:6-12, where an existence ο φ ου, anterior to
incarnation, is undoubtedly declared, though the exaltation after
human obedience, and the receiving then of "a name that is
above every name" (cf. Heb 1:4), is spoken of as well. One
other passage remains to be noticed, occurring, not in an
Epistle, but in the sermon at Antioch in Pisidia (Act 13:33),
where the view of Christ‘s Sonship which is found in the Epistle
to the Hebrews (no more being expressed) appears as present
to St. Paul‘s mind. For there God is said to have "fulfilled the
promise which was made unto the fathers, in that he hath
raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the psalm, Thou art
my Son; this day have I begotten thee." Here the Sonship
assigned to "the Christ" in the second psalm is regarded as
exhibited in the Resurrection. From this review of St. Paul‘s
usage it may be inferred that του υ ου αυτου in the text
before us carries with it in his own mind the idea of pre-existent
eternal Sonship, though what we may call Messianic Sonship
may be all he means distinctly to intimate as declared by
prophets. The bearing of this distinction on the interpretation of
Php 2:4 will appear under it. It may be observed here that the
absence of a fixed and definite usage in the application of the
term "Son" to Christ, which (as has been seen) is found in the
New Testament, is what might be expected there. Formal
definitions of theological conceptions by means of language

Romans 1:2
8 wanderean ©2024
used uniformly in a recognized definite sense had not as yet
been made. Among such conceptions that of the Holy Trinity
though implied, is nowhere distinctly formulated as a dogma. It
was reserved for the Church, under the guidance of the Spirit,
to preclude misconception by precise dogmatic definitions.
Romans 1:2
He promised afore ( ggeilato). First aorist middle of
for which verb see note on 2Co 9:5.
By (dia). Through, by means of, intermediate agency like Mat
1:22 which see.
In the holy scriptures (en graphais hagiais). No article, yet
definite. Perhaps the earliest use of the phrase (Sanday and
Headlam). Paul definitely finds God‘s gospel in the Holy
Scriptures.
Romans 1:2
MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.
The gospel long promised.—A scheme long in preparation, the
carrying out of which seems long delayed, may be expected to
be of great value and importance. The scheme of the gospel was
long in preparation to human seeming. The prophetic utterances
extend over thousands of years—long to human estimates. Long
and short may only be known to the divine mind in
condescension to human weakness. How great must be the
scheme of divine love and mercy which the prophets made the
burden of their message! No wonder Paul felt himself
empowered to write with authority, as he grasped the great idea
that he was separated to the gospel of God which was
proclaimed by the prophets as they walked with beautiful feet
upon the mountains of early time. His one idea to stir the soul
with noblest enthusiasm. Preachers of this gospel may well be
calm, though the moderns may say, Oh, what an old, effete,

Romans 1:2
9 wanderean ©2024
wornout system! Old, of course—older than the sun, older than
creation; but as fresh as the verdant landscape touched into
beauty by the magic hand of summer. Creation keeps unfolding
new wonders to the scientist; and so the old gospel has yet
more wonders to reveal.
I. What God promises He will fulfil.—Did He promise a
gospel in Eden, then in due time—which is God‘s and not man‘s
time—the promise will be accomplished. The winter has in it the
promise of summer, and that season must come, though the
winter blasts howl and the east winds tarry long. The winter of
the race carried in it the promise of a gospel summer, and that
must come, though the darkness grew denser, and though
devout souls were weary waiting. For God to be untrue to His
promise would be for God to be untrue to Himself, and that He
can never be. Sweet the thought that God‘s promises cannot
fail. He who gave the gospel, in His own good time will give with
it every promise He has made for our good. How much the
gospel carries with it to devout hearts!
II. What God promises through a series of faithful men
must be good.—The guarantee for the goodness of this
scheme is the wisdom, power, love, and mercy of the infinite
and all-loving Father. Men may scoff; but let scoffing men
produce their better systems. Men may jeer; but what are men
in the presence of that which is the product of unerring wisdom,
unfailing power, and abiding love? Is God mindful of our
weakness? Does He appear to say, Look at My confidence in the
goodness of this great remedial scheme, since I empower My
prophets to announce it to the world in plainest terms? The
mere fact that such men as Isaiah and Jeremiah have foretold
this gospel shows that it must be good. Isaiah is one of the
greatest of all bards, and his fancy did not so overrule his
judgment as to lead him to be guilty of the folly of foretelling a
worthless device. The prophets believed in this gospel as good;
the apostles received it as such; the martyrs esteemed it as a
good better far than the good of earthly life. It is our good, and
by it we will stand. Its pleasures we will enjoy. Its delicious

Romans 1:2
10 wanderean ©2024
fruits we will taste. In its sublime banquets we will revel.
III. What God promises through a series of faithful men
conveyed through holy writings must be binding.—That is,
the gospel comes to us with highest sanctions, and we ought
gladly to accept the good news. The Jews ought to accept this
gospel, for it is the burden of the message of those writings for
which they had great reverence. The Gentiles ought to accept it,
for the holy writings are incomparably superior in their moral
tone, and in many of their literary aspects, to all other writings.
Let all receive the good news from heaven with thankful hearts.
IV. What God has promised through four thousand years
cannot have grown old in two thousand.—The tree, the
germ of which was planted in Eden and was developed in
Palestine, has not lost its power of bearing fruit for the healing
of the nations. It still bears all manner of wondrous fruit, and
brings forth its fruit for every changing month. It had its fruit for
the month of dire persecution, for the month of the dark ages—
fruit for the month of the revival of literature; and it has fruit
still for the month that may feel the sirocco breath of modern
scepticism, modern luxury, and modern indifference. Grown old
indeed! God‘s works cannot grow old till their task is done.
Sometimes we think the earth is growing old; but her
landscapes are as beautiful as when Adam trod the green carpet
of the newly laid planet, and the stars gem the midnight sky
with brilliancy as great as when Isaac went forth at eventide to
meditate. Some people say the gospel has grown old. The wish
may be the father of the saying, because the fool‘s heart is
darkened. Ask the last convert to Christianity, who has really
been enriched by its treasures, if it has grown old, and he will
reply, It has to me about it all the freshness of youth. It has
given me ―the oil of joy for mourning, the garment of praise for
the spirit of heaviness.‖ It has made me and for me all things
new.
SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS ON Romans 1:2
The Old Testament not a final revelation.—Paul has told us his

Romans 1:2
11 wanderean ©2024
name, and has claimed our attention by calling himself a
servant of Jesus Christ—a servant of the first rank, one whose
whole life is spent in proclaiming good news from God. He now
further claims our attention by showing the importance of the
gospel for which he is set apart. ―Which He promised before‖:
God foretold through the prophets, not only good things to
come, but the announcement of the good things—i.e., that
salvation would be preceded by glad tidings of salvation. In one
sense God actually proclaimed beforehand the good news to
Abraham, but only as something far off and indistinct (Gal 3:8).
The good news promised, but not proclaimed, by Isaiah was
good news of present deliverance. ―Prophet‖ (Romans 12:6):
Notice that the prophet was but the mouth through (see
Romans 1:5) which God spoke the promise (Heb 1:1). The
following words prove that the prophets referred to were those
whose writings have come down to us. ―Scripture‖: something
written, sacred or profane. ―Holy‖: that which belongs to God, of
whose activity and tendency God is the one end and aim. Paul
here applies to certain writings the solemn word ―holy,‖ and
thus classes them with other holy objects—the Sabbath, temple,
sacrifices, priesthood. Therefore whatever solemnity belongs to
these belongs to the writings. In Paul‘s view these books, in a
special sense, were God‘s; they were written, and everything
within them tends, to work out His purposes. The promise of
good news passed through the prophets‘ lips; it abides and
speaks in the sacred writings. This verse claims attention for the
gospel. That for which the way was prepared during centuries,
and to proclaim the advent of which men like Isaiah and Ezekiel
were sent, must indeed be great. To many of Paul‘s readers the
prophets were almost superhuman, and to them the Old
Testament was separated from all other books as holy—i.e., as
a book of which every word spoke from God and for God. This
holy book and these prophets of God declared that in days to
come good news from God would be announced. Therefore, by
his readers‘ reverence for the book and for the men, he claims
their attention. Again, by appealing to the prophets and
Scriptures, Paul pays honour to the old covenant. That the
ancient prophets and Scriptures foretold the gospel increases

Romans 1:2
12 wanderean ©2024
our respect for them as well as for it. Paul thus guards in this
verse against the error both of those who deny that the Old
Testament came from God and of those who take it to be a final
revelation. We shall find that it was because the thoughts here
expressed lay near to the apostle‘s heart that they sprang to his
lips at the first mention of the gospel.—Beet.
Paul‘s doctrine not new.—It was peculiarly pertinent to the
apostle‘s object to state that the gospel which he taught was not
a new doctrine, much less inconsistent with writings which his
readers knew to be of divine authority. This idea he therefore
frequently repeats in reference to the method of salvation.—
Hodge.
Romans 1:2
The experience of conviction.—When M. Monod attended the
University of Geneva, there was a professor of divinity who
confined himself to lecturing on the immortality of the soul, the
existence of God, and similar topics. As to the Trinity he did not
believe. Instead of the Bible he gave us quotations from Seneca
and Plato. St Seneca and St. Plato were the two saints whose
writings he held up to admiration. But the Lord sent one of His
servants to Geneva; and I well remember the visit of Robert
Haldane. I heard of him first as an English or Scotch gentleman
who spoke much about the Bible, which seemed a very strange
thing to me and the other students, to whom it was a shut
book. I afterwards met Mr. Haldane at a private house, along
with some other friends, and heard him read from an English
Bible a chapter from Romans about the natural corruption of
man, a doctrine of which I had never heard before—in fact, I
was quite astonished to hear of men being corrupt by nature. I
remember saying to Mr. Haldane: ―Now I see that doctrine in
the Bible.‖ ―Yes,‖ he replied; ―but do you see it in your heart?‖
That was a simple question, but it came home to my
conscience. It was the sword of the Spirit; and from that time I
saw that my heart was corrupt, and knew from the word of God
that I could be saved by grace alone.—D‘Aubigne.

Romans 1:2
13 wanderean ©2024
Romans 1:2
Which he promised beforehand. The parenthesis is
unnecessary, for the whole passage is closely connected. It
must be God‘s gospel, for He had already promised it, and this
thought would have force with the Gentile Christians as well as
the Jews. Moreover it serves to emphasize the sacredness of the
gift intrusted to him as separated unto the gospel of God.
Through his prophets. In the New Testament the revelation is
always said to be made ‗by‘ God, ‗through the prophets.‘ The
‗prophets‘ are not here distinguished from the other Old
Testament writers.
In the holy Scriptures. The article is wanting in the original,
but this can scarcely alter the accepted sense. The Greek-
speaking Jews probably used the phrase as a proper noun, as in
the case of the word ‗law.‘ The omission of the article, in such
usage, does not imply any indefinite or general meaning. ‗The
divine promises of the gospel, given through the prophets of
God, are found in such books as, being God‘s records for His
revelations, are holy writing‘(Meyer). The reader would
understand that the whole Old Testament was meant. In fact,
the entire revelation is one organic system of types and
prophecies pointing to Christ; Joh 5:39. The gospel, Paul
implies, though new, is yet old.
Romans 1:2
Which he had promised afore ... in the holy scriptures —
Though the Roman Church was Gentile by nation (see on
Romans 1:13), yet as it consisted mostly of proselytes to the
Jewish faith (see on Introduction to this Epistle), they are here
reminded that in embracing Christ they had not cast off, but
only the more profoundly yielded themselves to, Moses and the
prophets (Act 13:32, Act 13:33).
Romans 1:2
Which he had promised before, &c. That is, God before, in the
Scriptures, promised the blessings, which are not come by the

Romans 1:2
14 wanderean ©2024
preaching of the gospel, and that they should come by his Son.
(Witham)
Romans 1:2
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.
Romans 1:2
Which he had promised afore,.... 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, ‫כל‬
‫כתובים‬
‫קדש‬ , "all the Scriptures are holy" (c), and style them,
‫כתבי‬
‫הקדש‬ , "Scriptures of holiness", or holy Scriptures (d).
(c) Misn. Yadaim, c. 3. sect. 5. (d) Misn. Parah, c. 10. sect. 3. T.
Bab. Sabbat, fol. 116. 2.
Romans 1:2
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

Romans 1:2
15 wanderean ©2024
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

Romans 1:2
16 wanderean ©2024
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.
Romans 1:2
had. Omit.
promised afore. Greek. proepangello. Only here: epangello
occurs fifteen times; always rendered "promise", save 1Ti 2:10;
1Ti 6:21 (professing).
Prophets. App-189.
scriptures. Greek. graphe. Occurs fifty-one times (sing, and
plural) Fourteen times by Paul, but only here with adjective
hagios, holy.
Romans 1:2
The phrase Holy Scriptures refers obviously to the Old
Testament and occurs only here in the New Testament (2 Tim.
3:15 uses different Gr. words for ―holy‖ and ―Scriptures‖). Paul
did not quote any prophets where the gospel was promised,
but Philip‘s use of Isaiah 53:7-8 with the Ethiopian eunuch is a
good example (Acts 8:30-35; cf. Luke 24:25-27, 45-47). 1
Gr. Greek
cf. confer, compare

Romans 1:2
17 wanderean ©2024
Romans 1:2
Which he had promised afore … in the holy scriptures—
Though the Roman Church was Gentile by nation (see on Ro
1:13), yet as it consisted mostly of proselytes to the Jewish
faith (see on Introduction to this Epistle), they are here
reminded that in embracing Christ they had not cast off, but
only the more profoundly yielded themselves to, Moses and the
prophets (Ac 13:32, 33). 2
Romans 1:2
THE GOSPEL‘S FOUNDATION: PROMISE
This greeting was designed to elaborate how the gospel in Christ
was related to Old Testament promises (Rom. 1:2). Note the
connecting first words in each verse (1:2–6). They build an
elaborate description of how Jesus relates to Old Testament
promises. This will also serve as a foundation to the arguments
concerning promises in Romans 4 and 9–11. The promises of
God, from Abraham to Christ, form the foundation and definition
of present experience and future hope. 3
Romans 1:2
which he promised beforehand through his prophets in
(the) sacred Scriptures …
This passage is indeed very important. It shows us how Paul,
inspired by the Holy Spirit, wants us to regard the Old
Testament. He clearly views the old and the new dispensation as
belonging together. He regards (a) the Old Testament and (b)
the good news of salvation as proclaimed by Jesus and his
messengers, as being a unit. Speaking by and large we can say
1
John F. Walvoord, Roy B. Zuck and Dallas Theological Seminary, The Bible Knowledge Commentary : An Exposition of
the Scriptures (Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1983-c1985), 2:440.
2
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset, A. R. Fausset et al., A Commentary, Critical and Explanatory, on the Old and New
Testaments, On Spine: Critical and Explanatory Commentary. (Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1997),
Ro 1:2.
3
Robert B. Hughes, J. Carl Laney and Robert B. Hughes, Tyndale Concise Bible Commentary, Rev. Ed. of: New Bible
Companion. 1990.; Includes Index., The Tyndale reference library (Wheaton, Ill.: Tyndale House Publishers, 2001),
528.

Romans 1:2
18 wanderean ©2024
that the Old Testament contains the promises; the New
Testament shows how these promises had been, were being,
and were going to be fulfilled.
When Paul says ―his prophets‖ he has reference, of course,
not only to such holy men of God as Isaiah, Jeremiah, etc., but
also to Moses, Samuel, David, etc. To speak in language which
even children can understand:
The Old is by the New explained,
The New is in the Old contained.
or similarly:
The New is in the Old concealed,
The Old is by the New revealed.
What Paul writes here is exactly what Jesus also proclaimed;
and this not only in those well-known passages: Luke 24:25–32,
44–48, to which reference is often made in this connection, but
certainly also in Luke 4:21 (in the context 4:16–30), ―Today, in
your very hearing, this passage of Scripture is being fulfilled,‖
and in Luke 22:37, ―For I tell you, what has been written must
be fulfilled in me: ‗And he was numbered with the
transgressors.‘ Yes, that passage about me is reaching its
fulfillment.‖ For more on this subject see N.T.C. on Luke, p.
977, and on Philippians, pp. 81–85.
The point to be emphasized here is that both Jesus (see John
10:35; 17:17) and Paul esteemed the Old Testament very
highly. They deemed it to be sacred. When a person rejects the
Old Testament, he is therefore also rejecting Jesus and Paul!4
Romans 1:2
the gospel he promised beforehand through his
prophets in the Holy Scriptures . . . . Here Paul‘s subject
N.T.C. W. Hendriksen, New Testament Commentary
4
William Hendriksen and Simon J. Kistemaker, vol. 12-13, New Testament Commentary : Exposition of Paul's Epistle
to the Romans, Accompanying Biblical Text Is Author's Translation., New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids:
Baker Book House, 1953-2001), 40.

Romans 1:2
19 wanderean ©2024
continues to be the gospel. His specific point is that the gospel
concerning the saving work of Jesus is not some new and
unexpected development in God‘s plan. Rather, it is something
that God had already ―promised beforehand‖ in the OT. After
the initial promise in Gen 3:15, God‘s promises focus specifically
on the role of Abraham and his descendants (see Gen 12:1–3;
Gal 3:8). Indeed, the entire history of Israel was God‘s
preparation for the coming of Christ (9:3–5), and part of this
preparation was to announce ahead of time what he planned to
do to save the world. Thus the gospel is simply ―what God
promised our fathers‖ (Acts 13:32).
God gave his promises ―through his prophets‖ (see 16:25–
26). A prophet is basically a spokesman for someone else, one
who speaks on behalf of another. God‘s prophets are those
whom he chooses to speak for him, to deliver his own words
(3:2) to others. In this sense all biblical authors are prophets
since their writings are God-breathed (2 Tim 3:16). In this
functional sense, men such as Moses and David and Samuel are
prophets no less than Isaiah and Amos. Sometimes the writings
of Moses are distinguished from the rest of the OT since their
main content is God‘s Law for Israel (3:21), but Moses writes as
a prophet of God (Num 12:6–8; Deut 18:15; Acts 3:21–22).
In the early years of the church, before the NT writings were
generally available, the OT prophets were a main source of the
gospel. Jesus cited Isa 61:1–2 to validate his ministry (Luke
4:16–21). He quoted Isa 53:12 as referring to his death (Luke
22:37). After his resurrection he twice gave a crash course on
the OT prophecies concerning his death and resurrection (Luke
24:25–26, 44–46). In his Pentecost sermon Peter quoted the
prophet David (see Acts 2:30) concerning Jesus‘ resurrection
and ascension (Acts 2:25–28, 34–35). Philip used Isa 53:7–8 to
preach the gospel to the Ethiopian eunuch (Acts 8:32–35).
OT Old Testament
NT New Testament

Romans 1:2
20 wanderean ©2024
Paul himself frequently cited OT prophecy to establish his
gospel message (see Acts 13:32–35; 17:2–3). The theme for
Romans itself comes from Hab 2:4 (1:17), and is undergirded
with the promise to Abraham in Gen 15:6 and the promises of
David in Ps 32:1–2 (Rom 4:3, 6–8).
Paul says the prophetic promises are recorded ―in the Holy
Scriptures.‖ The OT is often called ―the Scripture‖ (see 4:3;
9:17; 10:11; 11:2) or ―the Scriptures‖ (see 15:4). In the NT the
Greek word ( αφ , graphē) is always used for biblical writings
as a category distinct from all other writings. Thus it has a kind
of technical sense and is properly capitalized by the NIV.
Paul‘s point is that the prophetic promises concerning the
gospel of Jesus Christ come to us through writings that are ―the
very words of God‖ (3:2), and thus are inspired and completely
trustworthy. That Jesus died and was raised from the dead can
be established by examining the NT records and other early
testimony through purely scientific historical method. But the
fact that ―Christ died for our sins‖ and that ―he was raised on
the third day‖ according to the Scriptures (1 Cor 15:3–4)
undergirds the gospel with fully divine authority.
Why does Paul emphasize the OT origin of his gospel at this
point? As the book of Acts shows, the OT was often cited by the
early Christians for apologetical purposes. I.e., fulfilled prophecy
is a means of proving the divine origin both of the prophecy
itself and of the work that fulfils it. Paul may have had this in
mind here in 1:2.
It is more likely, though, that his purpose is polemical. There
is no question that many Jews and even Jewish Christians had
serious difficulty with the idea that anyone could be saved
―apart from observing the law‖ (3:28), in particular the Law of
Moses. However, the gospel of Jesus Christ, as known and
preached by Paul in Romans, is that we are justified through
NIV New International Version

Romans 1:2
21 wanderean ©2024
faith apart from law-keeping of any kind. Thus it is important for
him to show that this message is not some innovative heresy
that he himself has concocted, but that it stands in continuity
with what God has always taught through his inspired prophets.
God has always had just one way of saving sinners, and Paul‘s
presentation of that way is in perfect harmony with the Holy
Scriptures of the OT. By stressing this point at the very
beginning of the epistle, Paul seeks to deflect any criticism and
skepticism that might be directed toward his teaching by Jewish
readers.
Paul says that the gospel was promised in the OT. Does this
mean that the gospel itself did not exist in OT times, and that
salvation in those days came through some other means? No,
not at all. God has always saved sinners by graciously forgiving
their sins on the conditions of repentance and humble, believing
acceptance of his forgiveness. The OT is filled with teaching
concerning God‘s gracious nature and his promise of pardon
(e.g., Exod 34:6; Ps 32:1–2; Isa 65:1–2; Hos 11:8–9; 14:1–3).
Also, this forgiveness has always been based on the saving work
of Jesus Christ, even when that work was only foreknown by
God and not yet known by believing sinners (see 3:25).
OT saints knew and believed in God‘s saving grace, but they
did not know specifically about Jesus of Nazareth and his role in
the provision of the very grace that saved them. They had the
gospel of Jesus Christ himself, but only in the form of promises
to be fulfilled in the future (see Acts 13:32–35; Gal 3:18; Heb
11:8–13). They did not know who Jesus was, nor did they know
exactly what he would be doing to save them. The prophets
themselves—and even the angels—did not know these things (1
Pet 1:10–12). Our blessing is that we know not only the
promises, but also the fulfilment. We know Jesus himself. We
know the gospel in its fullness.5
5
Jack Cottrell, Romans : Volume 1, College Press NIV commentary (Joplin, Mo.: College Press Pub. Co., 1996-c1998),
Ro 1:2.

Romans 1:2
22 wanderean ©2024
Romans 1:2
In Greek the reference to the Good News is made by a pronoun
(literally ―which‖), but it is necessary to transform this into a
noun in the English discourse structure, inasmuch as this verse
is made into a separate sentence rather than a dependent
clause.
In the Greek text was promised appears with an indirect, or
secondary, agent (through his prophets), and without the direct,
or primary, agent specified (by God). Since it is obvious that
God is the one who made this promise through the prophets,
the TEV makes this explicit (see NEB ―this gospel God
announced beforehand‖). For languages in which the active form
is obligatory or much preferred, it is possible to restructure the
first clause of verse 2 as ―God promised the Good News long
ago by means of his prophets.‖ A far more complex problem,
however, exists in reproducing an expression for indirect or
secondary agent. In some languages one simply cannot say that
―someone did something through (or by means of) someone
else.‖ The only way in which an indirect or secondary agent can
be expressed is by a causative —for example, ―God caused the
prophets to promise long ago.‖ If a causative expression is
employed, ―prophets‖ must also be made the subject of
―writing‖—for example, ―and they wrote in the Holy Scriptures.‖
There may, moreover, be certain serious difficulties involved in
an expression such as written in the Holy Scriptures, since the
writing actually was a part of the Holy Scriptures and not merely
some marginal notes written in a book called the Holy
Scriptures. In some languages, therefore, one must be quite
explicit—for example, ―written as a part of the Holy Scriptures‖
or ―the prophets wrote this promise which became part of the
Holy Scriptures.‖
Both in the Old Testament and in the New Testament prophets
are primarily persons who speak on the behalf of God (Moses,
TEV Today’s English Version
NEB New English Bible

Romans 1:2
23 wanderean ©2024
David, and Solomon, along with others, are called prophets),
and not merely persons who foretell the future. In the present
context the emphasis is on the fact that what God promised
through the prophets has come true. The Holy Scriptures is a
reference to the Old Testament (see 2 Timothy 3.15 where this
same phrase occurs). More often the Old Testament is referred
to simply as ―the Scriptures‖ (Matthew 21.42; 22.29; 26.54;
John 5.39; etc.).
It is relatively easy to find a term for ―holy‖ as applied to
persons, since one may often use a phrase such as ―dedicated
to God.‖ However, a satisfactory expression for ―holy‖ in
reference to the Scriptures may be far more difficult. One
cannot employ an expression such as ―spotless‖ or ―clean‖
(which has been done in some languages), for this would apply
merely to the condition of a page or book. In some languages a
term for positive taboo is sufficiently generic so that it can be
applied to the Scriptures; but in some instances the only
satisfactory equivalent for ―holy‖ in this kind of context seems to
be a phrase relating the Scriptures to God—for example, ―the
Scripture from God.‖ At the same time, one must carefully avoid
any expression which would make the Bible similar to the Koran,
which, according to Islamic tradition, ―descended from
heaven.‖6
Romans 1:2
God promised this Good News in advance (see Ga 3:8). In
his letter to the Romans Sha‘ul is always showing how the great
truths he is expounding are derived from God‘s prophets in
the Tanakh (what Christians call the Old Testament). As Edith
Schaeffer put it in a book title, ―Christianity is Jewish.‖7
6
Barclay Moon Newman and Eugene Albert Nida, A Handbook on Paul's Letter to the Romans, Originally Published: A
Translator's Handbook on Paul's Letter to the Romans. 1973., UBS handbook series; Helps for translators (New York:
United Bible Societies, 1994), 8.
7
David H. Stern, Jewish New Testament Commentary : A Companion Volume to the Jewish New Testament, electronic
ed. (Clarksville: Jewish New Testament Publications, 1996, c1992), Ro 1:2.

Romans 1:2
24 wanderean ©2024
Romans 1:2
The gospel he promised beforehand through his prophets
in the Holy Scriptures. NIV
Romans 16:22 informs us that
Tertius was Paul‘s scribe for this letter. Remember that these
words were written down as they were being spoken. For
instance, the first six verses in this letter are one long sentence.
Knowing Paul‘s style helps us follow some difficult sentences
that were more easily grasped by Greek audiences. Here Paul
abruptly changes the focus from himself to the gospel, then to
the person it presents, then to the audience for whom the
gospel is intended. As Paul warms to his subject, the letter
quickly develops the tone of a sermon. Tertius‘s quill must have
been flying across the papyrus.
The Good News was promised by God and was not a new
religion made up by Paul or anyone else. It was rooted in God‘s
promises in the Old Testament to his people through his
prophets. The gospel that Paul preached was in perfect
continuity with God‘s earlier words in the Scriptures to his
people, Israel. Both the Jews and Gentiles in the church of
Rome needed to be reminded that the gospel is an ancient
message of God‘s plan for his creation. This was on Paul‘s mind
and is a recurring theme throughout the letter.
Even though the church in Rome consisted mostly of Gentiles
and former converts to the Jewish faith, Paul reminded them all
that in their acceptance of the gospel they were not casting off
Moses and the law in order to embrace Christ. Rather, they
were discovering and responding to the outworking of God‘s
eternal plan. The prophets in the Old Testament announced the
coming fulfillment of God‘s grace in Christ. The actual fulfillment
of those prophetic statements confirmed God‘s involvement all
along. This direct statement by Paul anticipates an important
teaching that he would develop later in this letter.
NIV
Scripture quotations marked NIV are taken from the Holy Bible, New International Version®
. NIV®
. Copyright ©
1973, 1978, 1984 by International Bible Society. Used by permission of Zondervan Publishing House. All rights
reserved.

Romans 1:2
25 wanderean ©2024
Here the door is thrown open wide for the understanding of the
Holy Scriptures, that is, that everything must be understood in
relation to Christ, especially in the case of prophecy.
—Martin Luther8
Romans 1:2
The gospel comes in fulfillment of a promise. In Genesis, God
spoke of the heel of the woman‘s offspring crushing the serpent
(Gen 3:15). Messianic psalms portray the coming deliverer (Pss
45; 72). Jeremiah spoke of a new covenant (Jer 31:31–34). The
Old Testament continually points beyond itself to a time of
fulfillment, the age to come. God made his promise ―through his
prophets‖ in the Old Testament. He entrusted his message to
men chosen to speak for him. Beyond that, he allowed his
message to be written down. What the prophets wrote became
―Holy Scriptures.‖ Here we have a brief summary of the method
God chose in order to communicate with his people. Scripture
originated with God. He used prophets to communicate his will,
and they accomplished that purpose by writing down what God
was pleased to reveal. The result was Scripture that is holy.5 9
Romans 1:2
He promised beforehand. This refers to the Gospel which
Paul was sent to preach. It was the same system of grace and
truth which from the beginning had been predicted and partially
unfolded in the Old Testament. The reason why the apostle
refers to that fact here was probably that one of the strongest
proofs of the divine origin of the Gospel is found in the
prophesies of the Old Testament. The advent, the character, the
work, the kingdom of the Messiah are predicted there. Therefore
it was from the Scriptures that the apostles reasoned in order to
convince the people that Jesus is the Christ. They constantly
8
Bruce B. Barton, David Veerman and Neil S. Wilson, Romans, Life application Bible commentary (Wheaton, IL:
Tyndale House Publishers, 1992), 4.
5
The absence of an article before ἁγίαις stresses the character of the writings as “holy.”
9
Robert H. Mounce, vol. 27, Romans, electronic ed., Logos Library System; The New American Commentary
(Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2001, c1995), 60.

Romans 1:2
26 wanderean ©2024
refer to this connection between the two dispensations to
substantiate their teachings. (See 3:21; 4:3; 9:27, 33; 10:11,
20 and compare Luke 24:44; John 12:16; Acts 10:43.)
Through his prophets in the Holy Scriptures. In Scripture
the word prophets is applied to anyone who spoke by
inspiration as the ambassador of God and the interpreter of his
will. Here prophets includes all the Old Testament writers,
whether prophets in the strict sense of the term or teachers or
historians. Meyer insists that the line of the prophets begins
with Samuel, according to Acts 3:24 (―all the prophets from
Samuel on‖), and therefore that the earlier writers of the Old
Testament are not included here. But Moses was a prophet, and
what is expressed here by the words his prophets is explained
by the phrase ―the Law and the Prophets‖ in 3:21.
By the Holy Scriptures, of course, we must understand
those writings which the Jews regarded as holy because they
dealt with holy things and because they were given by the
inspiration of the Holy Spirit.10
Romans 1:2
THE PROMISE OF THE GOOD NEWS
which He promised beforehand through His prophets in
the holy Scriptures, (1:2)
The gospel, which originated with God, was not a divine
afterthought, nor was it first taught in the New Testament. It
does not reflect a late change in God‘s plan or a revision of His
strategy. It was
promised by God beforehand through His prophets in
the holy Scriptures, that is, in what we now call the Old
Testament.
10
Charles Hodge, Romans, Originally Published: Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, 1835., The Crossway
classic commentaries (Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway Books, 1993), Ro 1:2.

Romans 1:2
27 wanderean ©2024
Perhaps especially for the sake of his Jewish critics, Paul
emphasizes in the very beginning of the epistle that the good
news did not originate with him or even with Jesus‘ earthly
ministry. He was frequently accused of preaching and teaching
against Moses and of proclaiming a revolutionary message
unheard of in ancient Judaism (cf. Acts 21:20ff). But here he
makes clear that the good news he teaches is really old news of
the Hebrew Scriptures now fulfilled and completed in Jesus
Christ.
Paul‘s use of prophets refers to the Old Testament writers in
general, all of whom were spokesmen for God, which is the
basic meaning of prophets. Moses, for instance, was the great
lawgiver, yet he also considered himself a prophet (Deut.
18:15). Paul‘s reference to the holy Scriptures was probably
to contrast the divinely-inspired Old Testament from the many
rabbinical writings which in his day were studied and followed
more zealously than was Scripture. In other words, although the
rabbinical writings said little or nothing about the gospel of God,
the holy Scriptures had a great deal to say about it. They did
not originate with men or reflect the thinking of men, but were
the divinely-revealed Word of the living God.
Most Jews of that day were so accustomed to looking to
rabbinical tradition for religious guidance that the holy
Scriptures were looked on more as a sacred relic than as the
source of truth. Even after His three years of intense teaching,
Jesus had to chide some of His own disciples for failing to
understand and believe what the Scriptures taught about Him.
Before He revealed His identity to the two disciples on the road
to Emmaus, He said to them, ―O foolish men and slow of heart
to believe in all that the prophets have spoken!‖ (Luke 24:25).
And as He proceeded to teach them about His death and
resurrection, He expounded Scripture (v. 27, cf. v. 32).
cf. confer (Lat.), compare
v. verse

Romans 1:2
28 wanderean ©2024
It was a defective traditional Judaism that was revolutionary,
man-originated, man-centered, and that was not grounded in
the holy Scriptures. And it was the proponents of that man-
made perversion of Judaism who most strongly opposed Jesus.
He denounced the religious devotion of the scribes and
Pharisees as being hypocrisy rather than piety and their
theology as being the false tradition of men rather than the
revealed truth of God.
The phrases ―You have heard that it was said‖ and ―You have
heard that the ancients were told‖ that Jesus frequently used in
the Sermon on the Mount (Matt. 5:21, 27, 33, 38, 43) did not
refer to the Old Testament but to rabbinical traditions that
contradicted and invalidated the Old Testament (Matt. 15:6).
It is estimated that the Old Testament contains at least 332
prophecies about Christ, most of which were fulfilled at His first
coming. The Old Testament is filled with truths that predict and
lay the groundwork for the New.
Jesus taught nothing that was either disconnected from or
contrary to the Old Testament. ―Do not think that I came to
abolish the Law or the Prophets,‖ He declared; ―I did not come
to abolish, but to fulfill. For truly I say to you, until heaven and
earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass
away from the Law, until all is accomplished‖ (Matt. 5:17–18).
Throughout the history of the church Jews have resisted the
gospel by arguing that to embrace it would be to deny their
heritage. On the human level that is true, because since long
before Jesus‘ day, popular Judaism has been based more on
human tradition that on divine revelation. To become a Christian
certainly demands denial of a heritage such as that. But for a
Jew to embrace the gospel is for him to truly inherit what his
scriptural heritage has always promised. The Jew‘s greatest
heritage is the promise of God‘s Messiah, and Jesus is that
Messiah, the fulfillment of that promise. Every Jewish prophet,
directly or indirectly, prophesied of the ultimate Prophet, Jesus

Romans 1:2
29 wanderean ©2024
Christ. Every Jewish sacrificial lamb spoke of the ultimate,
eternal Lamb of God who would be sacrificed for the sins of the
world.
Confronting that same issue, the writer of Hebrews opens his
letter by declaring, ―God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers
in the prophets in many portions and in many ways, in these
last days has spoken to us in His Soft‖ (Heb. 1:1–2). Peter also
accentuated that same truth in his first letter:
As to this salvation, the prophets who prophesied of the grace
that would come to you made careful search and inquiry,
seeking to know what person or time the Spirit of Christ within
them was indicating as He predicted the sufferings of Christ and
the glories to follow. It was revealed to them that they were not
serving themselves, but you, in these things which now have
been announced to you through those who preached the gospel
to you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven-things into which
angels long to look. (1 Pet. 1:10–12)
The prophets spoke generally of the anticipated new covenant
(cf. Jer. 31:31–34; Ezek. 36:25–27) as well as specifically of the
Messiah who would bring that covenant (cf. Isa.
7:18; 9:6, 7; 53:1–12). 11
2 ο ατο, ―promised beforehand‖—elsewhere in
the NT only 2 Cor 9:5. The force of the middle voice may be to
emphasize the subject of the promise—―which God promised,‖
―which he promised on his own behalf‖ (cf. Moule, Idiom Book,
24). On ―the dialectic of promise and gospel‖ see Käsemann. Cf.
also van der Minde, 45.
ὰ τω οφ τω αὐτου , ―through his prophets.‖ ―His
prophets‖ (unusual in the NT) may also reflect Paul‘s concern to
11
John MacArthur, Romans (Chicago: Moody Press, 1996, c1991, c1994), 11.
NT New Testament
cf. confer, compare

Romans 1:2
30 wanderean ©2024
emphasize God‘s personal involvement in and authority behind
the prophetic hope, though it may also be a continuing echo of
the familiar OT phrase, ―his/my (God‘s) servants ( ου ο ) the
prophets,‖ which lies in part behind Paul‘s opening self-
designation (see on 1:1). Paul avoids saying ―the law and the
prophets,‖ though he uses the fuller phrase later in 3:21 to
make a similar point, perhaps because it is precisely the role of
the law within the divine purpose which he seeks to clarify in
this letter, and almost certainly because he wants to strike the
note of promise and fulfillment, of God‘s promise and his
faithfulness to that promise, right from the beginning, as clearly
as possible. The apologetic concern is already evident and
prepares for the central role Paul gives to God‘s ―promise‖ in
chap. 4. The prophets and prophecies in question would have
been established as Christian proof texts as one of the earliest
apologetic requirements of the new movement (cf. 1 Cor 15:3–
4). They would already include at least some of the texts cited
or alluded to later on (see, e.g., on 4:25) and in the sermons in
Acts, and here particularly 2 Sam 7:12–16 and Ps 2:7 (see
on 1:3).
ἐ αφα ς ἁ α ς, ―in [the] holy scriptures‖—the only time
this phrase (―holy scriptures‖) as such occurs in the NT. It refers
to an established body of writings, already recognized as
Scripture and sacred, that is, as having the status of divinely
authorized statements or indeed of divine oracles in writing (cf.
Philo, Fuga. 4; Spec. Leg. 1.214; Heres 106, 159). The lack of
the definite article makes no difference, as those same
references show (cf. also 15:4 with 16:26; 2 Pet 1:20
OT Old Testament
e.g. exempli gratia, for example
Fuga. Philo, De Fuga et Inventione
Spec. Leg. Philo, De Specialibus Legibus
Heres Philo, De Quis rerum divinarum Heres sit

Romans 1:2
31 wanderean ©2024
with 3:16; see also BDF, § 255). Nor does the plural mark a
significant difference from the singular, which was already in
use for the collectivity of the Scriptures (Philo, Mos. 2.84; Ep.
Arist. 155, 168). The Scriptures in view would be more or less
the books contained in our OT (cf. Sir prologue;
Josephus, Ap. 1.37–42; 4 Ezra 14:37–48), though the concept
of a fixed and closed canon of Scripture was not yet clearly
evident, as the larger scope of the LXX indicates. 12
Romans 1:2
He promised afore ( ο ατο [proepēggeilato]). First
aorist middle of ο α ω [proepaggellō] for which verb
see on II Cor. 9:5. By ( α [dia]). Through, by means of,
intermediate agency like Matt. 1:22 which see. In the holy
scriptures (ἐ αφα ς ἁ α ς [en graphais hagiais]). No article,
yet definite. Perhaps the earliest use of the phrase (Sanday and
Headlam). Paul definitely finds God‘s gospel in the Holy
Scriptures. 13
Romans 1:2
Had promised afore ( ο ατο). Only here in the
New Testament. Rev., He promised afore. Paul‘s Old Testament
training is manifest. Naturally, in beginning the more precise
description of the new revelation, he refers first to its
connection with ancient prophecy. The verb ἐ α ο α
BDF F. Blass, A. Debrunner, and R. W. Funk, A Greek Grammar of the New Testament (University of
Chicago/University of Cambridge, 1961)
Mos. Philo, De Vita Mosis
Ep. Arist. Epistle of Aristeas
Ap. Josephus, Contra Apionem
LXX The Septuagint, Greek translation of the OT
12
James D. G. Dunn, vol. 38A, Word Biblical Commentary : Romans 1-8, electronic ed., Logos Library System; Word
Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 1998), 10.
13
A.T. Robertson, Word Pictures in the New Testament, Vol.V c1932, Vol.VI c1933 by Sunday School Board of the
Southern Baptist Convention. (Oak Harbor: Logos Research Systems, 1997), Ro 1:2.
Rev. Revised Version of the New Testament.

Romans 1:2
32 wanderean ©2024
means more than to proclaim. It occurs frequently, and always
in the sense of profess or promise. See Mark 14:11; Acts 7:5; 1
Tim. 2:10; 6:21.
Prophets. Not limited to the prophets proper, but including
all who, in the Old Testament, have prophesied the Gospel —
Moses, David, etc. Compare Heb. 1:1.
In the holy scriptures (ἐ αφαῖς ἁ α ς). Or, more strictly,
in holy writings. The scriptures would require the article. See on
John 5:47; 2:22. Here again the absence of the article denotes
the qualitative character of the phrase — books which are holy
as conveying God‘s revelations. On ἅ ος holy, see on Acts
26:10. This is the only passage in which it is applied to
scriptures.14
14
Marvin Richardson Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament (Bellingham, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc.,
2002), 3:i-3.

Romans 1:2 - Collection of Commentaries by wanderean

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Romans 1:2 - Collection of Commentaries by wanderean

Similar to Romans 1:2 - Collection of Commentaries by wanderean (20)

More from Berean Wanderean

More from Berean Wanderean (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Romans 1:2 - Collection of Commentaries by wanderean