INTRODUCTION Romans 8:31-39 is better sung than commented upon. It is a thrilling, ecstatic hymn of confident assurance that God?s purposes will be accomplished. Yet, I will attempt to comment on them. If we are to sing Paul?s hymn, let?s make sure we sing with understanding. Given the character of . . . . Continue Reading »
INTRODUCTION Paul is talking about the liberation of creation from bondage to decay and corruption into freedom. This raises the question of the time frame for the fulfillment of this prophecy. It is normally taken as a reference to the end of the world. The ?redemption of the body?E(v. 23) is . . . . Continue Reading »
The phrase “righteousness of God” in Romans 1:17 has been the subject of considerable dispute in recent years, with many abandoning a standard Protestant interpretation of the passage (i.e., that the righteousness of God refers to the righteousness that God gives) in favor of a more . . . . Continue Reading »
John Murray recognizes that Paul announces a ?deliverdict?Ein Romans 8:1-4. He is considering the force of ?therefore?Ein 8:1, asking what earlier portion of Romans this points to: ?If the apostle is thinking merely of freedom from the guilt of sin and from the condemnation which guilt entails, . . . . Continue Reading »
The main point of Romans 8:3, of course, is that the Law was undermined and made ineffective because of flesh, “flesh” here being shorthand for the condition of men and women under the reign of Sin and Death that characterized the OC. Made ineffective by flesh, by Sin, the Law cannot . . . . Continue Reading »
At the end of Rom 7, Paul is looking forward to a deliverance from the power of sin and death that holds him. His wretchedness is not relieved by the law, but only made worse. But he hopes for a deliverance, one that he characterizes as a future deliverance: ?Who will set me free from the body of . . . . Continue Reading »
What are we to make of Paul’s discussion of sin in Romans 7? If we take it as a description of fallen humanity as such, it is difficult to see how it can square with other portions of Scripture or with the Reformed doctrine of sin. Paul presents sin as an external power that dominates and . . . . Continue Reading »
There’s a fairly neat chiasm in the first part of Rom 7: a. law rules while one lives b. woman bound while husband lives; if husband dies, freed (KATARGEO) c. while husband lives: adulteress d. if husband dies: joined to another without adultery e. you died through Christ, through body of . . . . Continue Reading »
We tend to think of desire as the antithesis of submission to authority. Saying “I ate that chocolate pie because I wanted to” is the opposite of saying “I ate my broccoli because Moma told me to.” Paul, however, recognizes the imperative force of desire. Urging the Romans . . . . Continue Reading »
Rom 6:1 is often described as an “antinomian” objection, but it is really a legalist’s objection. Paul does not perceive an antinomian opponent; he expects that HE will be perceived as an antinomian. One can imagine it coming from the Pharisees: You overturn Torah, and the world . . . . Continue Reading »
Subscribe
Latest Issue
Support First Things
