Translated by Claude
Rom 5:1–2. "Therefore, having been justified by faith, let us have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom also we have access by faith into this grace in which we stand, and we rejoice in hope of the glory of the children of God."
Paraphrase. Therefore, having been justified by faith, as follows from the foregoing teaching, we are no longer subject to the wrath of God but are reconciled with him through our Lord Jesus Christ — through whom, namely, as our Reconciler, we once obtained, when we became Christians, through faith, that freely given benefit of justification which we now possess. But also with joy we rejoice in the hope we cherish of obtaining that glory which God has prepared for us, his adoptive children, in eternal blessedness.
Rom 5:1. "Therefore, having been justified by faith," etc. The Apostle is now about to speak of the happy condition of the justified. The particle therefore in this place is at once both conclusive and continuing the discourse. The sense is: Therefore, as follows from the foregoing teaching, having been justified by faith, we are no longer subject to the wrath of God (cf. v. 9), but we have peace with God (εἰρήνην ἔχομεν πρὸς τὸν Θεόν) — or, we are at peace with God — and this through our Lord Jesus Christ. The preposition πρός in the Apostle's phrase properly means toward or with regard to, and not strictly with; nevertheless the sense of this preposition may here be correctly rendered by with. For Paul has spoken after the manner of the Greeks, who in similar expressions are accustomed to use the preposition πρός. Examples are given by Fritschius on this passage: Diodorus Siculus XXI.12: Ἀγαθοκλῆς πολὺν χρόνον εἰρηνεύων πρὸς Καρχηδονίους ("Agathocles being at peace with the Carthaginians for a long time"); Plato, Republic V.445: πανταχῇ δὲ ἐκ τῶν νόμων εἰρήνην πρὸς ἀλλήλους οἱ ἄνδρες ἄξουσιν ("in every respect the men will maintain peace with one another according to the laws"); Herodianus VIII.7: εἰρήνην ἔχοντες πρὸς Θεούς, οὓς ὀμωμόκατε ("having peace with the gods by whom you have sworn").
We have judged it preferable to adopt the reading ἔχομεν (we have) over the reading ἔχωμεν (let us have, i.e., let us preserve, let us maintain), for two reasons: first, because there is nothing to indicate that the Apostle wished at this point to turn his discourse toward exhortation; and second, because the entire passage (vv. 1–5) is constructed in such a way as to appear wholly unsuited to paraenesis. Moreover, if he had wished to exhort at this point, instead of ἔχειν εἰρήνην he would have used κατέχειν, φυλάττειν, or τηρεῖν εἰρήνην, or some similar phrase, as Maier observes. Finally, if the present sentence is paraenetic and therefore means let us keep peace with God, then what follows — through our Lord Jesus Christ — would necessarily have to be referred to the assistance of grace; yet the Apostle does not customarily use this formula to indicate the assistance of grace.
Rom 5:2. "Through whom also we have access by faith into this grace in which we stand." These words are closely connected with what precedes. The sense is: Through whom — namely (καί) Jesus Christ — as our Reconciler, Mediator, and Peacemaker, we once, by faith (τῇ πίστει), obtained (ἐσχήκαμεν) access (τὴν προσαγωγήν — den toegang), or were admitted, to obtaining that freely given benefit of justification (εἰς τὴν χάριν ταύτην), which we now possess, and in which (ἐν ᾗ) we now stand. The Apostle's language is metaphorical, for he has conceived in his mind that grace of which he speaks as a kind of place to which access is given and in which one thereafter stands firm. The particle καί here serves to explain more distinctly what had been said in verse 1: through our Lord Jesus Christ. In Dutch one might render it: door wien wy ja den toegang, etc. The particle καί has a similar force in Hebrews 6:7: δι' οὓς καὶ γεωργεῖται ("on account of whom also it is cultivated"). Προσαγωγή means approach or access, as at Ephesians 2:18 and 3:12, from προσάγειν, which is also used intransitively in the sense of approaching or drawing near — for example at Acts 27:27. Τῇ πίστει is a Dative of Instrument, for which elsewhere διὰ πίστεως is used. The words εἰς τὴν χάριν ταύτην are to be construed with τὴν προσαγωγήν; for τῇ πίστει εἰς τὴν χάριν would be alien to the manner of expression found in the Scriptures. Ἔχειν in the sense of obtaining or acquiring, as at Matthew 19:16 compared with Mark 10:17, and ibid. v. 21.
"And we rejoice in hope of the glory of the children of God." These words depend not on the preceding relative clause in which we stand, but on the main clause of verse 1: we have peace with God; so that the discourse coheres thus: we have peace with God AND we rejoice in hope of the glory of the children of God. We have already noted (see the variant readings) that the word filiorum ("of the children") does not appear to belong to the text; but even if it is read, the sense comes to the same thing, for the glory in question is certainly none other than that with which God is to glorify the justified — and therefore his adoptive children (cf. Galatians 3:25) — in eternal blessedness. Καυχᾶσθαι is here used in the sense of rejoicing or exulting, as in the Septuagint at Psalm 32:11 and Psalm 149:5 (καυχήσονται ὅσιοι ἐν δόξῃ καὶ ἀγγαλλιάσονται), where καυχᾶσθαι corresponds to the Hebrew words הִרְנִין and עָלַז, which are used of shouting for joy and exulting. The preposition ἐπί indicates the object of this καυχᾶσθαι, as in Sirach 30:2: ἐπ' αὐτῷ καυχήσεται. In place of ἐπί, elsewhere ἐν is used, as immediately below at verse 3: καυχώμεθα ἐν ταῖς θλίψεσιν. Τῆς δόξης is an objective genitive, and τοῦ Θεοῦ is a genitive of author or origin, as at chapter 1:17. The sense therefore is: and with joy we rejoice in the hope we cherish of obtaining that glory which God has prepared for us, his adoptive children, in eternal blessedness.
Rom 5:3-6. "And hope does not disappoint, because the love of God has been poured out in our hearts through the Holy Spirit who has been given to us. For why did Christ, when we were still weak, at the appointed time die for the ungodly?"
Paraphrase. That hope of future glory does not deceive — for God will not fail in his promises — since his love toward us is so great that he poured out his Holy Spirit upon us and did not spare his own Son, who, when we were still sinners, at the appointed time underwent death for us ungodly ones who were to be redeemed.
Rom 5:5. "Hope does not disappoint." He is speaking, as is evident, of the hope in which the justified rejoice (vv. 3–4). That hope, he says, does not disappoint the one who hopes — he who has hoped thus will not be defrauded of his hope. The reason why that hope is not deceptive he immediately adds, saying: "because the love of God," etc. Hope that deceives someone is said by a Metonymy of effect for cause to disappoint him, because the one who is defrauded of his hope is filled with shame. Moreover, this manner of speaking is proper to the Hebrews, e.g. Psalm 22 (Vulg. 21):6: בְּךְ בָּטְחוּ וְלֹא בּוֹשׁוּ (Vulg.: in te speraverunt et non sunt confusi — "in you they hoped and were not put to shame"); Psalm 119 (Vulg. 120):116: וְאַל תְּבִישֵׁנִי מִשִּׂבְרִי (Vulg.: ne confundas me ab exspectatione mea — "do not put me to shame in my expectation").
"Because the love of God has been poured out in our hearts through the Holy Spirit who has been given to us." The reason why that hope does not deceive is drawn from the love of God (ἡ ἀγάπη τοῦ Θεοῦ) toward those who are justified. The genitive Θεοῦ is a subjective genitive. What is properly to be understood here is not the love with which God is loved by the justified, but the love with which God loves them. This is clear from the logical connection by which verse 5 coheres with what follows in verses 6–9, which are manifestly said about God's love toward men. Nor did St. Chrysostom understand τὴν ἀγάπην τοῦ Θεοῦ in this place otherwise [footnote 1]. The sense therefore is: That hope which we cherish of obtaining heavenly glory is not such a hope as can deceive the one who hopes — the proof of which is the surpassing love of God toward us, which he showed us both by giving us the Holy Spirit and by delivering his Son to death for us at the time when we were still his enemies. The inference from this argument to prove the thesis — namely that this hope is not deceptive — is not drawn immediately but only at verses 9 and 10, after verses 7 and 8 have shown how unprecedented in its example is the love displayed to us in the death of Christ.
The verb ἐκχέειν ("to pour out"), taking its metaphor from the pouring out of waters (cf. John 7:38–39), connotes abundance. Elsewhere (Acts 2:33) it is used of the Holy Spirit poured out; but here it is used of the love of God abundantly poured out in the hearts of the justified through the Holy Spirit who was given to them when they were justified. God's love toward those who are justified consists in his giving them the Holy Spirit, and in this sense the love of God is here said to be poured out in their hearts through the Holy Spirit who was given to them. The Holy Spirit is understood to have been given to them in such a way as to dwell in them by ἐνοίκησις — and this in a manner proper to himself and not common to the Father and the Son — by which personal union those who were ungodly were made just and adoptive children of God, the Holy Spirit himself sanctifying them and by his presence in them making them partakers of the divine nature. Cf. Thomassinus, De Incarnatione Verbi, Book VI, Chapter X and following. That ἐνοίκησις of the Holy Spirit which I have described the Apostle teaches in plain words at 1 Corinthians 3:16: "Do you not know that you are the temple of God and that the Spirit of God dwells in you?"; and in the second letter to Timothy, chapter 1:14: "Guard the good deposit through the Holy Spirit who dwells in us." [footnote 3]
Rom 5:6. "For why did Christ, when we were still weak, die for the ungodly at the appointed time?" Those who follow the Vulgate reading render the sense of this verse as follows: Why did Christ die for us with such great love, if he was going to abandon us and frustrate our hope? But as I said (see the variant readings), the reading εἴς τι γὰρ Χριστός which the Vulgate presents, though not entirely without textual support, is far less well attested than the reading ἔτι γὰρ Χριστός exhibited by the Complutensian edition. Following this reading, we interpret the present passage thus: For (γὰρ) Christ, when we were still (ἔτι) sinners (ὄντων ἡμῶν ἀσθενῶν), at the time divinely appointed (κατὰ καιρόν) for the redemption of the human race, underwent death for us ungodly ones who were to be reconciled with God.
It should be observed that through the particle γὰρ a second reason is introduced here for why that hope is not deceptive [v. 5]. The first reason had been introduced by the particle ὅτι [v. 5]. We must therefore recognize here a somewhat varied construction, for the thread of continuous discourse would have required the writing: That hope is not deceptive BECAUSE the love of God toward us has been manifestly shown to us in abundant measure AND BECAUSE Christ died for us when we were still sinners. But the Apostle wrote as though he had not adduced the first reason and had in mind the second reason alone — which also explains how it came about that in place of the causal ὅτι he then employed the causal γὰρ. The Apostle's meaning will be clear if you reduce verses 5 and 6 to these two distinct periods: Hope does not disappoint BECAUSE the love of God, etc. — Hope does not disappoint, FOR Christ when we were still, etc.
It remains to note that there is a hyperbaton in the placement of the little word ἔτι, since it ought to have been placed immediately before the words ὄντων ἀσθενῶν. This is evident from comparing verse 8, where the Apostle repeats the same thought in this word order: "when we were still sinners, at the appointed time Christ died for us." A similar transposition of the particle ἔτι Kyrcus observes in his Sacred Notes on this passage, finding it in Achilles Tatius, Book V, p. 325: Ἐγὼ δὲ ἔτι σοι ταῦτα γράφω παρθένος ("I still write these things to you as a virgin"), where ἔτι manifestly belongs to the word παρθένος. Those here called ἀσθενεῖς ("weak") are to be understood as those laboring under the disease of sin — that is, sinners (ἁμαρτωλοί); this is clear from comparing verse 8, and those called "weak" are none other than those who immediately [v. 6] are called "ungodly" (ἀσεβεῖς). Κατὰ καιρόν is to be construed with ἀπέθανε. The phrase κατὰ καιρόν means "at the appointed time" and refers to the time divinely appointed for the redemption of the human race (cf. Galatians 4:4; Hebrews 9:26). In place of κατὰ καιρόν the Apostle elsewhere (1 Timothy 2:6) uses in the same sense καιροῖς ἰδίοις. That phrase κατὰ καιρόν the Apostle added in order to suggest that Christ underwent death not by necessity but by the will of the Father — which served the purpose of commending the love of God, from which he drew his argument to prove that the hope which the justified cherish of a life eternally blessed is certain and by no means deceptive.
Rom 5:7–9. "For scarcely will anyone die for a just man; for perhaps for a good man someone might dare to die. But God commends his love toward us in that, when we were still sinners, at the appointed time he died for us. Much more therefore, now justified in his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him."
Paraphrase. Scarcely will it come to pass that anyone should be willing to undergo death for some upright man; for perhaps for his own benefactor someone might in the end endure to die. But God shows us his love toward us as plainly singular through this: that he willed Christ his Son to die for us at the time when we were still sinners and unjust. Therefore much more, now that through his blood we have been made just, we shall through him be kept safe from the vengeance to be one day exercised upon sinners.
Rom 5:7. "For scarcely (γὰρ) will anyone die for a just man; for (γὰρ) perhaps someone might dare to die for a good man." In this section (vv. 7–11) the Apostle extols and magnifies the love of God by comparison with human love. Among human beings, namely (γὰρ), he says, it will scarcely come to pass that anyone should be willing to undergo death for some upright man (ὑπὲρ δικαίου); for (γὰρ) perhaps someone might in the end endure to die for his own benefactor. The first γὰρ is explanatory of what had just been said in verse 6 — Christ died for the ungodly — and is equivalent to the Latin nempe, videlicet, scilicet, as often elsewhere, e.g. Acts 24:5. The second γὰρ, however, serves to confirm the preceding statement μόλις ὑπὲρ δικαίου τις ἀποθανεῖται. This confirmation consists in the point that if the discussion turns to τῷ ἀγαθῷ, it may be conceded that someone can endure to die for such a person. Ἀποθανεῖται is the Future 2nd Middle form. Τάχα denotes the opposite of what μόλις signifies and may be rendered it is possible. The particle καί, which our translator did not render, does not affect ἀποθανεῖν but the word τολμᾷ — which is indicated already by the very position of this little word. Therefore one should not translate: for it is possible that for his own benefactor someone might EVEN (καί) dare to die. Here καί has the force of the Dutch nog, as if one were to say: Want voor zijn weldoener heeft iemand misschien nog wel den moed van te sterven ("For for his benefactor someone might perhaps still have the courage to die"). The particle καί has the same force in this passage of Polybius cited by Raphel in his notes on this passage: περὶ δὲ τῶν διαδεξαμένων πῶς καὶ τολμᾶτε μνημονεύειν ("and how do you even dare to mention those who succeeded them?").
Moreover, for the correct interpretation of this passage it should be noted: (1) that the words δικαίου and τοῦ ἀγαθοῦ are to be taken not as Neuter gender, as if the discourse were about what is called just or good in the abstract sense, but as Masculine gender — about one who is just or good — for the discourse here is not about things but about persons, as is evident from the context, since what preceded was [v. 6] ὑπὲρ ἀσεβῶν ἀπέθανε and what immediately follows is [v. 8] ἔτι ἁμαρτωλῶν ὄντων ἡμῶν Χριστὸς ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν ἀπέθανε; (2) that between the words μόλις and τάχα there is a gradation proceeding from the more difficult to the easier; (3) that there is also a gradation between δικαίου and ἀγαθοῦ, and that in such a direction that the matter under discussion can occur more easily if it concerns τῷ ἀγαθῷ than if it concerned some δικαίῳ; (4) that ὑπὲρ δικαίου is written without the article but ὑπὲρ τοῦ ἀγαθοῦ with the article and therefore definitely; (5) that the word ἀγαθός can also be used of a beneficent man, in which sense it appears in Xenophon, Cyropaedia III.3: Κῦρον ἀνακαλοῦντες τὸν εὐεργέτην τὸν ἄνδρα τὸν ἀγαθόν ("calling upon Cyrus the benefactor, the good man"); other examples are given by Henricus Stephanus in the Thesaurus at the word ἀγαθός, p. 124; (6) that the article is sometimes placed so as to have the force of a possessive pronoun, as is the case for example in Philippians 1:23. In the same sense the word bonus was in use among Latin writers, as for example in this passage of Cicero, De Officiis III.15: "If a good man is one who benefits whom he can and harms no one, we shall not easily find a just man who is not a good man."
Rom 5:8. "But God commends his love toward us." To the foregoing statement — scarcely will it come to pass that anyone is willing to undergo death for an upright man; for perhaps for his own benefactor someone might in the end endure to die — the Apostle could immediately have subjoined: But God willed Christ to die for us who were not upright, not just, but still sinners and enemies, and thus he would have achieved his purpose, namely of extolling the love of God by comparison with human love. But here he employs that form of construction by which he both sets the love of God in opposition to human love and at the same time indicates that this love is far more wonderful than that love. The word συνίστησι here means commends or presents as excellent. See on 3:5. It occupies the first position in the sentence because it carries the chief emphasis — for there is emphasis also on the word ἑαυτοῦ, as by this word the love of God is set in sharper opposition to human love. Εἰς ἡμᾶς means toward us. Ἔτι refers to the condition in which the justified were before they were justified.
Rom 5:9. "Much more therefore, now justified in his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him." He concludes (οὖν) by arguing from the greater to the lesser. The sense is: If at the time when we were still sinners God pursued us with such great love as to will to reconcile and justify us with himself through the outpoured blood of his own Son, how much more shall we through his Son be kept immune from the future vengeance of God and made to possess the promised happiness, now that we are already reconciled with him and justified? By the expression to be saved from wrath the acquisition of the hoped-for heavenly glory [vv. 2 and 5] is here expressed in negative form. The preposition ἐν here denotes the instrument, for which elsewhere δι' αὐτοῦ (through Christ) is used. By τὴν ὀργήν ("the wrath") the Apostle understands that of which he spoke above at chapter 2:8–9.
Rom 5:10–11. "For if when we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of his Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved in his life. And not only so, but we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received reconciliation."
Paraphrase. For if at the time when we were hateful to God we were reconciled with him through the propitiatory death of his Son, much more shall we be saved through his life — we who are already reconciled with him. And not only reconciled with him, but also rejoicing in him as in our Father, as his adoptive children, through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now obtained that reconciliation with God.
Rom 5:10–11. "For if when we were enemies," etc. He confirms (γὰρ) the preceding argument [v. 9] by setting it out more distinctly and placing it in a clearer light by means of the antithesis between ἐχθροί and καταλλαγέντες — indeed also adding a new ground for hope [v. 2]. For he says: If at the time when we were hateful to God (ἐχθροί ὄντες) we were reconciled (κατηλλάγημεν, Aorist 2 Passive) with him (τῷ Θεῷ, Dative of communion) through the death of his Son — much more (instrumental ἐν) through his life shall we be saved (σωθησόμεθα), we who are already (καταλλαγέντες) reconciled with God; and not only reconciled with him (οὐ μόνον δέ) but also rejoicing in him as in our Father as his adoptive children (καυχώμενοι ἐν τῷ Θεῷ) through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now obtained (τὴν καταλλαγήν) that reconciliation with God.
The word ἐχθροί ("enemies") is to be taken in the Passive sense: this is required by the appositional word καταλλαγέντες ("reconciled"), and by the context as well [v. 9: σωθησόμεθα ἀπὸ τῆς ὀργῆς]. The word σωθησόμεθα here [v. 10] I would render as "we shall obtain eternal salvation," since unlike verse 9 there is no addition of ἀπὸ τῆς ὀργῆς. Moreover, even through that expression σωθησόμεθα ἀπὸ τῆς ὀργῆς the Apostle intends that salvation which consists in the glory of the children of God [v. 2] and the hope of which the justified cherish. For if by that expression σωθησόμεθα ἀπὸ τῆς ὀργῆς only liberation from divine vengeance were signified, there would be no gradation in the Apostle's thought and therefore no argument at all, since those who are justified are by that very fact understood to be reconciled with God and therefore no longer subject to the divine wrath.
The "life of Christ" here expressed as ἐν τῇ ζωῇ αὐτοῦ is to be understood not as his resurrection but as the glorious and immortal life which he entered upon once raised from the dead. Natalis Alexander on this passage seems to me to have rightly expounded the Apostle's meaning when he renders Paul's words more freely thus: If Christ the Son of God reconciled us to the Father by dying for us when we were his enemies and subject to his wrath on account of sin, how much more will he save those whom he has reconciled, living the immortal and glorious life, reigning without end, sitting at the right hand of the Father, and interceding for us as our advocate? What will he rather do — to whom all power has been given — than to bestow full and perfect salvation of soul and body upon those for whose restoration to the Father's favor he accomplished and suffered so much? Therefore I would judge that what is said — ἐν τῇ ζωῇ αὐτοῦ — "through his life" — is here equivalent to "through the Son of God now living the glorious and immortal life, to whom all power in heaven and on earth has been given, whom he has appointed judge of all, and who therefore will not refuse to admit his friends into the fellowship of his immortal life — those for whom, when they were enemies, he poured out his temporal life."
The participle καυχώμενοι [v. 11] depends on σωθησόμεθα in the same way as καταλλαγέντες. Therefore the structure of the words is as follows: σωθησόμεθα καταλλαγέντες — οὐ μόνον δὲ καταλλαγέντες ἀλλὰ καὶ καυχώμενοι κ.τ.λ. See the paraphrase. For the structure cannot be: οὐ μόνον δὲ σωθησόμεθα ἀλλὰ καὶ καυχώμενοι. The reason is that if the Apostle had meant this, in place of the participle καυχώμενοι he would have used a finite verb. And if you say that it is possible for a participle here to take the place of a finite verb, you will have made no progress, for even granting this, there would still be the obstacle that καυχώμενοι is a verb of Present tense, whereas the preceding σωθησόμεθα requires a verb of Future tense.
Footnotes:
[1] Homily IX on the Epistle to the Romans, where on the words ὅτι ἡ ἀγάπη τοῦ Θεοῦ ἐκκέχυται ἐν ταῖς καρδίαις ἡμῶν he notes: "He did not say 'given' but 'poured out in our hearts,' indicating the abundance. For the greatest gift he gave — not heaven and earth and sea, but what was more precious than all these: he made angels out of men and sons of God and brothers of Christ. And what is this? The Holy Spirit. And if he did not will to crown us with great crowns after our labors, he would not have given us so many good things before our labors. But his warm love is shown from this: that he honored us not gradually and little by little but poured out at once the fountain of his blessings — and this before our contests."
[2] This interpretation is not hindered by the fact that the Fathers of the Council of Trent, Session VI, Chapter 7, appear to refer this locus of the Epistle to the love of men toward God, and not as we have interpreted it to the love of God toward men. For as Ben. Justinianus wisely observes on this passage, the Fathers in no way affirm that this is Paul's meaning, but only make use of his words to prove what it was their own purpose to demonstrate. Those therefore who rely chiefly on this testimony to prove infused habits and qualities should see for themselves how aptly they argue. Thus far Justinianus. Compare what we noted on Acts chapter 20:28 in the attached note, Vol. 2, p. 156.
[3] Titus 3:5–8: "Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us through the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit, which he poured out upon us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Savior, that being justified by his grace we might become heirs according to the hope of eternal life."
CONTINUE
Comments
Post a Comment