The Best of Romans

The Best of Romans A study by Daniel L. Herring completed in 2020 Edit completion: Introduction A study of the book of Romans, in the fashion of “The Best of John,” pulling the special content to the surface for closer investigation. In my study, one may not always find a chapter and verse. I often treat multiple verses without numbering each one. The reader should, therefore, read my study in conjunction with his or her own study, keeping the book of Romans close for handy reference. I have never been one for name dropping.

You will not find an index at the end of this work. Neither will you find that I am writing about what previous authors have said. When I bring up references, it is usually from Wikipedia, a dictionary, encyclopedia, or online site of a current author. The study, as it is presented here, is solely my own and is the product of collaboration between myself and the Holy Spirit. It is not my intention to teach anyone what either is or is not. The work, at it's most basic level, represents my thoughts only. However, it is hoped that, as the thoughts of others have both inspired and spurred me forward, my thoughts may be of some similar use in leading the reader to his or her own thoughts. It is with a great sense of personal satisfaction that I forward this work and, because of the sure assistance of the Holy Spirit in my endeavors, I suggest to anyone with an interest in the truth, never strike out on your own nor lean on your own understanding but allow the Holy Spirit to lead.

Chapter One Notes on verses three and four: Paul's take on the nature of Jesus Christ is two-fold. Paul believed Jesus to be made from the seed and stock of David, 'according to the flesh', but he believed Christ to be proclaimed the Son of God by the indisputable evidence of his resurrection, 'according to the spirit of holiness'. That is to say, the Holy Spirit declared Jesus to be the Christ. The Holy Spirit influenced the resurrection as surely as he had influenced the birth. (That which is born of the spirit, is spirit.)

Notes on verses five and six: Apostles, according to Paul, received their apostleship, and grace, from God for a purpose. That purpose is stated as “obedience to the faith among all nations.” On the surface, that statement seems Judaical in nature – Jews clinging to their relationship with God while the nations around them flounder in sinful idol worship.

But there is more.

The stated purpose had a purpose – which was “for his name.” It was for the name of Jesus. Those people addressed by Paul, referenced as “ye”, among the nations – they,

like Paul, were considered as “called of Jesus Christ.” They were, therefore, as Romans (and here I refer to verse one) separated unto the gospel of God. Paul evinced a mindset that at once addressed Jews (for the good news was from God) and gentiles (for the good news was Jesus.) It was an approach that bridged the old and new, showing that both sides of the divide were actually one.

Notes on verses seven through twelve: One must see, in these verses, a personal connection in Paul's heart to the Roman Christians. See that connection in Paul's own words – from verse 7, “To all that be in Rome,” and from verse 12, “both of you and me.” Paul felt very much the converted Roman, and so, he had a vested interest in the spiritual conversion of Romans.

Paul is proud of them. They have a good reputation. The world at large knows of their struggle in the new faith. Paul wants to see them, to be with them. Paul serves God with his spirit (note: in contrast to 'with his flesh') and wishes to impart a spiritual gift to the Romans. Paul speaks of the inner man, the converted man. Paul uses the words 'spirit' and 'spiritual' to reference the mind, the thoughts. It is this quality of the Romans, the renewed minds, that Paul wishes to establish. By 'established' Paul means that they together, as Romans, may enjoy the comforts of a better way of thinking.

Notes on verses sixteen and seventeen: Paul was not ashamed of the gospel he preached.

He had preached it to Greeks, Barbarians, wise men, and simpletons. Like iron on iron, Paul had honed his craft, insomuch that now, feeling indebted to his earlier converts, he felt better prepared to preach the gospel to his own.

Paul gives us a sense, in verses sixteen and seventeen, of how the gospel (as it was preached) actually worked. In two small words, Paul opens to us the dynamics and efficacious workings of the gospel. They are “faith to faith.”

Paul explains that from faith to faith, the gospel reveals the rightness of God. From the owned faith to the accepted faith – from the experience of one supplying the need of the other – the preached good news is (as the power of God unto salvation) the one most essential ingredient of the recipe. It is an exclusive salvation in that it is only effective for those who believe. It is not within the reach of non-believers. The gospel, of course, is the good news of the only begotten son of God. It is about Christ – and by extension, it is about Christ-likeness.

Note on verse eighteen: This verse clearly states that the unrighteous and the ungodly know the truth as much as any believer; the difference between the believer and nonbeliever is shown that the non-believer holds the truth in unrighteousness. In other words, they use the truth the wrong way. Truth for the non-believer is clipped and

trimmed, maligned, and twisted. It is a sad and pathetic amputee crying to be put out of its misery.

Verse eighteen, while pointing to the fact that the wrath of God is revealed against these types, it is not necessarily revealed to them. It stands to reason that if they knew what they were doing, they might not do it. The truth which they abuse is a part of God. They are cutting into God – He must react. Wrath may be seen as a sort of knee-jerk reaction to pain and loss.

Note on verses nineteen through twenty-five: Verse Nineteen. That which the ungodly may know of God is manifest, not outside of or apart from the ungodly, but “in them.” If God has revealed himself to the ungodly, then the ungodly have seen God within themselves. Each of us, as mature thinking adults, is aware of every facet of our nature.

We know who we are, what we are. To take a stand against God or against truth or against what is right – that is a personal choice.

Verse Twenty. The “invisible”, or spiritual, truths, as far back as the creation, are “clearly seen”. One need only look within. Reflect. God, truth, and the tools to realize them are all “in them.” We may understand all spiritual truth, by the application of comparative thought. All things that we see as solid and real are reflections of all things spiritual. Because of this, it is seen that man is without excuse, for in all matters, there is no mistake or accident, only man's deliberate choice.

Verse Twenty-One. As it played out, although wicked men have always had the same resources as the righteous, and indeed, have known and recognized God in their nature, instead of lifting God up in praise as God, they named him human nature and imagined that wisdom originated in themselves. In fact, they lowered God to their own level and subjugated all higher matters to their will. Their mindsets lost the light of God, being deliberately replaced by the darkness of willful isolation in the name of independence.

Verse Twenty-Two. By professing themselves to be wise, they usurped the wisdom in them that was God. The first step on the road to ruin.

Verse Twenty-Three. Deliberately, they changed the incorruptible glory of God's nature in man to a thing they could manipulate – the nature of man, a corrupt low-end knockoff of the original. They went a step further in redefining who they were by dividing human nature into lesser natures such as the various natures of wild animals they were impressed with.

Verse Twenty-Four. This verse presents the reader with a definition of the actions of man. While one might think that all of this describes the process of living a lie, and that is true enough, the lie is, itself, based in something else. That something is named 'lust'.

To lust, one must look away from what one has and want something different. It is a

tearing away from one's true self to construct a fabrication that is not one's true self. In the matter of tearing away from the nature and truth of God within, one may only move to a lower plane – it is a form of self-debasement and degradation, as when a man leaves the cleanness of his house to go outside and wallow with pigs in their sty. Offended, God pretty much said, 'fine. If that is what you want, I will not intervene. I will let you be as nasty as you choose to be.' By their choosing, they even dishonored the low estate of their flesh, thinking it so common that any treatment was acceptable.

Verse Twenty-Five. The high and the glorious truth of God in man, they changed into a lie. It was such a serious break from the truth that man ended up serving and worshiping the flesh (any flesh, any part of it, any image of it) of humans and animals rather than the spirit of God in man – which can never be anything other than good and right.

Notes on verses twenty-six and twenty-seven: Because men make such deliberate choices, God's response is to (hopefully) let them learn from their mistakes. God lets them run with their “vile affections.” What are affections and when are they vile? Let's do a little digging. Some synonyms of the word affection include 'fondness', 'liking', 'endearment', 'attachment', and even 'devotion'. These are all common to the human condition and not necessarily bad in and of themselves. So, how can such very human states be vile?

Synonyms of the word vile include a lengthy list. They are 'foul', 'nasty', 'unpleasant', 'disagreeable', 'horrid', 'horrible', 'dreadful', 'atrocious', 'abominable', 'offensive', 'obnoxious', 'odious', 'unsavory', 'repulsive', 'disgusting', 'distasteful', 'loathsome', 'hateful', 'nauseating', 'sickening', 'disgraceful', 'appalling', 'shameful', 'dishonorable', 'heinous', 'abhorrent', 'deplorable', 'monstrous', 'wicked', 'evil', 'depraved', 'debased', 'contemptible', and 'shocking'.

It is easy to see that these synonyms, for the most part, are reactions. It is what one might see wrong in another and criticize as something that works against the viewer.

After all, one does not bother to call a wall hard until after one has run into it face-first.

Using the expression 'vile affections' is like God saying, “Well, I sure didn't mean for that to happen.”

In the very same verse, we see the expression “natural use.” That the thinking of man turned from the 'natural use' implies that there is a right way – a way that was intended.

One might well consider unnatural as 'forced', 'backward', and 'contrary'. The reference here is to sexual behaviors and appetites that range beyond the original purpose of the man/woman relationship.

The unnatural, backward way of doing things has certain – ramifications – if you can look past the unfortunate pun and see the dire consequences. Verse twenty-seven clearly states that those who engage in such actions must face the consequences. The wording is

this: “receiving in themselves that recompense of their error which was meet.” That recompense is always something bad – syphilis, gonorrhea, social stigma, hemorrhoids.

Notes on verses twenty-eight through thirty-two: These verses sum it all up. The very first statement, in these verses, is an accurate depiction of the reprobate mind. “And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge,” shows plainly that, one, God was there and, two, they deliberately removed him. God responded to that willful choice by allowing the reprobate mind to thoroughly rule their lives.

The word reprobate is defined as lacking principles. A reprobate mind is an unprincipled mind. In regard to people of such minds, synonyms include: 'knave', 'degenerate', 'wretch', 'villain', 'miscreant', and 'good-for-nothing'.

The reprobate mind leads an individual to do things that are “inconvenient” to their own well-being and the well-being of others. This means that a person who retains God in their knowledge makes choices that are convenient. What is the definition of convenient? It is defined as fitting in well with a person's needs, activities, and plans.

Synonyms of the word include: 'appropriate', 'expedient', and 'advantageous'.

There follows to the end of the chapter a long list of all the wrong actions and wrong kinds of people that are a direct result of the reprobate mind. “Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, without understanding, covenant-breakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful.”

Is there any possibility that these people stumble into this unaware? Are they just 'born' that way? Can it be an accident? The Bible says, “No.” These people have available to them everything that the righteous have. They know that their appetites and choices work against God. They know that their ways are ways that end in death. That is why they do not like to retain God in their knowledge. They reject the God who rejects their evil choices. They exalt their choices and they love those companions of similar ilk.

Chapter Two Notes on verses one through eleven: This chapter launches on the topic of judgment, (or condemnation) something common to both man and God. God judges, a righteous man judges, (that is, God judges through the righteous man) and a wicked man judges (that is, he employs condemnation apart from God.) Here, the words 'judgment' and 'condemnation' are used, not to imply an idle opinion, but rather, an active response. We

think in terms of a final outcome, as in the righteous are rewarded in Heaven with eternal life, but the wicked are condemned to Hell.

What we must keep clear and distinct in our thoughts is the fact that every ending has its beginning and its middle (or transitional area.) A person cannot, for example, ever reach hell unless that person first chooses to get on the highway to hell. This beginning is an active choice. It is also true that this same person will never reach hell unless he or she continues on that highway. This continuation, this place of transition is an active choice.

Anyone who condemns another, no matter what the rationale, condemns himself. There is, in reality, but one condemnation – it is this, that they did not like to retain God in their knowledge. If a man who has rejected God condemns war, or abortion, or school shootings, or corrupt government – he is not suddenly righteous. There is no justification or excuse, for that man exists in the same rejection of God as all those he condemns. It is foolish to think that because he judges other God-rejecters he will somehow escape the condemnation of his own rejection of God. Now, the 'anyone' in the example from the previous paragraph does not cover the righteous man who judges – that is to say that it does not cover the man through whom the judgment of God works. That same man is actively working toward glory, honor, and immortality – as per verse 7. They achieve this focused result through patient continuance in well-doing. So, what exactly does this “well-doing” entail?

This well doing is an active extension of the spirit of humility and obedience to the will of God. That includes obedience to the truths and laws and commands of God. We know, from Galatians five verses twenty-two and twenty-three, that the fruits of this spirit are the real and active works of love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, and temperance.

We have to ask, then, how does the judgment or condemnation of God manifest in these works? Certainly, the judgment of God, even though it works in and through the righteous man is not a thing that the righteous man has to work at. While the righteous are busy living the life of faith, believing in God and Jesus, the judgment of God works through their very existence as a constant reminder to the wicked. Let us jump back to a previous determination – John three verse eighteen says, “He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only-begotten Son of God.” Romans two verse two says, “the judgment of God is according to truth against them which commit such things.” The rejection of God is the rejection of God in man. It is the rejection of Jesus Christ. So now, let me remind the reader of the type of people and evil deeds that stem from a rejection of the Son of God. Romans one verses twenty-nine through thirty-one, “Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness,

covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, without understanding, covenant-breakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful.”

The unrighteous man will condemn, being just as guilty of rejecting God as those he condemns, and will falsely align himself with those righteous people who are against war, and abortion, and school shootings, and corrupt government, but will wholly overlook the point that God's tolerance, patience, and plentiful goodness toward men is meant to lead men to repentance. Instead, he makes every excuse to remain the same person. In the end, it is a choice for God's wrathful response. When God “renders” (delivers, yields, or hands down a judgment) to every man “according to” (meaning, it corresponds or is equivalent) that man's “deeds”, do you think it will matter one whit that he took a stand against abortion?

According to verse eight, these people's deeds are contentious, choosing lies over truth, choosing evil over righteousness. Such deeds get the response of indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish. There is no respect of persons with God. Every “soul” who rejects God and Jesus Christ will get the equivalent response. On the other hand, everyone who “worketh good” gets the equivalent response of glory, honor, and peace, (or renown, privilege, and tranquility.) What are the works of good? Love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, and temperance.

Notes on the rest of chapter two: Law is the issue. The law of God. There is no accusation within the law. The accusations and punishments of God are only brought to bear against those who reject the will of God. A rejection of the will of God is equivalent to the rejection of God, the rejection of God in man, the rejection of Christ, and the rejection of Christ in man. One either is or is not in sync with the spirit.

All of us know that we expect the most from those closest to us, also that we are most deeply hurt when those closest to us are the ones who fight against us. That is why the author uses the expression, “to the Jew first, and also to the gentile.” We tend to think that our loved ones and dear ones are on the same page with us. Basically, it is a matter of reciprocation. We give of ourselves and expect as much in return.

God's love for his chosen people is nothing less than a peace treaty. There are conditions. The history of the Jewish people is a history of a people struggling to meet the conditions God has set. The staunchest advocates of the will of God make their boast in being God's chosen. Their boast is of keeping the law of God and thus also, of expecting his continued favor.

The author pointedly asks of those who make their boast in the law, will they preach and teach its tenets only to defy this or that point? Will they take an outward stand against theft, for example, only to steal when others drop their guard? A point is made by the author that being the chosen of God cannot be an outward affectation; being a Jew must be a true spiritual connection.

Moreover, the author stipulates that when gentiles, who do not know or practice the law that God has given to his chosen, do those things that are in the law, they become a law unto themselves. An example might be a gentile who decides not to eat pork on spiritual principles. I say 'spiritual principles' in the sense that a man orders his heart and mind and life in all aspects of self-discipline, virtue, and honor.

If the uncircumcised gentile keeps the spirit of the law, and thus the letter, he is counted more of a Jew than the Jew who outwardly keeps the letter of the law but not the spirit.

The difference between a righteous person and an unrighteous person is a difference in the spirit. It is a difference that sees one extreme acknowledging the truth of God while the other does not. It is a difference that sees one extreme maintaining the spiritual connection while the other does not. It is a difference that sees one extreme actively maintaining self-discipline, virtue, and honor while the other only makes an outward show.

When being the chosen of God is a natural inward condition of the heart and mind, that is truly praiseworthy, for the praise of it is not from men but from God. Chapter Three This is a chapter of questions, a chapter of questions and resolutions. Let me paraphrase the salient points. What advantage or profit is there to being a circumcised Jew? What if some do not believe – does that negate the faith of God? If our unrighteousness commends God, is he unrighteous when he takes vengeance? How, then, can God judge the world? If the truth of God has more abounded through my lie unto his glory, why yet am I also judged as a sinner? Are the servants of God any better than those who wrongly accuse the servants of God as evil-doers? Do we make the law void through our faith?

May we boast ourselves through the laws handed down to the chosen of God or through the works of a circumcised Jew? Is God only the God of the Jews and not also the God of the Gentiles?

There are a lot of questions in this small chapter. Each question is a good and valid point projecting the spirit in which should be found every servant of God – not by works but by faith. Here are the conclusions of the author.

There is no accusation with the law, but through the law comes the knowledge of sin.

Whatever the law says, it says to those under the law, that all mouths may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. It has already been proven that both Jews and Gentiles are under sin. There are none righteous, no, not one. With their tongues they have used deceit. Their mouths are full of cursing and bitterness. Their feet are swift to shed blood. Destruction and misery are in their ways. They have not known the way of peace. There is no fear of God before their eyes. Therefore, in regard to both Jew and Gentile, by the deeds of the law shall no flesh be justified in the sight of God. But. To the Jew was committed the oracles of God. God will be found true and justified in all his sayings when liars arise to condemn God. Those who condemn what is true and justified or accuse the servants of God's will of evil – their damnation is deserved.

Where are those who understand? Where are those who seek after God? The rightness of God has been shown to all, being witnessed both by the prophets of old and the oracles of God. It is the rightness of faith in Christ with partiality to neither Jew nor Gentile – all are equal in grace. For the Gentile has sinned without the knowledge of sin found in the law of the Jew but the Jew has sinned knowing the law which God gave them. Grace is to both through Jesus Christ. God made a way for sinful man to be redeemed, not through the law, but through the sacrifice of his son.

God made a way in that his son was able to incur divine favor toward man for past offenses. No man was just before God until Jesus came, being just, and justified all men who turned back to God through Jesus. It is a matter in which no man may boast himself – either through the law or through his own actions. It is outside the law, which always loops back to the knowledge of sin, and can only be attainable through faith in the sacrifice of the just son of God. The conclusion of the author is that sinful man may be justified before God through faith in his son, outside of the deeds of the law. Faith becomes the new law, the new oracles of God. It is one and the same God who justifies both the Jew and the non-Jew through faith – a faith that neither stands opposed to nor in any way negates the law of God but, rather, establishes the law of God. The law of the Jews may not, therefore, be a thing in and of itself but now depends upon faith in Jesus Christ for both its establishment and justification.

Chapter Four

The author continues in chapter four with the differences between the Jew and the Gentile, with the differences between works and faith. The immediate conclusion is that the works of the Jews are a matter of indebtedness while the faith of the Gentiles is counted as righteousness after the manner of Abraham, the father of the Jews.

The author presents the witness of Genesis fifteen verse six which basically says what the author says, that Abraham believed God and it was counted unto him for righteousness. The author, by this, is showing the Jew, with his own scriptures, that faith counts more with God than the physical deeds of man. Like a lawyer laying out his case, the author of Romans goes on to call a second witness, Psalms thirty-two verses one and two. What is meant to be seen in this is that justification of man is not the work of man but the work of God. “Blessed is the man unto whom the Lord imputeth not iniquity.” The question is asked,

does this blessed state, if faith is counted as righteousness, come only to the Jews and not also to the gentiles who believe? The author suggests that the blessed state, in Abraham's case, came first – in other words, Abraham believed while he was uncircumcised, God counted his belief as righteousness, then Abraham received the seal of circumcision.

The author concludes that Abraham is not only the father of those who are circumcised but also of those who are not circumcised. Abraham is the father of all believers, Jew and Gentile, and by the work which is God's alone, God counts all faith in God, anywhere and in anyone, as righteousness. No one is exempt from God's work of grace.

Next, the author turns his attention to the promise God made to Abraham in chapter seventeen of Genesis. God promised, in perpetuity, that Abraham would be heir to the earth – he and his children in their generations. Abraham would be the father of many nations, not just the nation of the Jews. Like Abraham, all his descendants who believed would receive the mark of circumcision as the sign, or seal, of their faith.

The reasoning goes like this: the promise to Abraham and his seed came before the establishment of the Law through Moses. It came not through the law but through the faith and belief evinced in Abraham. If the promise came by way of the law, that would negate the word of God that he counted Abraham's faith as righteousness. It would also negate the justification of man as the work of God only. That would make God's promise to Abraham null and void.

The thing about the law is this: it achieves offense, indignation, and punishment. The author suggests that where there is no law, there is no transgression of the law. The author's conclusion is that the promise may only be sure to all the seed of Abraham through the faith of Abraham, so that the promise may be given as the grace of God. It is certain in the author's expression, “who is the father of us all”, that the author counted himself in a scope broader than the Jewish people and the law.

The author's reasoning hinges on Abraham. The claim is made that it was not written for Abraham's sake that his faith was counted as righteousness. It was written for the sake of those who would follow. It was written for those who would be found in a faith like that of Abraham's, whose very nature and being shouted faith. At nearly one hundred years of age, he did not consider himself dead, nor the womb of his wife. He fully relied on the word of God. He did not stagger under the weighty responsibility that God's promise imposed. Rather, he was strong and steadfast in his faith, giving the glory to God. Abraham was fully persuaded that anything God promised, he was able to deliver, and that was exactly the kind of faith for which God imputed righteousness to Abraham.

The author's closing argument is that we, the seed of Abraham, the father of many nations, must use the same kind of 'fully persuaded' faith that Abraham used, to fully believe the word of God in regard to his son Jesus Christ. We must be fully persuaded that God raised his son from the grave, his only begotten son, who was delivered to the law for our offenses and raised again for our justification.

Chapter Five Verses one and two: The point of these two verses hinges upon a 'fully persuaded' acceptance of the existence and work of the only begotten son of God. This acceptance realizes two truths, through Christ, about our relationship with God. Truth one is that our access into the grace of God (that is, God's promise to account our faith as righteousness, our justification before God) is accomplished solely through the agency of Christ.

Truth two is that we only have peace with God through his son Jesus Christ – as provided in the specified precondition of “Lord.” By this, I mean to say that the faithful must be 'fully persuaded' that Jesus is Lord. That is how it is written and that is how it is meant to be received.

The title of “Lord” is placed in the sense of one having the authority to act on the behalf of God, as a superior tasked with the negotiation of peace. The expression “peace with God” is here used in the sense of a peace treaty – that is, an agreement between two parties in which the captive (subdued and absorbed) party is offered promises of hope and prosperity in return for meeting and upholding the stipulated terms, or conditions, of the covenant.

Notes on verses two through five: The author's thinking and argumentation follow the lines of cause and effect – as in, A leads to B which leads to C which leads to D. Beginning with the last statement in verse two, a cascade of cause and effect follows in a natural and preset configuration. The final statement of verse two is that the believer rejoices in hope of the glory of God. That is the high point; let us pause here for examination. What is the glory of God that the believer hopes in (or for?)

From Wikipedia, I get, Glory (from the Latin gloria, "fame, renown") "Glory" is one of the most common praise words in scripture. In the Hebrew Bible, the concept of glory is expressed with several Hebrew words, including Hod ( ‫ )הוד‬and kavod. Later, these original Hebrew Bible concepts for glory were translated in the Christian Testament as the Greek word doxa (δόξα). The Hebrew word kavod (K-V-D) has meant "importance", "weight", "deference", or "heaviness", but primarily kavod means "glory", "respect", "honor", and "majesty". In translating the Hebrew Bible, the Greek word used is δόξα, a word also appearing extensively in the New Testament which was originally written in Greek. Doxa means "judgment, opinion", and by extension, "good reputation, honor".

St. Augustine later rendered it as clara notitia cum laude, "brilliant celebrity with praise" So then, the list of words commonly associated with the 'glory' of God are fame, renown, importance, weight, deference, heaviness, respect, honor, majesty, good reputation, opinion, and judgment.

If the believer hopes to be like Jesus and hopes to share in the Godly attributes, then which of these words seems most applicable to the final statement of verse two? A person might hope to share in the renown of God, which translates as a place or condition that person would like to find themselves in. A person might hope to share in

the good reputation of God, which would mean that the person wants to be honored like God is honored, to receive the respect and deference that God receives. Of course, this makes the person's motives seem base and tacky – sort of self-serving. In this sense, they wish to share in judgment of those they consider wrong, bad, counter-them. They want to sit on the thrones judging the twelve tribes (or rather, all the individuals who ever defied their will or annoyed their spirit.)

In my opinion, however, the most likely scenario must include both elements of the hoped-for divine glory and elements of the believer that God thought worthy of justification. As to the latter, I refer to a person's humility, and 'fully persuaded' faith in the sovereignty and work of the Father and Son. By this, I mean the right and authority of both God and Christ. When this condition is met, what we see is the faithful hoping to be a part of the importance of God and Christ in the human condition. Like the angels of God, the faithful seek to be keepers of the Holy flame, to bring to all who remain in darkness the light of God's truth, to include whosoever will into the reality of God, and thus to magnify the Lord.

So, the hope in, or for, the glory of God is the high point, as I pointed out, and that high point is set in contrast with the low point of tribulation – in which the hopeful also rejoice. Why would they rejoice in tribulation? Well, they must see it as a marker in their progress toward the hoped-for glory. As B is the natural progression between A and C, tribulation progresses toward and achieves another marker in the overall march toward spiritual perfection. When a person endures tribulation, the spirit of that person is affected. The outcome is patience; patience is a spiritual quality that better equips that person for the march.

The exercise of patience achieves another quality that better equips the person, giving them much more to work with. The net result and greater tool of which I speak is experience. Patience and experience are qualities that are found in those souls who have 'been around the block'. They are the older souls who have graduated from the 'school of hard knocks'. Rarely does one find patience and experience among the rash youth.

Finally, these crusty diehards reach a marker high and far removed from their tempestuous beginnings. They reach a point of spiritual surety called hope. They can hope in the glory of an invisible God precisely because of their experience, because of the patience, because of all the former hard knocks, hardships, and insecurities. They have been made, they have been molded, they have become the only cup able to contain the fluid certainty of hope in the glory of God. Christ has filled them to the brim and now they overflow. They share that overflow with anyone fashioned to receive; they are

not ashamed of the invisible truth of the Word, of God, of their spirit, of their joy or real connection to the importance of the Holy flame.

Notes on chapter five verses six through eight: By our knowledge of and experience in the nature of men, and from which we may not set ourselves apart, we know that any individual would be hard-pressed to die for another individual. If they could be convinced that other individual was “righteous,” then there would be a slim chance they might step up and take a bullet for the other person. Slightly better odds exist if the individual can be convinced the other person is “good.”

When I think of someone sacrificing their life for another individual, I picture the romanticized American soldier who throws himself in harm's way to save his comrades.

The other person or persons may or may not be close and dearly loved friends. I must ask, then, what must a person believe about another in order to reach the point of selfsacrifice? For the soldier, the thought may be the greater good, by which I mean it is believed those being saved may go on to complete the objective. Such might fall under the category of a very specific indoctrination.

What about the non-soldier? Of what must he or she be convinced to consider selfsacrifice? Tender emotions for the other may be enough. I recently heard of a father who died in the act of saving his children from a bear. We might consider, at this point, the notion that 'tender emotions' are akin to a belief in or a sense of oneness between all parties. As for the children the father died for – they were weak and deficient in many regards. He might die only for them to grow up and become serial killers. Then again, they might grow up to be the people he hoped they would become.

A father's love for his children is no indication the children are either righteous or good, but love must hope. Of all our natural qualities, love and hope are the most likely triggers for self-sacrifice. In the act of sacrifice, one is not able to save his deed for later; self-sacrifice may not be performed after the fact. The soldier could not wait to see if his comrades succeeded or failed. The father could not postpone his sacrifice or make it dependent upon how the children would turn out.

I think that is what the author is trying to get across. God did not wait for us to become righteous or good; Jesus died for us while we were “yet without strength.” That is to say, while we were yet sinners. That is to say, we were ungodly – the exact opposite of what God hoped we would be, and void of any evidence we would become what he hoped for.

In the act of sacrifice at such a point, certain facts come to light. Love is shown to be present in the act: “God commendeth his love toward us.” We may also note the applicable hope in this scenario. The saving sacrifice is no guarantee that we will ever be anything but what we already are. Here, I must return to the point of connection between hope and a sense of oneness.

It is not a case of: “Oh, what the heck – let's give it a shot and see how it turns out.” The one who is performing the act of sacrifice does not take his ultimate act lightly; the person must truly be moved. When I bring up such a word as 'love,' it must not be mistaken for the word 'like.' One does not perform the ultimate act for a nice guy. 'Like' is not a sufficient motive.

In both of my examples, the soldier and the father, there was a sense of oneness. It should not seem a stretch, therefore, to think that God and Jesus were so moved through a sense of oneness. To save someone does not apply only to those who are not set against you. Yes, as it says in verse ten, we were the enemies of God but even in the act of saving a drowning man, the rescuer must deal with a person who works against his best efforts. Therein lies the meaning of our lack of strength mentioned in verse six.

Being yet without strength equates to being the enemy of God, to being a sinner, to being ungodly. A father might rightly hope that his combative children may still come around – after all, they are made of the same spiritual stock, as it were, a spiritual chip off the old block.

Notes on verses nine through eleven: On top of the former argument, owing to it, because of it, and through the agency of it – that is, the blood sacrifice and death of the son of God – we may be saved from wrath. This wrath must not be seen as an emotional bearing of God, such as anger or frustration. This wrath comes through the agency of the law. Think about it. If all you have going for you is the law, then all you can hope for is the judgment that you are guilty like everyone else. The merry-go-round of the cycle of life and death is hopeless enough without condemnation for an inherently sinful nature.

In these three verses, three words are seen as the synthesis of a believer's hope and faith.

They are “justification”, “reconciliation”, and “atonement.” Justified by the blood plus reconciled to God equals the atonement from the verdict of 'guilty as charged'. The conclusion is that Jesus did not just die, he also lived again – he conquered death itself.

The effect on us is, therefore, twofold. We are reconciled by his death; we are saved by his life. We are included in both facets of his work.

Notes on verses twelve through fifteen: To further illustrate our salvation in the life of one man, the author resorts to the belief that death came upon all mankind through the sin of one man. Some of us may argue that what Adam did was what Adam did, and we are, therefore, innocent. However, all men have inherited a nature that is impossible to hide. Daily, we demonstrate our nature through thoughts, actions, words, and choices.

The sin is definitely there.

Some of us even reject the reality of an Adam – no Adam, no sin. What if Adam had not sinned? Another man would have been the first, perhaps Cain. If not Cain, then Bob, Steve, or Raul. Yet, the author of Romans seeks to show that the verdict of sin rests upon all mankind from the first sinner to the present. He seeks to show that the hopeless wheel of death is a direct result of a common and widespread natural inclination. He claims that death has ruled from Adam to Moses while, at the same time, stating that it is the law (which is placed at the time of Moses) that imputes sin. In other words, the law was the result of sin.

We did not have the laws through Moses before the time of Moses but, clearly, we had sin and death. In verse fourteen, the author makes a concession on the record of sin.

While he believed death reigned in the time between Adam and Moses, he did not believe that everyone was a sinner on the scale of Adam. This is to account for the righteousness that God applied to certain servants of his will. There were Enoch and Noah to consider; there was Abraham, the father of all faithful believers.

The first sinner, as a type, whether he was an Adam or a Raul, presaged the return to that type. The pendulum swings; what was must come again. Adam's type must be seen as more than simply the one who made an unwise choice. The type that was Adam, as well the type that was to be Jesus, was the type of great change from one condition to another. It is the transitional type that affects everyone who follows him.

Notes on verses sixteen through twenty-one: In verse sixteen, the author gives us two models for the progression from one state to another. Both models are the same with the difference between the two being where each starts and where each ends. The model type is the pyramid. The first model begins at the apex and ends at the broader base. The second model begins at the broader base and ends at the apex. As far as each of us are concerned, who hopes for justification, the apex represents the state of Adam before the fall.

In verse seventeen, the author explains his two models by contrasting the impoverishment and servitude of death with the rich importance and power of life. It is a contrast between disobedience and obedience. It is a contrast between law and faith, between sin and righteousness.

In verse eighteen, the author makes a comparison between results. Although the results are different in that the first depicts judgment upon all men who came after Adam and the second depicts justification for all men who follow Christ, both outcomes come exclusively through a single individual.

In verse nineteen, we find the summation of the argument. Two single individuals, each able to affect all who follow profoundly. Through the disobedience of the first individual, many were made sinners. Through the obedience of the second individual, many were made righteous.

In verse twenty, we find the author's assessment of the importance, the rank, and by way of proliferation, the value of each separate outcome, one through the law, one through grace. Grace won.

Finally, we see the reason things worked out in the order they were ordained to have.

Whereas sin had its time and power up until death, the grace of God would have its time and power through a righteousness imparted through Jesus Christ right up until life – a life meant to be ongoing.

Chapter Six The author is still building on previous argumentation. Upon the established conclusion that grace abounds because of, and through, sin, he asks, 'should we continue as before for the sake of grace?' He answers his own question with an emphatic and resounding 'no'. From verses one and two, we get this: grace has made us dead to our previous mind, our previous actions. Our being 'dead to sin' is such a monumental respite from the past that it deserves nothing less than a clean break. Our inclinations must not be allowed to go back. Given the opportunity to advance, we must now settle it in our hearts to press forward only.

Notes on verses three and four: Here, the author clears up and defines the matter of baptism. Baptism is much more than the washing away of sin, for that is the secondary aspect of the ritual. The primary aspect of the ritual is that we are buried with Jesus. The old life is gone. We are raised from that old life with Christ by the glory of “the Father.”

We are raised to a new life – a life washed free of sin, a life in the family of God. Notes on verse five: It is an important aspect of this verse that the author used the word “planted.” As it is presented, the verse is laid out in two parts – an action and a result, a cause, and an effect. The two poles of this verse are death, as the action, and resurrection, as the result. In that the word 'planted' was employed to convey this message, we are reminded that the action of death is the death of the seed referred to in John 12:24. Resurrection, as the result, is a harvest obtained from the planted seed. That is to say, because the seed died, it is now able to bring forth much fruit, which we know to mean, many like itself.

Notes on verses six and seven: Having touched upon the ritual death of baptism in verses three and four, and following immediately with the actual death and resurrection in verse five, the author lays out the mechanics of it in verses six and seven. The point of it is the 'clean break' from sin – to be no longer bound to it or bound by it – but to be absolutely free from it, above it, beyond its pull and influence. The mechanics that brings one to this point hinge on a new alignment. In other words – to align oneself with Christ in his death and to have the same death in oneself. It is to the effect that the body of sin (the spiritual “old man”) should be destroyed, wiped out once and for all. The author uses the same common logic that we still employ to this day, that being, a dead man is finally free of all that bound him in life. There is no more ring in the nose to lead us; there is no more monkey on the back, no more devil on the shoulder whispering in our ear.

Notes on verses eight through eleven: Choices. It is the author's hope and choice, indeed of all Christians also, that planting oneself in the death of Christ will, by the same power of the spirit, join one to the harvest produced by that planting. The reasoning behind this is that we are swept up in the wake of Christ's forward momentum. While Christ died once in regard to sin, as should all faithful, Christ lives (the harvest) unto God. Please take careful note of the word 'unto'. It is a directional word; it is a progressional word; it is a developmental word.

When the word 'unto' is used, one must understand that there is a progression of development in one direction. When we say unto, what we really mean is through and toward. For the faithful to fulfill the same forward momentum as Christ, he or she must

face one direction only, he or she must make choices that progress higher and higher.

The faithful must move forward through a spiritual terrain, never looking back. To look back is to go back.

Verse eleven is spiritually pivotal. When I say 'spiritual', I point to things we should know and understand; I point to things that should be settled in our hearts and minds.

The terrain we progress through is Christ himself. Every developmental choice we make should be a Christ choice. We can ill-afford to merely be 'like Christ' – we must be Christ. We must have his nature. To come close is not enough. Christ recommended that we learn of him. That learning should be neither static nor idle. Learning is the mortar by which we build into ourselves, brick by brick, the essential reality of Christ.

For a while, our progression will include the vehicle of our flesh. We will be as a driver in a car, barreling down an obstacle course, meeting situation after situation in which a decision must be made. The question we must ever keep as compass and guide is, “What would Christ choose in my place?” The mind of Christ exists in all Christians but it may be neither static nor idle. It is a thing we must learn and practice. The mind of Christ is 'unto' Christ, it is developmental and may progress in one direction only.

You are racing around the track in your car, striving to reach the finish line. Your car comes equipped with a rear-view mirror. You must realize that is not forward-looking; there is nothing behind you anymore. Those others you are out ahead of treat the race, not as an obstacle course but, as a demolition derby. Your car comes equipped with a reverse gear. You must realize that you cannot win the race with it. You must bring all forward progress to a halt in order to engage that gear. Your car has a steering wheel with which you may steer your car in any direction – but the car is not the driver; you are in control. You have made your choice; you have set your goal; you are ahead of the others. That is all good. Why change any of it? Stay your course; win the race.

Notes on verses fourteen through eighteen: Under the conditions so far explained, sin no longer has dominion over those who have died and risen with Christ. The reason is pointedly simple: they are now spiritually aligned to the grace God wishes to extend through Christ and no longer subject to the sin and the death that come through the law.

The author returns to the same question he asked in verse one. If we are free, may we do anything we choose? The answer, of course, is no. When one is set free from bondage, one may, thereby, choose only freedom. The moment one chooses bondage again, that one is no longer free.

We see, in this, an either-or situation. One may choose either bondage or freedom but not both. One may serve either bondage or freedom but not both. One is completely owned by that which he or she chooses to serve. One may choose to serve sin under the law and expect the result of death or one may serve obedience under the provision of grace and expect the result of righteousness. Please note the four terms: 'sin', 'death', 'obedience', and 'righteousness.'

There are two sets and the elements of each set are placed in direct antithesis of one another. If sin is the direct opposite of obedience, we understand that sin is disobedience.

Sin is under the law, therefore, the disobedience is not disobedience to the law but, rather, to the grace God extends through his Son. By the same token, if righteousness is the opposite of the death that follows from sin under the law, then righteousness is life.

In this, we understand this particular life to be, not simply the state of organic living (which is affected by death) but, rather, a state that may not be affected by death.

The author is grateful for everyone who was the servant of sin, in that they made a lifechanging choice from the heart (that is to say, from the mind) to adopt and follow the doctrine that was handed them – the step-by-step formula for setting themselves free from sin. They, because of the better choice and their disciplined actions, are no longer servants of sin. Still, however, they are servants. They have chosen to serve righteousness. A servant of righteousness is a servant of life and exists in a state that may not be interrupted by physical death. By stepping out of the dark, they stepped into the light. They have stepped into an uninterrupted spiritual state of connectedness to God by and through the life of Christ.

On a personal note, I wish to ask this question. Who are the kind of people that are able to pull off such a monumental change? To choose a thing unseen and unproven over all that is known and dependable (even comfortable) is no common ability. I think a mind must be prepared in advance. Such people are quite likely the “good soil” mentioned in the parable. They cannot be the people who must see to believe. They are not the type who are limited by worldly concerns or by corporeal facts and figures. Necessarily, they would have to see such things as trivial in comparison to the higher truths that have elevated their thinking.

Notes on verses nineteen through twenty-three: In verses nineteen and twenty, the author speaks to his readers as a man, knowing the weakness of the human condition. Verse nineteen is a partial command that both commends and speaks to the choice his readers have made. The choice cannot be all in their heads but must be a real change that includes both mind and body. The author uses the phrase “even so now yield your

members.” This is a command that equates the new to the old by degree. The author is saying to his readers that to the very degree to which they yielded both mind and body to sin in their past, they should provide every assurance that their new choice follows through in both body and soul. The former service to sin and iniquity reached its fruition and so their new service to righteousness should reach a fruitious outcome.

Verse twenty continues to make an assessment. That is, namely, freedom from righteousness. It is the beginning half of an argument, the second half of which will follow in another verse. The nature of the argument lies fully within the either-or quality of the choice. When they chose sin, they were free from righteousness. They had not the slightest connection to righteousness. The old choice fully engulfed them. But, now they had rejected the old choice and made a choice for something completely contrary to the old.

The question is asked in verse twenty-one, now that they were ashamed of their past, could they not see the pitiful harvest of their previous planting? All of that – and for what – just to die? Their previous labors offered no do-overs, no coupons, no green stamps, no lottery tickets. In all, their previous estate offered but one reward – and that was a sorry end to a miserable life.

In verse twenty-two, we find both the second half of the argument and the rest of the command. Now, because of their own choosing, they were free from sin because righteousness fully engulfed them and left no tether into their sinful past. With such an auspicious new beginning, the command was that they should run with it. Serve God. Plant the whole field with obedience. Pledge and commit not only the mind to the service of God's will but the body as well. This time around, the harvest would not be pitiful. It would be grand and wonderful. It would be unceasing.

This whole argument ends, in verse twenty-three, with a straightforward and simple truth. For all the work they put into sin, their total wages were zip. Nothing gained. For their complete faith in the work of God's grace through his son Jesus Christ, the reward of unceasing gain would be freely given to them. What a gift!

Chapter Seven Notes on verses one through six: The author, here, takes up the same argument but with a different example. He is speaking of a change whereby a person who, being bound under the law, is suddenly free to make a better choice. In his example, the author brings

up the institution of marriage. Under the letter of the law, the wife is bound to her husband for life. There is no place within the law for that wife to choose differently. It is for life that the letter of the law is in effect. As long as the husband is alive the wife is bound to him. Should she choose to be with another man while her husband yet lives, she is in violation of the law. When the husband is dead, the woman is no longer his wife. She is set free from that law that formerly bound her for life. She is free to make her own choices.

The example is clear and straightforward. The author applies it to all people who are bound for life under the letter of the law. It takes a death to set them free. That death was found in the body of Jesus Christ. As in the example, the person set free from the law is now in a position to choose another attachment without fear of penalty. The example of the wife serves a focused purpose, that being to show our need for alignment and allegiance.

The wife in the example is aligned to her husband. It is that alignment that defines her place in life. Without the alignment, there is no place. For the woman, there was only her attachment to her father or her attachment to her husband. Being single had no definition. The daughter drew her sustenance from her father. The wife drew her sustenance from her husband. The purpose of the wife was to bring forth fruit for her husband. A wife set free under the law would most likely seek another husband with which she would serve the same purpose.

The author applied all of that to his readers. They were like the wife set free who would naturally seek another alignment, another attachment from which to draw sustenance and in which to find a similar purpose. The expression which the author employed was “bring forth fruit.” That must be viewed within the framework of marriage. To bring forth children was borrowed from the physical alignment under the law and applied to the new spiritual alignment to God. Having served sin under the law, it could be reasoned that we brought forth children after a fashion. All we were and all we did carried the entire system of sin forward just as a wife carried forward her husband's bloodline. In similar fashion, those of us set free must seek a new alignment and serve a new purpose. We, the new body of Christ, must be wed to him, must draw our sustenance from him, must bring forth fruit in all we are and all we do. We serve a very singular purpose and it is within our skills and abilities to pull it off. It is up to us to carry it all forward.

Notes on verse seven: In that the author has placed faith and the law as opposites, he feels compelled to set the record straight. They are not opposites. The person of faith must neither fight nor oppose the law. The law has it's place, a proper place, as the author explains, he would never have known what was wrong except by the law. In

showing him what was the wrong thing to do, it also, by extrapolation, showed him what was the right thing to do. The law, therefore, was a necessary stage in his spiritual evolution, a marker on the road to his higher calling.

The author extends his reasoning in verse eight. The law, itself, is not sin but sin used the law to bring about many occasions of longing contrary to reason. To understand what the author was speaking of, the reader must know a little about the Jewish mindset of that day – the author speaks from that mindset.

This excerpt from Wikipedia will certainly help the reader. “In Judaism, there is an early concept of yetzer hara (Hebrew: ‫ יצר הרע‬for "evil inclination"). This concept is the inclination of humanity at creation to do evil or violate the will of God. The yetzer hara is not the product of original sin as in Christian theology, but the tendency of humanity to misuse the natural survival needs of the physical body. Therefore, the natural need of the body for food becomes gluttony, the command to procreate becomes sexual sin, the demands of the body for rest become sloth, and so on. In Judaism, the yetzer hara is a natural part of God's creation, and God provides guidelines and commands to help us master this tendency. This doctrine was clarified in the Sifre around 200-350 CE. In Jewish doctrine, it is possible for humanity to overcome the yetzer hara. Therefore, for the Jewish mindset, it is possible for humanity to choose good over evil, and it is the person's duty to choose good (see: Sifrei on Deuteronomy, P. Ekev 45, Kidd. 30b).”

Notes on verses nine through thirteen: “For without the law sin was dead. For I was alive without the law once,” said the author. The essential nature of humanity, as in the state of a young child, is new and pure. But it doesn't stay that way. The evil inclination is born through the given command. By this, I point to the child of older years, an unruly child that chafes at being told what to do and what not to do, a child possessed by the spirit of rebellion. Many parents know, for example, that to get a child to do something, they must use reverse psychology and tell them to do just the opposite.

My Mom would say things to me like, “Go ahead, jump off the roof. Break your ankles.

Just don't come crying to me.”

The author explained what went wrong in the human spirit by explaining what went wrong in himself personally. “When the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.

And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death. For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it, slew me.” The sinful nature within him, the evil inclination, used the law to his detriment.

The author commends instruction through the law as holy, just, and good. He asks, was the good thing made evil just to kill him? His assessment was that the good thing remained good but sin had to remain sin. In the great tapestry, everything is known for

what it is. For sin to be sin, it had to look the part. Sin was not a part of the good law but a part of his own evil inclination. His own sin used the law against him, it twisted the things he understood. It was like oil on a pole he was attempting to climb. His knowledge and his will should have gotten him to the top but his own inclinations prevented him at every turn.

In the nature of his evolution, he had to reach a point where his own inclinations repulsed him. By using the good thing to work death in him, sin matured to the point where he found it to be vile and repulsive. Things grow, they become, they mature. His own spirit was also in the process of maturation. He came to the point where he saw the absolute futility of his best hopes.

Notes on verses fourteen through twenty-five: The author has fully realized that the law is spiritual in its nature. Further, he knows all too well that his body and persona, his nature, is twofold. There is a noble nature and a base nature that war against each other.

His noble nature would do all that is good and right but his base nature, a nature sold under sin, continually justifies the more judgmental aspects of the law, setting them above the grace of God that is through faith.

His sinful nature causes him to do the opposite of what he wants to do. He looks for a way to do the things his noble nature has called for but because the sinful nature constantly redirects him back into the overwhelming strictures and legalisms of death, he cannot find his way. He knows the impediment but he cannot find a way to circumvent it. He is conflicted, tormented.

Realizing the sin within his members was at war with his mind, a mind that would serve the will of God, he asks who it is that can deliver him from the body of death. He sees how it works with him, that even while he delights in the law of God after the inner man, his body wants to keep him on the merry-go-round of death. He sees Jesus as the only deliverance and is glad that, even while his flesh continues to serve the law of sin, through Jesus, his mind is able to serve the law of God. The author is a person with serious shortcomings, as are we all. The struggle is just that severe but the prize is worth the hardship. The author tells us that he is not someone who has achieved perfection, no, he is far from perfect. But he will not give up. We will not give up. We will ride the stormy sea and let the waves lash us for we hold onto the one solid truth that will keep us afloat – Jesus Christ the Son of God. Chapter Eight Notes on verses one through four: The parameters of differentiation between the law and grace are stark. Within those demarcations, how, then, is the righteousness of the law

brought about? The law is weak because of the flesh, subject to the instabilities of the passions, and the ultimate futility of death. How does the author, a man of self-confessed captivity to the law of sin present in his members, hope to support his argument?

He has laid the foundation of two laws. One is the law of sin. Two is the law of grace.

The law of sin is not the sin of the law but, rather, the sin of the flesh. It is the weakness of the body and the instability of the passions. Where the law fails because of the weakness of the body, the law of grace prevails because of the strength of the renewed mind. Where the flesh was a clenched fist pounding against the door of the law, the renewed mind was and is a key – a perfect fit for the lock that opens the law – for a law that the author conceded was actually spiritual. By spiritual, I take the author to mean mental.

A man can choose one of two paths through life. That is collectively termed his 'walk.'

He can choose the walk of the flesh or the walk of the spirit. Either choice is an affiliation to a particular proclivity. To be affiliated to the flesh is a reactionary attempt to stave off the painful, hampering, and disagreeable intrusions of one's present predicament. To be affiliated to the spirit is a broader approach that recognizes a planned path in full acceptance of losses and suffering in the course of realizing a higher moral goal.

In other words, it is commendable to align oneself with Christ and to affiliate oneself to the Christ-like mindset. There may be losses and suffering but the goal is worth it. To follow the Christ-like mindset, that is, to walk after the spirit rather than the flesh, by which spirit we should understand to mean the spirit or mindset of life, overrides the machinations of the mortal passions, the weakness of the flesh, and the ultimate futility that after everything, we die anyway. We altogether bypass the condemnation that is inherent to that path.

The law, which is spiritual, failed because of the weakness of the flesh. I might also say it this way: the law, which is of the mind, failed because of the weakness of the flesh.

There is no confidence in following that path. The flesh, the passions, neither can affect the success of the law – only the spirit, the mind can bring about the successful application of the law. And, no – not just any mind, a renewed mind, a mind that has overcome the pull of the flesh and passions, a mind like that of Christ.

In answer to the failure of the law because of sinful flesh, God sent his son into the world to represent sinful flesh and, thus by his death for sin, judge all failing of spiritual law. With the matter of failing the law through weakness of the flesh set aside, all those

who follow the Christ-like mindset of life were and are in a position to realize the righteousness of the law.

Notes on verses five through eight: The evidence. That which is on a person's heart, by which I mean, the things that fill his or her mind, will also be found on the lips. For example, a history professor will take every opportunity to speak about history. All of his words and efforts are bent around the mindset that is filled with love and admiration for history – like iron filings are bent around a magnet.

The added parameter. Those with a worldly mindset mind the things of the world, the facts and figures, the self-limiting standards, the passions, the body. Only being concerned with that small and unfulfilling aspect of our whole existence brings turmoil.

Those who walk after the mind seek and find additional aspects of our existence. Instead of limitation, turmoil, and death, those who walk after the mind find liberation, peace, and life.

A limited mindset simply cannot reach the escape velocity needed to please God. The worldly-minded are trapped within a self-imposed circuit of futility and disappointing tokens. I see it as akin to Esau, who sold his birthright for a bowl of gruel. He made his choice. Likewise, the mind of the world chooses the world and despises all else. The carnal mind chooses to be the enemy of God, chooses to reject the righteousness of the law of God. These minds are adamant in their decisions and can be understood in those heard to say, “I would rather die than do such and such.”

Notes on verses nine through fifteen: How it works. If the mind of God is alive and well inside of you, you are “in the Spirit” not “in the flesh.” Any person found without the mind of Christ, that person has no connection to Christ. The title of 'Christian' is empty and vain for all people who do not harbor the “Spirit of Christ.” However, if you do have the same mind as Christ, this how it will play out for you. Because of sin, the body is dead; the instabilities of the passions and the futility of ultimate demise still apply but the Spirit within you, the mind of Christ, is life because of righteousness.

That is not to say that you will drag about the heavy burden of a lifeless corpse as if shackled with ball and chain. The same God who raised Jesus from the dead will quicken your mortal bodies by the Spirit, that is to say by the mind that is in you. If the mind of God is alive and well in you and if the mind of Christ is alive and well in you, that Spirit will affect the flesh and the world around you. Let us take a look at the word 'quicken.' Merriam-Webster gives us these definitions of the word quicken: to make

alive, to revive, to stimulate, to kindle, to enter a phase of active growth and development, to shine more brightly.

As many as are led by the Spirit of God, that is to say, as many as follow the mind of God – who are people who employ the thoughts of God in their thinking – these may genuinely claim to be the children of God. This Spirit does not lead one back around to the bondage once known, nor should we fear again the flesh and its passions or deeds.

Through the mind of God, you have risen above and beyond such things. You have placed the body and its deeds on a back burner, you have left death to its own devices for this is no longer your arena. You owe nothing to the flesh but everything to the new mind. Your new mind, your new center, is the mind of an adopted child of God. Your new mind is the mind of Christ which reverences God – as does Christ – as one's Father.

Notes on verses sixteen and seventeen: As to the fact that we are the children of God, the author makes this claim: “The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit.” What does it mean to bear witness? I found these definitions: attestation of a fact or event, testimony, personal knowledge of something. Notice, also, that the author duplicates the word spirit, marking a differentiation within a union. There is the big spirit and the little spirit; there is the Spirit with a capital letter and our spirits in lower case.

It is the big Spirit that bears witness. That bearing of witness is not an isolated fact but one in union with our own smaller spirits. The attestation, the testimony, the personal knowledge – all are presented within the framework of a close relationship. Basically, the big Mind and the little mind have joined, have wed, have become one. The personal knowledge is a shared attribute equal in either case. What our minds are sure of, we know through our relationship, and from a quality of sameness, with the greater mind.

Likewise, the higher minds of God and of Christ are assured and strengthened in our lower case upgrades.

What is that quality of sameness of which I speak? It is exactly the same mind. There is the upper case Mind of Christ and all the little lower case minds of Christ. For any of us to be a child of God, we must share in the Mind of the Son of God. When we share that mind, we share, also, the mind of the heir of God; our quality of sameness makes us joint-heirs with Christ – but there is one precondition. For any of us to share in Christ's glorification as son and heir, we must first share in his burden. We must begin with the taking up of similar crosses and sufferings. It is the whole nine yards or nothing; we must take the bad with the good.

Notes on verses eighteen through twenty-two: Sufferings and glory. Embrace the birth pangs of your own elevation. The things we suffer, quite frankly, hurt like hell. None of it is easy. Yet, all of our broken bones, scrapes, and scars, all of our dashed hopes and disappointments will inevitably make us who we are meant to be.

The creature we are. We have an earnest expectation that is core to our very nature. We expect greatness. We strive to be more than what we are at present; we eagerly look forward to and even work toward a higher better self. None of us wants to be found at our lowest state, yet, here we are. Many, I repeat, many have been the failings of mankind. We are like the dumb caterpillar, blissfully munching away on a small plant, leaving a trail of pellets that begs the question: is this all we will ever do?

We are the creature, yet, the creature is change. We spin our cocoons in earnest expectation of a real transformation. Some of us seem colorful and decorated while others of us seem hairy and vile, yet, one fact unites all of us – we are change. We are smack dab in the middle of a grand process. Despite our personal ignorance, something is going to change in us. Not all of us but in each of us willing to spin our cocoon.

Spinning a cocoon leaves us vulnerable but we suffer willingly for the hope of wings.

What is a creature – according to the author? Anything that affects our present condition, anything that affects us with adversity, suffering, struggling. In verses thirty-eight and thirty-nine, the author gives us a shortlist of creatures. We see that we are not the only ones; we suspect, also, that all creatures are change and immersed in the grand process of change. The list includes events and operations such as life and death. It includes higher creatures such as angels. It includes constructs such as principalities and powers.

It includes the forces of time and space, past and present. It includes all the intangibles that we suspect but cannot prove.

Those of us who know and believe, hope for, struggle to achieve, and can hardly wait for the liberating glory of what we shall become – are the children of God. All of existence is bound to this grand process. We are small, we men and women. We are not the main attraction, just a very very small part of the bigger picture. However, our hope for the change to come is as big as the big picture. All of existence is the process – some still at the munching stage, blissful and blind, some beginning to spin. All of existence groans and travails to give birth to the higher and the better.

Notes on verses twenty-three through twenty-seven: All of existence, the grand process of change, itself, is mirrored in each of us individually. We groan within ourselves with fervent desire for both body and soul to reach their proper destinations together. We

hope to be adopted into the Kingdom Family through Jesus Christ the son of the King and the heir of the Kingdom. More than just the adoption of the spirit, we expect, by the same faith, to receive the redemption of our bodies. Every aspect of our being waits patiently for the one-up. As the spirit shall be in all respects a more capable spirit, in turn, the body it will inhabit must necessarily be a more capable vehicle.

To be saved from our low estate, we must first hope for salvation. We know our disease, we see the cure – but the cure is not present. It is promised to the hopeful, to the patient.

So, we believe and we wait. We place ourselves advantageously to receive the cure. We can not see it but it is promised. We hope for a thing we cannot see but, on the other hand, if we could see it, we would stop hoping. We would stop waiting patiently and we would reach out and take it. From the aspect of hope, it is either on its way or it is in our hand.

While we wait in hope, not seeing the thing that is promised, our minds assist and bolster our infirmities – and they are many. We are unsure and confused. While we are sure of the general direction we should take, every step along the road we walk is new territory, unfamiliar territory. We have no manual to go by. If we knew, we might ask for this help or that help along the way but, that is the problem, we just don't know. Our small minds are not complete – they only wait to be complete. In the meantime, the big mind, of which our minds are only small aspects, asks on our behalf for all that we need to make the journey of hope.

There is a real connection between the big mind and the one who searches and knows all minds. It is a true connection and a viable connection for one reason: the big mind, the Holy Spirit, prays for us and intercedes for us, not according to our wills or even according to the will of the Holy Mind but according to the will of God. The will of God is the one condition that must always be met for there to be any forward movement. No action comes without the will of God. Jesus always met the will of God and in his physical body he walked on water, raised the dead, healed the sick, cast out demons, and overcame his own bodily demise.

Notes on verses twenty-eight through thirty-one: Fragile, uncertain, fighting the constraints of a reckless nature – just what is it that we think we know? Our small spirits get this from the big spirit – we are the ones who love God. We love the Father with the love of a Jesus. We are the ones whom God called, not according to our need but according to his own purpose. He knew us from the beginning; he knew us completely, and from the beginning, he assigned each of us a definite and fixed final end – that all of

us who love God should be conformed into the image of Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son, whose destiny was to be the first fruit of many just like himself.

For this reason, we are sure that all things in our lives, including the hard parts, work together for our ultimate good. We know that since he fixed our personal destinies, he also called us to them. Since it was God's call, he also justified each one of us, making us fit and right for that personal destiny. We know that the justified are also glorified along with the Son of God. We know that God did all of this according to his own will and by his own power. He took care of everything. So, what is there left to say about the matter? We must admit that if God is for us, the matter is settled in advance. No one can alter the will of God. Notes on verses thirty-two through thirty-nine: As authors go, the guy who wrote this book is comprehensive in his ruminations, touching some points more than once. He ends up merging many points into a whole. In reaching the end of this chapter, we see the author expand upon the justification of the elect. Who, exactly, is he painting a portrait of? It is the person the world deems to be weak, ineffective, foolish; the beaten, the hopeless, the prey. We may be all of that, yet, I take note that the author sees all of that about us – and more. He sees the part the world cannot.

No one can lay a charge against God's elect, no one can condemn those whom God has lifted above condemnation. It was the almighty who justified his elect and, in setting the parameters of his work, He spared no effort, took no shortcut. He delivered up his only begotten son for our justification. In that regard, it is also through that only begotten son of God that God shall freely give his elect all things.

All complaints, all condemnations, all charges, and pointing fingers aimed at the elect fail to reach us. They break themselves against the protective wall that is Christ. It was Christ that died – and more – it was Christ that rose from the grave, ascended to heaven, and is now at the right hand of God pleading our case.

Can anyone or anything undo that complete work? No. Not tribulation, persecution, distress, the sword, or peril, neither famine nor nakedness. It is written in Psalms fortyfour verse twenty-two, “Yea, for thy sake are we killed all the day long; we are counted as sheep for the slaughter. ” We cannot deny the fact that persecutions of Godly men and women continue into our modern era. Be that as it may, we are not weak, we are not beaten, we are not foolish, hopeless, or ineffective. Rather, through the love of God which is in His son Jesus Christ, we conquer the world as a whole. Paint us victorious.

From such a complete and all-encompassing love, the world may not separate us. No power or being has the ability to remove the arms that are wrapped around us – not the powers or principalities of the world, not things past or present, not even the unknown future. Time, itself, may not wear away that Holy embrace. Whether in height or depth, there is no measurement or standard greater than the will of God. The lives and deaths we endure are like waves against the beach. The waves may get bigger, they may rage but, in the end, there will always be a beach where the waves fall short. Not even angels, in all their might and wisdom, have power against the certain will of God.

Chapter Nine Now, let us move on to chapter Nine. Take note of verse one. When you really look at the words of the author, you must genuinely ask, 'how might these things be?' The author claims to 'tell the truth in Christ.' How, exactly, does that work? How does one know such a thing? Anyone can think or believe that they are telling the truth. For many people, if they feel a thing strongly, they claim it to be true. Yet, the author of Romans is not just claiming to tell the truth, he makes the claim that the truth he tells is in Christ.

The thing we know about this author is that he never physically met Jesus in the flesh.

He never sat with the apostles and listened to the man speak. His experience with Christ is more of a paranormal event. As to the truth of what the man Jesus taught, the author would have had only two channels for informational input. The first channel would necessarily be what he heard second-hand. He would have received this information from the original apostles or from those who were there at sermons and other events.

The second channel would be a direct spiritual connection.

In any event, the truth is not just the truth, it is the truth in Christ. Compare the expression of this author to what Jesus said in John 8:28, Then said Jesus unto them, “When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know that I am he, and that I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things.” Let us assume for the sake of this argument, therefore, that the author 'only saying' what Jesus said to the author is the same as Jesus 'only saying' what God said to him.

Moreover, the author wants it to be known that he is not just making this stuff up. He feels certain of the verity of the message he relays and is, himself, assuaged by his own conscience in the Holy Ghost. Let it be noted that if the conscience is “in” the Holy Ghost, the two are not separate or far removed. What we must see is that the Holy Spirit is an active agent within the mind of the author – an open conduit through which the truth may pass from Christ to the author.

Verses two through five: The author's sorrow is conveyed, in verse two, in relation to his conscience. Here, the author's conscience burns. It is a source of grief. His deep and continuing sorrow may point to a sense of guilt for all the brothers and sisters who died by his hand. They were not only brothers and sisters in Christ but in the flesh as well.

They were Israelites, like himself, but he may have felt that they were more worthy of their connection to God than was he. Yes, he was their kin but he was also a Roman – a matter which may have made him feel distanced from them. The author, we might assume, lived with a daily sense of personal shame.

It seems obvious that he sees himself and his Israelite kinsmen as somewhat separate and he states, without reserve, that if it were possible, he would gladly give up his own salvation for their good. They were the ones, after all, who bore the glory of the 'chosen of God'. To them pertained not only both covenants but adoption as well. In that they were called to serve God, they were blessed. To only the Israelites were given the laws of God and to them, also, were given the promises. The fathers of the nation, the patriarchs, Moses, Abraham, etc – they were their fathers. Finally, it was to none but the flesh and blood Israelites that Christ came as Messiah. Christ is over all and blessed by God forever.

At the end of verse five, the author makes the utterance, “Amen.” The word means 'so be it.' This would be akin to the proclamation, 'Hear! Hear!' It would be like saying, 'I couldn't agree more' or 'the feeling is mutual.' All of these expressions are used to show acceptance of a situation or truth.

Verses six through thirteen: Who are the Israelites? These verses give us a sense of who the author is referring to. He had just put forth that, for their sake, he would offer his own redemption. Why would he say such a thing? Some of his Israelite brothers and sisters, according to the flesh, who were people he supposed to be deeper into the issues just listed, seemed, for all intents and purposes, bereft of the salvation that was offered to the 'chosen' through the Son of God. It was almost as if the word of God had been ineffective. He thinks there is another answer to the matter.

The author makes a statement that is altogether surprising. In verse six, the author states that not all Israelites are Israelites, among the chosen of God may be found the nonchosen. How strange. If they all hail from the same forefathers, the fathers of Israel, how could they not be Israel?

He claims that being the seed of Abraham is no guarantee that all of them are the children. He asserts that there is an addendum to be considered. That is, namely, “in Isaac shall thy seed be called.” Such a claim begs investigation.

I submit this reference from Stackexchange for clarification: 'Concerned about what may be inferred from his lament [v.1-5], his anguish over Israel's rejection of the promised Savior, the Apostle hastens to declare that there has been no failure; God's promises have indeed been effective and do remain: this word has not failed. Some Jews have believed, and what is more, some Gentiles, too. These believers constitute the real Israel. Not all of those who are biological descendants of Abraham deserve the name only those who have put their faith in Christ and are thus "a new creature", "the Israel of God" (Galatians 6:16) Not all the fleshly sons of Abraham are his children, "his seed"; take, for example, the children of the bondwoman and Keturah, whom he had married after Sarah's death (Genesis 16:15; 25:1-4). But, as the Apostle reminds us, it was "in Isaac" that Abraham's "seed should be called" (Genesis 21:12; Hebrews 11:18).

This does not mean, however, that fleshly descent from Isaac is the guarantee of being "counted for the seed" [cf. Galatians 3:26,29]. This new understanding of "the seed" had been foretold by the Psalmist, when he put these words in the mouth of the Man, the Anointed or Christ: "But I have been appointed king by Him on Zion His holy mountain ... The Lord said unto me, Thou art my Son, this day I have begotten thee. Ask of me, and I will give thee the nations [LXX: τὰ ἔθνη, "the Gentiles"] for thine inheritance" [Psalm 2:6-8].*' *Dmitry Royster, St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans (St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, 2008), pp.234-235.* When we think of the word 'called,' must we understand it to mean 'named?' Here, I am reminded of the word of Christ in Matthew 22:14, “For many are called, but few are chosen.” We see the chosen people of God, among whom, both physically and spiritually, many are not the chosen and, on the other hand, we see that many are called, some from Isaac, to whom was the promise. God provided a sacrifice for Isaac so that Isaac was saved from death. Through the power of the Holy Ghost, Isaac blessed Jacob over Esau.

So then, the children of flesh are not the children of God, who is spirit, but, rather, the children of promise are the children of God. Even though the whole thing about the chosen nation of God had been set in motion and played out as it did, men taking possession by their own will, God's election was still the center of God's overall plan. I see, in connection to God's election, a strong connection to faith and spirituality.

In physical and national terms, the twelve tribes of Israel came through Jacob. God favored Jacob. Salvation offered to Israel through the Messiah was a salvation offered to a small percentage of Abraham. Even here, salvation is reserved, through election, for those of the faith. Is faith in Christ at all on the order of Jacob's faith? What was Jacob's faith? Jacob had the faith to wrestle an angel of God all night, to endure physical damage, all for a blessing. Jacob went the distance, his faith endured.

The blessing that Jacob received was that he became Israel. I think the Israel of God are those who become Israel through enduring faith.

Verses fourteen through eighteen: Can we accuse a righteous God of unrighteousness?

No. Many try but their failing is that they do not realize how high above us all God truly is. They try to bring God down to their level so they can make claims such as 'a loving God would not do thus and thus.' God is spirit. God has his own agenda. Just because he loves us and is willing to go to extra pains to make us his own – that in no way entails that we will have our way. God will have mercy on whom he will have mercy, as he told Moses, God will have compassion on those of his own choosing.

The fact is, no man, by his wanting it so or by working really hard to make it so, can replace the will of God with his own will. It just won't happen. It will always be God's choice, and rightly so, who will receive his mercy and compassion. It will always be God's choice, and rightly so, whose heart is hardened, as in the case of Pharaoh. It will always be God's choice, and rightly so, whose life is destroyed so that the power and mercy of God's choosing may be made known through them, as in the case of the blind beggar that Jesus healed.

The fact is, if God were on our level, he would be as powerless as we are. The fact that God has power should clue us in on how things work. God is above. He creates and manipulates energy and matter. He creates and manipulates angelic beings of more power than we can imagine. God has created mankind and set the parameters by which our lives play out. Existence runs on autopilot, obeying pre-existent rules. We may not change those rules. Our reality can be a beautiful thing – like a colored image meticulously colored inside the lines. It is only in our pride that we give ourselves more choices than we actually have.

Verses nineteen through twenty-four: Of all the people on Earth, there is 'one lump' – we are all lumped together. We come from the same source, without difference. Like a potter working with clay, God may choose to create some lives for one purpose and some lives for another purpose. That is within his power and jurisdiction. Like the pots, we may only be what we are made to be. Our complaints are so much wasted breath.

What foolishness it is to think we might work against God's will! What foolishness it is to ask, why would God make me this way and still find fault if I am unable to resist His will?

It is God's choice. If he deliberately makes some of us cracked and worthy to be destroyed, we will be destroyed. As to being cracked, our best course is to hope He might fill us. Though we leak through our cracks, there is still the possibility of mercy in that we may be patched. As pots go, some may be attractive and whole to be filled with

water. Some may be plain and rough but suitable for potting plants – and in this, a slow leak works to the advantage of the plant in that the water does not sour. Not all pots are filled with the same thing – but consider for a moment the treasure of the Dead Sea Scrolls; consider the pots and jars that were so filled. They were not honored until they were cracked open and the treasure set free.

Verses twenty-five through thirty-three: In ending the chapter, the author refers to two of the old testament prophets. As God said through the prophet Hosea, “I will call them my people, which were not my people; and her beloved, which was not beloved. And it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people; there shall they be called the children of the living God.” Let us look closer. The Jewish people were the chosen people of God, the beloved of the spirit (her.) The division was between the chosen and all the rest, the gentile peoples of the world. As Jesus said in John 10:16, “And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd.”

To what place does Hosea refer?

Adam Clarke Commentary: And it shall come to pass, etc. - These quotations are taken out of Hosea 1:10, where (immediately after God had rejected the ten tribes, or kingdom of Israel, Hosea 1:9, then saith God, Call his name Lo-ammi; for ye are not my people, and I will not be your God), he adds, yet the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured nor numbered: and it shall come to pass, that in the place in which it was said unto them, Ye are not my people; there it shall be said unto them, Ye are the sons of the living God. As if he had said: The decrease of numbers in the Church, by God's utterly taking away the ten tribes, ( Hosea 1:6;), shall be well supplied by what shall afterwards come to pass, by calling the Gentiles into it.

They, the rejected Jews, which had been the people of God, should become a Lo-ammi not my people. On the contrary, they, the Gentiles, who had been a Lo-ammi - not my people, should become the children of the living God. Again, Hosea 2:23: I will sow her (the Jewish Church) unto me in the earth, (alluding probably to the dispersion of the Jews over all the Roman empire; which proved a fruitful cause of preparing the Gentiles for the reception of the Gospel), and, or moreover, I will have mercy upon her, the body of the believing Gentiles, that had not obtained mercy. See Taylor.

The place is Palestine. The place is Northern Israel and the lost ten tribes that are mentioned in the letters of the new testament. As is said in James 1:1, for instance, “James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting.”

As God said through Isaiah, “Though the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, a remnant shall be saved: for he will finish the work, and cut it short in

righteousness; because a short work will the Lord make upon the earth. Except the Lord of Sabaoth had left us a seed, we had been as Sodoma, and been made like unto Gomorrha.”

To what does 'the Lord of Sabaoth' refer? It refers to the old testament title, 'the Lord of Hosts.' It is important, here, that we know exactly what the hosts of heaven are. They are the armies of God; they are destoying angels. The reference to Sodom and Gomorrha is stark. They were completely destoyed. None survived except for Lot and his family – and even among the survivors, not all survived but the wife was also destroyed so that only three came out.

Like as with Sodom and Gomorrha, the destruction and dispersal of the ten northern tribes of Israel was almost complete. Like as with Lot and his two daughters, a seed was left. That seed of the Ten Tribes was planted among the gentile nations where it grew and flourished. Yet, after all was said and done, they were as much gentile as the nations they were dispersed in.

The author of the book of Romans comes, then, to the differentiation between the people of God, the remaining southern tribes, and those who, in the book of Hosea, were declared to be not the people of God. It is the differentiation between the Jews and the Gentiles. The author makes the point that the Gentiles will be called the children of the living God through faith in his son Jesus Christ. They will be the spiritual Jews, the new elect or chosen of God. They will not replace the physical elect (there shall be one fold, and one shepherd) but will be added to the Jews. This, according to Hosea, will take place in the same physical area where they were rejected.

Faith trumps the law where the physical Jews fail in the matter of legalisms. The law had become their own works and they had rejected the cornerstone that was the son of God. All of the faithful build upon the cornerstone but to the unfaithful that cornerstone becomes a stumbling stone and a rock of offense.

Chapter Ten The author begins chapter ten with a fervent desire for the physical Israel, namely, that they may be saved. He acknowledges that the Jews are zealous toward God – just not according to knowledge. In this, we must judge the way they think and the beliefs they form. The author boldly states that the Jews are ignorant of the righteousness of God. Instead of knowing and submitting themselves to the righteousness of God, the Jews have tried to establish their own righteousness. The point he wants us to understand about the old testament law is that Jesus Christ is the goal that the law strives to apprehend. For every believer, Jesus Christ is the end result. If you want to be righteous, be Jesus.

The author speaks of attitude, of perception. He speaks of the difference between two kinds of righteousness. In his explanation for new testament believers, the author turns to old testament writers. Moses, for example, describes the kind of righteousness that is obtained through the keeping of the law only – that a man who does such things shall live in them. In other words, what you practice today is what you will obtain tomorrow.

The author counters by describing the mindset of faith. The mind of the believer should not lift itself up in the vain attempt to bring Christ down from heaven to the level of the common man. Neither should the mind of faith seek in any way to bring Jesus back up from the grave. That is a situation that is not ours to control.

The mindset of faith, rather, takes this attitude: The Word (Jesus Christ) is alive and well in the very words we speak among ourselves – in our daily conversation. He lives in the way we think, in the way we act out our faith toward our fellow man. Lastly, he lives in the propagation of the gospel. How near is the living Christ? He is right here and right now. He and the believer are one.

Faith in Jesus Christ (that God raised him from the dead) and public open confession with the mouth, that is to say, belief and salvation, are two sides of the coin that is oneness with him. The author explains this through a scriptural quote which may be Isaiah forty-five verse seventeen. Go ahead, take a moment to look it up.

He goes on to assert that believers are found equally among the Jews and the gentiles.

He asserts that one and the same God will give salvation to any believer that calls on the name of the Lord.

Based on Isaiah fifty-two verse seven, the author asked a series of four interconnected questions in verses fourteen and fifteen. First, the verse from Isaiah. “How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of him that bringeth good tidings, that publisheth peace; that bringeth good tidings of good, that publisheth salvation; that saith unto Zion, Thy God reigneth!”

So, even the gentiles will be saved if they call upon the name of the Lord. But, how will they ever call on him if they have never believed? How will they ever believe since they have never even heard of him? Moreover, the opportunity of them hearing depends on someone preaching to them. Lastly, there will be no preacher unless he is sent.

Working this chain of logic in reverse, we see that preachers are chosen and sent. Those who preach to the gentiles are chosen expressly for that purpose. Preaching to the gentiles is as much the will of God as is preaching to the Jews. The preachers go out and the gentiles learn of God's will, of salvation and grace. Believing on God, believing in Christ, is prerequisite to calling on his name for salvation.

In verses sixteen and seventeen, the author returns to Isaiah, quoting the prophet thus, “Lord, who hath believed our report?” He claims that even among those who are chosen, who have been raised up in the law and prophets, there were a percentage who had chosen not to believe. They were disobedient, having deliberately chosen not to hear the report. They had turned a cold shoulder, a blind eye, and a deaf ear to the word. In contrast, all who call upon the name of the Lord will be saved. This is accomplished by a singular process – faith comes by hearing and hearing comes by the word of God. The author claims that Israel should have known, in fact, there was no way they could have been ignorant of the truth. The original author of the laws they had sworn to uphold, Moses himself said in Deuteronomy thirty-two verse twenty-one, “They have moved me to jealousy with that which is not God;” (this is God speaking of God as a concept) “they have provoked me to anger with their vanities: and I will move them to jealousy with those which are not a people; I will provoke them to anger with a foolish nation.”

And again, the author quotes from Isaiah sixty-five verse one, “I am sought of them that asked not for me; I am found of them that sought me not: I said, Behold me, behold me, unto a nation that was not called by my name.” This was said about the gentiles who hear and believe.

As for Israel, the author quotes Isaiah sixty-five verse two, “I have spread out my hands all the day unto a rebellious people, which walketh in a way that was not good,” (here, 'not good' is equivalent to 'not God') “after their own thoughts.”

In all, the author makes a good case for anyone who is in the category of 'whosoever will.' See Revelation twenty-two verse seventeen. See Mark eight verse thirty-four. The author expands on his argument in chapter eleven.

Chapter Eleven Does God completely reject his chosen people? No. Based on scripture found in First Kings nineteen verses seventeen and eighteen, the author argues that God has reserved for himself a remnant among Israel. He states that he, himself, an Israelite of the tribe of Benjamin is part of that remnant. This argument of election by grace is found in verses one through five.

The author qualifies that argument in verse six. If election is by grace, then it is not by works, if otherwise, then grace would no longer be grace. If election is by one's works,

then it is not by the grace of God, then one's works would not be works but grace, would negate election by grace, would make a lie of the word of God. What it boils down to, in the author's opinion, is that Israel has not obtained what it sought through it's works but the individual who has heard and believed (that is to say, the election) has. It is black and white. Either one sees and hears by way of faith in the Word or one is blind and deaf. This argument is based on scripture found in Isaiah six verse ten and in Psalm sixty-nine verses twenty-two through twenty-eight.

In verse eleven, the author asks if Israel has fallen and can't get up. He hopes not. He says, “God forbid.” He believes that the fall of Israel is the salvation of the gentiles, the riches and the reconciling of the world – through which Israel may be provoked to jealousy and some, in turn, may also be saved. The author puts forward the thought that if the casting away of Israel can accomplish such a thing, the receiving again of Israel will be like the raising of the dead.

In verses sixteen through twenty-one, the author brings up the truth that if the roots of a tree are holy then the branches that the tree bears are also holy. If the firstfruits, like the initial lump in which the yeast is added, is holy then the whole lump, that is, the remainder of the dough that is kneaded in later will also partake of the same nature. He goes on to liken the tree to a cultivated olive tree, its nature fat with goodness, upon which some of the natural branches have been broken off. In their place, wild branches were transplanted. To counter the argument that the branches that were broken off deserved to be broken off, the author reminds the reader that such is the nature of God. The root bears the branch and not the reverse. If God spared not the natural branches, the wild branches should not make their boast at the expense of those who were removed for unbelief. Rather they should remain humble and fear God who has the power to remove anyone who does not continue in God's goodness.

In verses twenty-two through twenty-five, the author exposes both the goodness and the severity of God. Those grafted onto the good olive tree came from a tree that was wild by nature. God has the power to do such. Moreover, if he can graft in wild branches and make it work, he can also remove the wild and graft back in the natural branches. One should not be high-minded. That belongs to unbelief. The author presents this argument as a mystery he wants the reader to understand. Ignorance of this mystery is the blindness of Israel and a reason for their fall. It will be that way until God accomplishes all of his plans for the gentiles.

The author concludes in verse twenty-six that all of Israel shall be saved. He writes, “There shall come out of Sion the deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob (Israel).” From Wikipedia I get this about Sion: Zion is a placename often used as a synonym for Jerusalem as well as for the biblical Land of Israel as a whole. We know that the ministry of Jesus both began and ended in Jerusalem. The author uses Isaiah as his source material.

Isaiah fifty-nine verse twenty, “A Redeemer will come to Zion and to those who turn from transgression in Jacob,” declares the LORD. Isaiah fifty-nine:twenty-one, “As for Me, this is My covenant with them, says the LORD:” and Isaiah twenty-seven verse nine, “And this will be the full price of the pardoning of his sin.” The author uses these portions of scripture to support his argument of a future national regeneration of Israel.

In verses twenty-eight and twenty-nine, the author points out that there are two issues at work, namely, both an acceptance of and belief in and through the gospel and the election and calling of God which the author states is irrevocable. In verses thirty and thirty-one, he reminds the believers that there was a time when they did not believe.

They simply fell into the vacancy left by the unbelief of the Jews and so obtained mercy.

He sees it as a natural cause and effect the extension of which infers that the mercy they now enjoy will be a bridge by which the Jews shall also have mercy. One thing leads to another.

Verse thirty-two is crucial to the author's argument and is presented as the foundation upon which his argument is built. God has 'reset' everyone to the unbeliever level so that he can save all through his mercy. That effectively negates the works of man and sets God's will as the standard by which salvation is obtained. No man may receive God's grace through his own works or by his own will. Redemption through the mercy of God must come by way of belief in his only begotten son, Jesus Christ.

Just past the effusive praise that the author lays out before God, the final verse holds a concept of universal proportion. It is a truth so vast and all-encompassing that it may be seen in the smallest detail. All things, all matters, all beginnings and all endings, all hopes, all works, indeed, every particle of being and existence, itself, may be summed up in the word 'One.' It is all from One, it is all through One, it is all to and for One. My use, here, of the word 'One' refers to First John five verse seven, “For there are three that bear record in heaven, The Father, The Word, and The Holy Ghost: and these three are one.”

Chapter Twelve In chapter twelve, the author comes, at last, to what he wants from the reader. Twelve is a list of specific traits that are to be found in the believer. As a whole, they are a standard by which all men may be judged in regard to their faith. If they say they believe in and serve God but their works are not the works in this list, they have lied to the world but, more tragically, they have lied to themselves.

Romans twelve is a list that describes the personal traits of the believing Christian. It includes not only the spirit of the believer but the body of the believer, as well. The body is listed first. It is stated that the reasonable service to God of any faithful soul is to present their body as a living sacrifice. This simply means to live in a particular way. It is a way that is special, set apart, set above. It is a way that is not common, not profane.

It is the way of dedication – a gift to God. As such, the body no longer belongs to the believer but to God. One need not make a vow of abstinence, per se, neither a vow of silence. One need only exercise moderation in the spirit of dedication.

Speaking of the spirit, the orientation of the spirit directly and precisely affects the flesh.

The mind can form either a fist or an open hand. With that in mind, let us take a look at the author's list of traits. The very first thing the author says about the spirit is found in verse two. It is immediately important to recognize that the author names the spirit. He calls it the mind. He also offers the formula by which any individual may test and prove what is good and right. There are many issues in this life that threaten to overwhelm the spirit. This world is a formidable adversary. It seeks to incorporate your mind. It will beat you with thoughts and feelings that have already been around the block. They are old thoughts, common thoughts. They are familiar and easy. Friends and family who have been incorporated by the world will assail you with these thoughts and feelings as if they are your only options. They are not.

The first spiritual trait of the believer is the renewing of the mind. Not only is it the first but it is the most essential. You might call it the foundation for other spiritual traits.

Indeed, one might call the renewing of one's mind the cornerstone of one's spiritual temple. New thoughts, new feelings, must be set above the old and common by which the world magnifies itself. New thoughts and new feelings, in the spirit of dedication, lead to new actions. What you think, you will do. As you believe, so shall it be.

This is what the Bible tells the believer: “Death and life are in the power of the tongue: and they that love it shall eat the fruit thereof.” Proverbs eighteen verse twenty-one.

“For he that will love life, and see good days, let him refrain his tongue from evil, and

his lips that they speak no guile.” First Peter three verse ten.

“Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things.” Philippians four verse eight.

“And all things, whatsoever ye shall ask in prayer, believing, ye shall receive.”

Matthew twenty-one verse twenty-two.

All individuals should think soberly and not imagine themselves to be higher up the ladder than someone else. They should not view themselves in any way other than by the measure of faith God has granted to them. This is a spiritual trait by which one may prove to oneself their connection to God. We should view ourselves as parts of the whole, like organs in a body, each with its own function, yet, dependent upon the other organs and with the certain knowledge that they depend as much upon us. Our work, our health, our growth depend on this spiritual certainty.

Some of us will prophesy, some of us will minister, some of us will teach, some of us will exhort, some of us will have substance to give, some of us will rule, and doubtless, some of us will sweep floors and wash dishes. Whatever we have to give, let us give it with simplicity and diligence, showing mercy from a glad and cheerful spirit. Those who believe, work together with all other believers. Between believers, there should be no concealment of our thoughts and feelings. There should be no pretense, deceit, misrepresentation; neither hypocrisy nor double-dealing. We are one and should work as one. The grace of God has given each of us a unique gift, our own place and function. A new mind will fully accept this truth.

Our love, our thoughts, our actions are a whole. We must, each of us and all of us, think the thoughts of the whole. We must hate evil and seek the good as a whole. We must love the body and the members of the body. Our preference for all that is good and right will bear the fruit of kind affection, brotherly love, and honor for all fellow believers.

That is the spiritual trait of the new mind.

Actions will naturally follow from the new mind of the faithful believer. Traits may be seen not only in the spirit of the believer but in the believer's works, as well. A believer will not be slothful in business, for example, and this is because the believer is fervent in spirit, that is, mentally impassioned as he or she serves the will of God. Rejoicing in hope, patient during troubles, consistent in prayer – these are spiritual traits in all believers that will be seen in the works of each. The new mind will display the following action-traits in all true believers.

The believer will distribute to the necessities of the saints (other true believers.)

The believer will be predisposed to hospitality.

The believer will bless those who persecute them, after the manner of Jesus on the cross, who did not curse his persecutors.

The believer will rejoice with those who rejoice and weep with those who weep.

The believer will be of a like mindset and in agreement with other believers who show the traits of true believers – both in spirit and in works.

The believer will not mind high things, as the Pharisees did, but more like Jesus, they will condescend to men of low estate.

The believer will not be wise in his own conceits, that is, vain or self-centered. Rather, the believer will strive to be in concert with God and the unity of believers. In all their works, they will be seen to submit to the will of God while in their spirit, they will trust God wholeheartedly.

The believer will not repay evil with more evil.

The believer will provide things honestly in the sight of all men.

The believer will try to live peaceably with all men.

True believers will not avenge themselves. Rather, they will let God lead in his own affairs.

The believer will show compassion even for an enemy.

The believer, finally, will not be defeated by evil but will defeat evil by enacting goodness from a new mind.

Chapter Thirteen Verses one through five of Romans thirteen present a bitter pill that many people find hard to swallow. It is the belief of the author that the higher powers are ordained by God and that we, as the body of believers acting in concert with each other, should in no wise resist the higher powers. There is no power but God. Does this speak only of the church?

No. It also speaks of civil governments.

Those people who are over the little man at times seem to be monsters. They send our young people out to die in their wars. They tax us into poverty. They pretty much have their way in all matters and benefit at our expense. Was the author speaking of such powers as Rome? Yes. But, the Romans were cruel in their subjugation. How could Paul recommend obedience to such a government?

Paul's purpose was to unite the churches into a single body. There had to be a single standard that covered them all – a spiritual approach to worldly issues. One may not simply say that the powers should only be comprised of sympathetic souls who treat well those who are of like mind. The world is full of unlike minds. God puts them all on the playing board. God has ordained the enemies of his people as well as the friends of his people.

Let me ask a question of you. How are you to overcome the evil with good if there is no evil to overcome? The extended question, then, is how will you overcome evil with good if you set yourself at odds with it? Isn't that the old mind? Isn't that the way of the world? Didn't the author just instruct us in chapter twelve, rather than be conformed to, that is, to act in accordance with the standards, ways, or rules of the world, to be transformed by the renewing of our minds?

Don't get me wrong. It would be great to know that the higher powers were seeded with souls who thought and acted in concert with all other believers. At least we would be assured of love and compassion, of righteous discernment. However, we can't just go out and beat our adversaries into a mindless subservience to the new mind. The new tactic is to win them from the inside out.

Christian democracy has been a hard-won achievement and a boon to mankind but the battle is far from over. There are still powers in the world that are outdated and cruel, that seek to beat us into submission. We will win them from within. We will incorporate them into our brotherhood of the new mind.

There are two reasons why the body of Christ should submit to the higher powers. One is because of 'wrath' and two is 'conscience.' Working back toward verse one from verse five, the author tells us that there is only one cause to fear the higher powers. That one cause is if you do things that are unlawful. The higher powers are described as having a dual purpose. They are ministers of God to the doers of good for good and to the doers of evil for revenge. To those individuals who act unlawfully, the higher powers will execute the punishment of God's wrath. However, these same will praise and reward all who are in concert with the law.

The book of Romans was written by a Christian who was also a Roman citizen. He was in a position that provided a clear view of both sides of the occupation. Rome had many gods. When they conquered another culture, they incorporated that culture's god along with the people. Rome was not necessarily Christian but it did include Christianity within its parameters. Their laws were neither necessarily pro-Jew nor pro-Christian but governed them nonetheless. The author's instructions to those under the law called for subjection to that law in the spirit and practice of the Christian faith. The instructions were without regard to the type or source of the government.

We look around these days and see many meek and humble people in this world. They are faithful and kind, they are willing to put themselves out for the benefit of their fellow man. We see them in subjection to many different kinds of governments. Some of these governments are brutal in their treatment of God's people. They ban their faith and destroy their places of communal worship. They arrest, torture, and kill them. They are beheaded, stoned, or burned alive. These actions are perpetrated against them, not because their faith is wrong, but merely because their faith runs counter to the higher powers they live under. If one would flee to a more tolerant culture, there would be no wrong in doing so. It seems that just being a good person is not enough under some governments. What good does it do for a person to be in subjection only to be rewarded with such mistreatment?

All governments, even the bad ones, are composed of people and can be represented as a solid core around which is a misty penumbra that is gradually becoming less solid. That was certainly the case under the Roman occupation for Jews and Christians. There were cases where a Christian's subjection to the higher power brought him in contact with Roman officials who were persuaded to the Christian faith. They, in turn, persuaded others. I think this is an overlooked point when most of us consider the persecution of Christians under the higher powers of the Muslims or the communist Russians and Chinese. Conversion to the Christian faith is the will of God. For their conscience's sake, it is the responsibility and duty of the oppressed. 'Whosoever will' is an option that is extended to the non-Christians through the Christians. It is what Christ died to provide.

Continuing from verse six, the payment of tribute is also mentioned. The higher powers have their place and function and should have their provision. Of course, while the higher powers of the author of the book of Romans included the governing bodies of both Rome and the religious assemblies of the Jews and Christians, governments of the gentiles must be inferred from the indications of verse seven.

It is advised to be in arrears to no higher power. As governing bodies, they are assemblies of men and women, basically. Don't be found owing to any individual anything, with the exception of love. Despite the local and regional variations of law, the author asserts a law that is both above the higher powers and of intrinsic core value in regard to human nature across the board. He states that love fulfills the law.

The very nature of love implies obedience to the law. Because of love, a person will not commit such wrongs to others as adultery, murder, theft, coveting, and false witness.

Every civil law in every government, from the Ten Commandments and up can be summed conclusively in the saying, “Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.” The premise for the author's argument is concluded in verse ten where he states plainly, “Love worketh no ill to his neighbor: therefore love is the fulfilling of the law.”

Verse eleven continues the argument with two important points that each of us should think through carefully. In regard to love and with the certain realization of the times we live in, every faithful believer owes it to him or herself to awake out of sleep. Therefore, sleep is the first important point we need to think through carefully. The second important point is the assertion that our salvation is now nearer than we had previously thought. If we carefully think through each of these important points, what vital understanding might we benefit from as followers of Christ and seekers of truth?

What might it mean for the believer to awake out of sleep? Many people walk through life as if asleep. This includes the faithful. There are 'downtimes' placed deliberately along the highway of our progress. They serve a function just as sleep serves the body.

Yet, when we are asleep, we are unaware of what goes on all around us. When we are asleep, we are inactive. The matters that we would carry forward are at a standstill. The works that we would attend are withheld from us by the chains of darkness.

The author continues the thought in verse twelve. As for our downtime, the night is far spent, and at hand is the dawning of a new day. We have slept, now, let us awake. We have worked the works of darkness, within our chains of darkness, we have failed to attend to the waking matters that assure our future good. We are the workers. We work for our pay. When the day is done, we are at ease and we seek leisure activities. The night is not all sleep.

In the dark, there is deceit, hiding, riotous behavior, wantonness, and the desires of the flesh. Even without all the evil inherent in our nature, we still turn to ourselves for normal desires. We eat our meal and lay down to heal both body and mind in preparation for the new day. While we may be groggy, we know that we must arise. We must shake

off the feelings and stand up to face the work ahead. As workers, we dress for work and put on the uniforms that identify the ones we serve.

Our salvation is nearer than when we believed. How should we understand the second point? The Jews sought salvation. They had a set view on salvation and their savior. It did not work for them. They crucified their savior, working against the salvation they needed. From that sleep arose those who still worked the works of the day, who put on the armor of light. The progress of the faithful continued forward. The armor of light is the uniform that identifies the worker. The author states the same in verse fourteen but he shows us just what he means by the armor of light. He puts it to us in these words, “put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ.”

You are the faithful. You have cast off the works of darkness. You have awakened out of your sleep and now stand dressed in the armor of light, ready for the works of the day.

Let each of us put this in context for ourselves personally. Jesus said it, himself, in Mark thirteen verses thirty-five through thirty-seven, “Watch ye therefore: for ye know not when the master of the house cometh, at even, or at midnight, or at the cockcrowing, or in the morning: lest coming suddenly he find you sleeping. And what I say unto you I say unto all, Watch.”

Chapter Fourteen Verse one. We are instructed to receive those who are weak in the faith. That is, we should neither reject them nor avoid them. It is important to note that this instruction is not about those who have not the faith or those who reject faith. We must not, for softness of heart, include any element that works against the faith. Save your strength for those who might actually be brought forward. Why would we waste our time on those who simply squander our energies? If there is at least some faith with which to work, concentrate on those souls that you can bring forward.

I see, in the first half of verse one, a forewarning to shore up the outer reaches, the lesser members of the body of Christ. Those who try and fail have at least tried. They are worthy of our help. What I do not see in the first part of that verse is an instruction to spend any time or effort on the person who refuses to believe. Neither do I see an instruction to include in our efforts those who believe differently – those who believe in other gods. In both cases, those individuals have made deliberate choices insofar that the matter is no longer between themselves and ourselves but, rather, the matter is now between them and the one true God.

There is a second half to the first verse. There is an addendum to the admonition to receive the weak in faith. It is a secondary instruction, a warning, actually, not to engage with the weak in faith in any manner that becomes contentious. In other words, we should never engage in “doubtful disputations.” This is an important point that every strong believer must keep in mind to remain strong and not, himself, become weak.

What is a doubtful disputation? The Institute for Creation Research gives this concise explanation: “Doubtful disputations” refer to critical judgments on the inward reasonings of others. Unless some practice is specifically revealed in Scripture to be right or wrong, each believer should be free to formulate his own convictions about it.

New Christians may still feel constrained by certain criteria they had followed earlier, and thus may be reluctant to change when they become saved. Unless these are specifically enjoined or prohibited in the Word of God, older believers should receive them into fellowship without argument or criticism. The link to that, if you wish to verify, is https://www.icr.org › books › defenders My Dad once told me a story about doubtful disputations. He told a tale of his youthful days in the city of Gadsden, Alabama. His anecdote involved two preachers both of whom were weak in the faith. As he walked down the main street in downtown Gadsden, two preachers stood on the sidewalk in front of the rented building they used as their church. It was one church shared by two preachers because neither could afford the rent on his own. They took my Dad by the elbows and led him inside. “Young man,” they said, “you need to be saved.” As they led him down the aisle in the old narrow building, a dispute erupted between the two preachers. One of them believed that Dad needed to repent before God would save him. The other man believed that God's love for Dad came before Dad's need to repent. By the time they reached the altar, they were engaged in a fistfight. Dad looked on in dismay. Quietly, while they were occupied, Dad turned and walked away.

Verses two through eight. People are different. Each of us has our own way. Above the minor differences, God deals with all of us. The author notes that one person might eat freely without qualms or reservations while another person, and here, the author places this second person as 'weak,' only eats herbs. These are two different choices based on two separate opinions. The one who, by comparison, eats meat is considered strong while the vegetarian or vegan is considered weak. I don't think the author intended us to view the so-called strong eater as someone who would just put anything in his mouth.

Being both a Jew and a Roman, the author may or may not have subscribed to the Jewish restriction against pork but we know that he argued for the inclusion of pork eaters into Christianity.

Perhaps his point is not so much about food as it is about the spirit of the person.

Perhaps the author recognized the stronger of the two as the one who walked in faith rather than living a life based on fear or a softness of heart. The vegetarian may not necessarily be seen as fearing to eat meat but rather as fearing for the animal. Yet, a reluctance can hold a person back. The person who is reluctant to fly may take the bus instead. He will not get there as soon as the flier but he will get there nonetheless. For weakness, that person has amputated his wings. A person is then seen to restrict not something outside of himself but, rather, a part of his own being. In regard to eating meat, I find it interesting that science makes the claim that a meat diet was responsible for the evolution of primates into humans – meaning, I think, that a vegetarian diet would have restricted the advancement of intellect.

Not necessarily in the author's own words, the person who flies should not despise the person who takes the bus. The person who takes the bus should not despise the person who flies. Both of them, barring the unforeseen, will reach their destinations. People are different. Still, there is an area of concern where it may be said that there is a right way and a wrong way. The person who walks on the sidewalk may think his way is right and that it more or less assures his likelihood of not being struck by a car. The person who enjoys the freedom of walking in the street may think his way is right because it is his way and that it is just as valid, as ways go, as the way of the side-walker. Equality under the law. Right? The man on the sidewalk may call out an earnest warning to the man in the street. The man in the street may reject that call. The man in the street may, indeed, increase his chances of being hit or reduce his opportunities to be in a safer area. He may for the time get by with his way but if he gets hit, he has only himself to blame.

What comes down, comes down from a level that is higher than the one on which we exercise our personal choices. While one man may be of the opinion that certain days of the week or year are special and should be celebrated, another person may hold a more profane view of the days, thinking that no one day is any different than any other day. It is permissible that each of us may be fully persuaded in our own view. We may look at the differences between Christianity and Atheism and it may be the view of the Christian that the Atheist needs to get right with God. On the other hand, the Atheist may view the Christian as someone who just needs to chill out and enjoy life without overcomplicating matters. It is permissible that each of us be assured in our own world view.

According to the author of this Biblical book, the Christian should not judge the Atheist and the Atheist should not judge the Christian.

He said that because of the higher level from which comes down to us all that occurs. In that regard, no man is an island. In other words, no man lives unto himself and no man

dies unto himself. Where we come from and where we go are higher matters that have never been under our control. Therefore, while it is expedient for the faithful to exercise their faith, it is not beneficial to judge others by our own standards. Revelation 22:11 instructs all of us, “He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still.” Beyond expressing our views and hopes and concerns, we should simply let the matter alone. Christians should serve their master and allow the Atheists to serve their master – whoever or whatever that master may be. The same standard should apply to all intelligent people. Atheists should allow Christians their place in the world we hold in common. Muslims and adherents to other faiths should allow a place in this common world for those of other views. It is wrong not only to condemn those unlike ourselves but worse, for our own sakes, to harm another for superficial differences.

The Christian lives and dies unto his Lord. The people of other faiths live and die unto their respective Lords. The non-believer lives and dies unto the higher force of his or her existence. While we live and share this common realm, it is good to be useful to those we care about. It is also expedient to exercise the best within us, and that 'best' must necessarily include tolerance for those of different views.

Verses nine through twenty-three. The first word of verse nine leads our inquiry. To continue his argument, the author began verse nine with the word 'for.' To use the word 'for' as a connector between his previous argument and his current continuation is a matter that could as well be served by the use of the word 'because.' In other words, his former argument is the reason Christ died, arose, and revived. By doing what no one but Christ could do, he established his Lordship over not only the saved but the unsaved, as well. Think of it that way and connect the dots. For Jesus to be the “Lord both of the dead and the living,” it is the same as saying Jesus is the Lord both of the Christian and every other believer and non-believer, as well. It doesn't matter that some people don't believe or that some people believe differently, Jesus Christ is the one and only Lord.

Being the only Lord means that he is the only judge. All of us – Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, Atheists, or whatever – all of us must stand before the judgment seat of Christ. In this life, it is not our place to judge another. It is not our place to belittle or despise. Simply put, such thoughts and actions only add to the crimes that we commit against ourselves. We condemn ourselves by condemning others. In doing so, we are stealing the thunder from thunder's true owner.

The author justifies this view in verse eleven when he states, “For (because) it is written (it is legally established) As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God.” Every one of us must personally answer to the judge who is judge overall. There is no mention of a substitute judge. There is no stand-in. There is only one judge and “every” knee shall bow to that one judge. Likewise, there is established in writing only one God to whom “every” tongue must make confession.

This is not a Hebrew thing. It is not an old testament thing. Neither is it a Christian thing. It is an everyone thing. It covers all of us. The Atheist is not excluded because he does not believe. The Muslim is not excluded because he believes in Allah. If you have a spirit, that spirit will stand before Christ. Every spirit must give an account of all that he or she truly said and truly did in this short life on Earth.

It is the conclusion and suggestion of the author that all of us stop judging and condemning our fellow man. We are challenged, rather, to no longer place a stumbling block or an occasion to fall in the paths of our brothers and sisters. What does that mean? To behead a Christian for not being a Muslim is a stumbling block. To excommunicate a so-called heretic is an occasion to fall. For the purpose of being righteous, there must no longer be the view that a brother can be an infidel. Knowing that we must all make an accounting of our righteousness before a righteous judge, there can be no infidels, there can be no heathen. There may only be brothers and sisters and beloved all.

Many of us know in our hearts what the author is persuaded of in verse fourteen. Is it merely an opinion? No. It comes down from the judge of all. There are no infidels.

There are no heathen. There are no heretics. In and of ourselves, none of us are unclean.

None of us are wrong except in the minds of those who insist that it is so. The message is clear in verse fifteen. We should not destroy another with the thing in which we are strong, be it our meat or our faith or our lack of faith. The meat-eater should not in any way cause harm to the vegetarian. The vegetarian should not do harm to the eater of meat. Both are blessed with sustenance. The Christian should not destroy the Muslim for the sake of his Christian faith and the Muslim should not destroy the Christian for the sake of his Muslim faith. Both are blessed with faith that gives them the strength to live.

Christ died for all. Our attitudes toward our brothers and sisters should be charitable.

Verse sixteen is advice for the ages. If you think there is something in you that is good – whether it be your faith as a Muslim or your faith as a Christian, don't give it a bad reputation. Give no cause for others to see you as an evil enemy. Tolerance is the skeleton of the spirit. Charity is the muscle of the spirit. How can we stand without tolerance for our brothers and sisters? How can we move without charity? What is the highest ideal that we strive for in life? What is our heaven and what is our paradise? It is

not found in setting differences and insisting that yours is the best. It is not in the dietary restrictions of a religion. It is not in the particular name we employ for our God. It is not found in a desire to have power or the bitter arguments that lead to destruction. It is only found in right-thinking and good deeds toward all people. It is found in peace between people and joy in the assurance of a right mind.

If in peace, joy, and rightness of mind, you serve the judge you will someday stand before, two things will be true of you. You will be acceptable to God and you will be approved by men. You will be a hero with an assured reward. If you know the work belongs above you and is not in your control, why would you destroy the work of God for your small opinion or desire? All things are pure, the evil is in forcing another to receive what is not for them. Don't force the vegetarian to eat meat. Don't force the Christian to be a Muslim or the Muslim to be a Christian. Don't force the Atheist to believe. It is not good to do anything to offend a brother or to make him stumble in his particular path through life. Do not offend them or wear them down.

This is the culmination of chapter fourteen in the book of Romans – a book considered to be only Christian. It is better for us to see it as spiritual. If you have faith, exercise your faith within yourself before God. If you do not condemn yourself before the true judge in the things that you adopt for yourself, you can count yourself happy. The things that you allow are things for you. Whatsoever is not of faith is sin. That is to say that if you do not have full assurance in the thing that you do, you are damned in the doing of it. If the vegetarian who is doubtful of meat is forced to eat meat, he is damned by doing so. It is not the meat eater's place to damn his vegetarian brother. It is not the Muslim's place to damn his Christian brother. It is not the Christian's place to damn his Atheist brother. While this is what the author of a Christian book has said, it is more a tenet of the spirit. Greater than the petty differences between mortal men is the Spirit within us.

Chapter Fifteen

Verses one through eight. The author has, by no means, finished his treatise but carries his argument over into verse one of chapter fifteen. He says that those of us who are strong should bear the infirmities of the weak. Let us stop right there and think really hard about what has been said. Let us see ourselves as strong in our particular faith or frame of mind. Let us consider exactly what it is that we feel is so right about the way we interpret reality. Let us consider why it is we interpret what others think and feel as weak. How does it all play out? What would it mean for the strong Christian to bear the “infirmities” of the Muslim? What would it mean for the Muslim, strong in his faith, to

bear the “infirmities” of the Christian? How might it transpire that the faithful bear the differences of the unfaithful or the unfaithful the differences of the faithful? If any of us find it difficult to bear up under such a common weight – then maybe we are not as strong as we claim to be. Is a faith that fears or a righteousness that destroys out of hand really that strong? There is a parable that speaks of hiding a candle under a bed. Light is strong. It is good. It is commendable. However, we must ask the hard question. Is hidden light really light? Does not the hiding of one's light defeat the purpose of the light?

The point of the parable is that the light is set out for the good of all. The author of Romans suggests that we are not in this game to please ourselves but to please our fellow man by doing and saying the things that build him up in his own strength. I want to ask – when has righteousness ever been selfishness? Never. I get something wholly positive and encouraging from these words. I get that it is totally possible for the Christian to edify the Muslim or the Atheist, for the Muslim to edify the Atheist or the Christian, for the Atheist to edify the faithful. It is not only possible but it is a desirable human trait. It is desirable to follow the example of Jesus who took upon himself the reproaches that we, ourselves, face and still said and did the things that were beneficial for those who stood in opposition to the truth Jesus lived by. The record of Jesus is unique in that regard. He proved to the world what a righteous and faithful man is capable of. He saw what was “weak” in others but did not condemn, he forgave, he did, and said the things that were good for the others rather than pleasing himself. He who was strong bore the infirmities of the weak.

Each religion and frame of mind has its particular tenets. The books of the Hebrews, Muslims, and Christians each derive from the same history. We all have a Moses and a Noah and an Abraham. All of us have books that include patriarchs, prophets, and angels. To each of us, these writings provide the learning comforts that support our faith and righteousness. The Atheist and Agnostic may not share these particular books with us but they have other books that build them up in their strength. Followers of other religions also have their books and histories. The point is there is hope for all of us – whoever we are – whatever we are. We have been patient in our diligence and have found comfort in our faith or our science or philosophy but none of those writings existed for any other purpose than our learning. Divisions and differences were never inherent in those texts.

It is suggested in verse six that all of us strive to be of the same mind one toward another after the example of Jesus Christ who was, on this earth, the expression of Godmindedness. That is to say that the Muslim should be God-minded toward the Christian and the Christian should be God-minded toward the Muslim. I use the expression Godminded, here, as a more accurate interpretation of the word “like-minded.” We should

have, rather than differences, the same mind toward each other – that is to draw from our personal strength to say and to do what is good and right and what builds up the other rather than to merely satisfy ourselves. Jesus is the example to follow in this regard.

Jesus is the pattern of the temple in heaven.

Like-mindedness, forgiveness, selflessness, as taken from the example of Jesus, are traits in each of us that rise above the individual to glorify God. God makes no difference between one man and another. God is not a man; God is spirit. Here, the author of Romans puts forth that Jesus was the minister for the truth of that spirit to the circumcision. Circumcision speaks of the covenant between the spirit and mankind.

Jesus is the minister to all faithful people who believe in the truth of the spirit. As that minister, Jesus is the confirmation of the promises that God made to the patriarchs shared between the Christians, Muslims, and Jews.

Verses nine through thirteen. In that Christ is the minister for the truth of the spirit to the circumcision, there is no elite club with its doors closed to non-members. The author seamlessly includes the gentiles – and not by his own opinion. He cites from the old books we look to for authority and confirmation. In that Jesus confirmed the promises made to the fathers, it is for the purpose that the Gentiles might glorify God for his mercy. The gentiles are included. God had a plan and it included every nation and people and faith and non-faith of the world. No one is left out. The author shows us from established scripture.

“As it is written” is a part of the author's argument. He presents a thing that any of us

might turn to for fact-checking. Now, one might initially think that the Hebrews and the Muslims have different books altogether but the first fact is just that. The differences are regional. They represent the differences between mortal authors rather than the difference between God and God. If I say that the truth of my God is established in where my hand falls and you say that the truth of your God is established in where your hand falls – that only proves that neither of us, on our own, can fully reach the object of our desire. Yet, chained together – we can reach quite a bit further. The cited verses from older scripture are meant to show that God's plan is for everyone working together. Look at the words, check the language.

“For this cause, I will confess to thee among the Gentiles, and sing unto thy name.” That

is a statement from old scripture that includes the outlying nations, cultures, and peoples.

Let us ask, then, 'includes' among whom? The Gentiles are included among the chosen.

Among the Hebrews, the Muslims, and even among the Christians, there is a human tendency to think, 'I am the chosen.' It is human to justify oneself, to pat oneself on the

back. This human trait is not the inclusive trait of God, it is the exclusive trait of individuals who revel in creating boundaries. Yet, the word of God to all the so-called chosen is a command to include. “And again he saith, Rejoice, ye Gentiles, with his people.”

God does not exclude any people. There is one God and one people. There is no single faith that is permitted to say they are the one people and that God is only God to them.

There is only one God and he is above all boundaries of faith. He has created all people for Himself. Who are we to divide God among us? There is no 'us' and all the rest. There is only one people – all people. The author cites, “And again, Praise the Lord, all ye Gentiles; and laud him, all ye people.” The word of God is not to this faith or that faith.

It not only to the nation of the Hebrews or the Muslim nation. The word of God is not to this people or that people but to “all” people.

Admittedly, these references are vague. They do not point specifically to a shared source. However, the author, in verse twelve, quotes a prophet that is shared not only in Hebrew and Christian tradition but in Islamic tradition as well. I speak of the prophet Isaiah. This is what Wikipedia says about Isaiah in Islamic tradition. Isaiah, or his Arabic name ‫( أشعياء‬transliterated: Ashiʻyā'), is not mentioned by name in the Qur'an or the Hadith, but appears frequently as a prophet in Islamic sources, such as Qisas AlAnbiya and Tafsir. Tabari (310/923) provides the typical accounts for Islamic traditions regarding Isaiah. He is further mentioned and accepted as a prophet by other Islamic scholars such as Ibn Kathir, Al-Tha`labi and Kisa'i and also modern scholars such as Muhammad Asad and Abdullah Yusuf Ali. Isaiah is notable for his predictions of the coming of Jesus and Muhammad. Isaiah's narrative in Islamic literature can be divided into three sections. The first establishes Isaiah as a prophet of Israel during the reign of Hezekiah; the second relates Isaiah's actions during the siege of Jerusalem by Sennacherib; and the third warns the nation of coming doom. Paralleling the Hebrew Bible, Islamic tradition states that Hezekiah was king in Jerusalem during Isaiah's time.

Hezekiah heard and obeyed Isaiah's advice, but could not quell the turbulence in Israel.

This tradition maintains that Hezekiah was a righteous man and that the turbulence worsened after him. After the death of the king, Isaiah told the people not to forsake God, and warned Israel to cease from its persistent sin and disobedience. Muslim tradition maintains that the unrighteous of Israel in their anger sought to kill Isaiah. In a death that resembles that attributed to Isaiah in Lives of the Prophets, Muslim exegesis recounts that Isaiah was martyred by Israelites by being sawn in two.

The author of Romans quotes Isaiah thus, “And again, Esaias saith, There shall be a root of Jesse, and he that shall rise to reign over the Gentiles; in him shall the Gentiles trust.”

The nations are not presented as conglomerates of individuals but, rather, as entities that,

as a whole, may be known for such shared human traits as “trust.” The nation of the United States of America, not as individuals but as a whole, trusts the risen one who is meant to reign over the Gentiles. We have inscribed our trust upon our currency as a national motto – 'In God We Trust.' Recall that Jesus said in John 10:30, “I and my father are one.” Christ, as an example of God in man, is named the Truth. The Truth may apply to any man. What is the mind, the spirit, in a man? What is the most special, that is to say, Holy, mind or spirit in man? It is the Holy Spirit of Truth – the truth being God in man. This is desirable in a Hebrew, in a Muslim, in a Christian, or any other individual of faith. Just as Jesus can be one with God, we can be one with God – but only if we try, only if that is what we want. The author continues in verse thirteen, “Now the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace in believing, that ye may abound in hope, through the power of the Holy Ghost.” Think of that for a moment. The spirit of God in man, the Holy Ghost, is ascribed with the power of our faith to bring about joy, peace, and fulfillment.

Continuing in verse fourteen, the author speaks to the believers among the gentiles. That is to say, he speaks to the monotheists among the polytheist Romans. He has a good feeling about them. He gets a good vibe from them. He is fully persuaded about their positive attributes. Whoever they may be that believe in the one true God and his representative son, the author considers them to be brethren. He deems that all of his monotheist brothers and sisters are full of goodness, filled with all knowledge and, as such, are able to admonish one another. Let us zero in on the two salient points in this verse.

Point one is about the knowledge. It is not just knowledge that they are full of, per se.

No. Limited or localized knowledge is not what the author addresses here. Rather, he addresses “all” knowledge. What does it mean that the author puts it that way? It means that the Jews have a measure of the whole, the Christians have a measure of the whole, the Muslims have a measure of the whole. If knowledge could be presented as a jig-saw puzzle, we could then say that each group, in and of themselves, only possess a handful of the pieces needed to complete the big picture. Together, and only together, it may be said that they possess “all” knowledge.

Point two is about what the monotheists do with their handful of puzzle pieces. They are, as the author claims, “able also to admonish one another.” Admonish means to advise, urge, recommend, caution, warn, counsel, exhort, implore, beseech, and encourage. These actions are taken to maintain unity, solidarity, and forward momentum.

The actions, all of them, are on a par with the self-healing function within a single body.

The white blood cells in my body will maintain my own growth and good health but are of no purpose to any organism outside of myself. Also, just as the white blood cells

derive from the skeleton that supports the body, the actions listed above derive from the system of support within a single body. They are not meant to be applied to external bodies. “All” knowledge, as well as the action of admonishment, is a single-body event.

Admonishment is not intended for the enemy. We do not encourage the enemy to oppose us. The concept of 'all knowledge,' as presented by the author of the book of Romans, is not a concept whereby scattered entities assist the entities that oppose them. No. It is a concept, rather, in which a single body, using all of the combined puzzle pieces, recognizes and promotes self-awareness within the context of unity. What that means is that if you hold some of the pieces, you are part of the body. Judaism, Islam, and Christianity are not separate, are not inimical, not alien. They are, in actuality, three organs within the single body of monotheism. Each of the three arms of truth is meant to support the others, to hold each other in check. In that sense, if one sibling begins to color outside the lines, the actions of self-maintenance may appear to be a reprimand or a rebuke. Actions of this nature, while seeming hostile, are still acts of self-maintenance within a single body.

The author has been deliberately bold in his writing. He has gathered the three arms of truth and tried his best to put them in mind, as he says, that because of the grace of the one true God, he has dedicated himself to be the minister of the representative son among the Gentiles. That is to say, the office and purpose of the author are to be the minister of Jesus Christ among the differing cultures. If his small life has any meaning, he so much as says, it is in the fact that he attends those matters that pertain to the one true God. He accomplishes that duty through the agency of Jesus Christ. He is not putting forward anything that was not accomplished through Christ. In other words, he is not making any of this up. His words and deeds, for the self-maintenance of the body (to bring the nations and cultures of monotheism together in acts of obedience (selfawareness within the context of unity) to God), originate in and are powered by the truth of God in man – Jesus Christ. He reminds his readers that through the power of the spirit of God, through signs and wonders beyond the scope of mortal ability, he has gone from Jerusalem to Illyricum in the single-minded act of self-maintenance for the body of monotheism – he has preached the gospel, and only the gospel, of Christ. The gospel is the good news. The good news is the truth. The truth is God in man.

So, I pick up in verse twenty. The author feels that he has worked really hard for the cause. He has done his utmost. He has not striven to build upon another man's foundation in the cause of Christ. Peter and the other apostles were already bringing Christ to the Jews from which he originated. As he said: to the Jew first. The Jews had priority in the matter but no monopoly. The author also said: and also to the Greek. Sure, Jesus said he came only for 'the lost sheep of Israel' but he also said, in Luke twenty-four

verse forty-seven, “that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.” So, yes. Jesus came from the Jews to the Jews but that was only a starting point. Note the word 'all' in “among all nations.”

It was meant to be. All nations included the nations of the Greeks, Romans, Egyptians, Assyrians, Arabians, Persians, Hindus, and Turks just to name a few. Jesus is for all nations, all peoples, all cultures. Paul was the apostle to all nations. Israel already had their church. He took the ministry on the road. Did Jesus have a place in other cultures and other faiths? The author thought so. He quoted scripture as an endorsement of his ministry. “To whom he was not spoken of, they shall see: and they that have not heard shall understand.” The delay in his getting to the Romans was due to the fulfillment of his franchise in other places. To add to his great desire over many years to go to them, his work in certain areas was, at that point, complete to the extent where he was able to make plans to reach them.

His intent was certain. He had faith that he would reach them by and by – to be strengthened by their fellowship insomuch that it would propel him forward into continued service in new places. They would be lumped together with his visit to Spain but after his return to Jerusalem where he hoped to minister to the saints. I pulled this from Wikisource: Ever he cherished the hope that in some way he might be instrumental in removing the prejudice of his unbelieving countrymen so that they might be led to accept the precious light of the gospel. He also desired to meet the church at Jerusalem and bear to them the gifts sent by the Gentile churches to the poor brethren in Judea.

And by this visit, he hoped to bring about a firmer union between the Jewish and the Gentile converts to the faith.

He was determined and his belief was that if the nations were included in the spiritual benefits of the Jewish people, the nations were also responsible to help out in times of great need. His plan to return to Jerusalem was an iffy matter. He had intelligence that certain unbelievers in the area would try again to thwart his ministry. There was a certain amount of risk and danger involved but his mind was set. He saw the blessing in his work and asked for their prayers that things would go well. He was not completely certain that his Jewish counterparts in the Jerusalem church would accept him and the material support he had gathered for them. His hope was to come to the Romans by the will of God and that the will of God would give him some joy in his service to the saints – that after the completion and success of that work, he might, with the Romans, be refreshed. His work was arduous but his optimism was high and he wished those in Rome the best until they met.

Chapter Sixteen The final chapter of the book of Romans. Who are the people mentioned in this chapter?

The information that is to follow has been pulled from https://margmowczko.com/listof-people-in-romans-16_1-16/ Phoebe was a minister in Cenchrea, a port town of Corinth. She had travelled to Rome where one of her tasks was to deliver Paul’s letter. Paul introduces her to the Romans in terms of her ministry.

Prisca and Aquila were a married couple. They were friends of Paul, and the three had lived, worked, travelled and ministered together. Prisca’s name is listed before her husband’s in four of the six times their names are mentioned in the New Testament. This may indicate that Prisca was more prominent in ministry than Aquila. The couple hosted and led a house church in Rome which is also greeted.

There is no specific information about Epaenetus in Romans Sixteen but Marg tells us: This is the only Bible verse that mentions Epaenetus. He was a friend (literally, “beloved”) of Paul, but we know nothing about him apart from Paul’s claim that he was the first person in Asia Minor who became a Christian.

There is no specific information about Mary in Romans Sixteen but Marg says this: Note that these four labouring women in Romans 16 are not mentioned with a man.

Many of the women Paul names in his letters seem to be acting independently of husbands or fathers.

Andronicus and Junia were a missionary couple who had been persecuted for their faith. They had been Christians longer than Paul, perhaps they had even been disciples when Jesus was alive. The couple is described in terms of their relationship with Paul (and other apostles) and their ministry.

Ampliatus was a common male name, especially of slaves in the imperial household, but we know nothing about this man except that he was a friend (“beloved”) of Paul.

Just like Prisca and Aquila, Urbanus, a man, is described using Paul’s favourite word for a fellow minister: coworker.

Stachys is the third person in this list who Paul describes as his friend (“beloved”).

Apelles is a man whose faith in Christ had been tested in some way, and proven.

Literally “those from/of Aristobulus” probably refers to the family and/or the slaves of a man named Aristobulus. It may also refer to a congregation (or, house church) hosted by Aristobulus, but it is odd that Aristobulus himself is not explicitly greeted.

Herodion. Paul makes a point of highlighting the ethnicity of some of his fellow Jews.

This is significant as there were tensions between the Jews and Gentiles in the Roman Church at the time Paul wrote his letter.

Literally “those from/of Narcissus.” Narcissus is a male name, and like Aristobulus, he may have been the host of a house church, or it may only have been family members and/or his slaves who belonged to the church.

Tryphaena and Tryphosa. These women, most likely sisters or even twins, ministered “in the Lord.” Despite the senses of daintiness and of luxurious living that the etymology of their names conveys, these women were hard workers.

Like Epaenetus, Ampliatus and Stachys (three men mentioned above), Paul refers to Persis, a woman, as a dear friend (“beloved”). The apostle regarded these four people with warm affection. But in the greeting to Persis, Paul uses a definite article instead of the pronoun equivalent to “my” Persis was not just loved by Paul, she was also loved by the church. Furthermore, Paul refers to the ministry of Persis, something he doesn’t do for the three men.

Rufus may be a son of Simon of Cyrene, the man who was forced to carry Jesus’s cross.

Paul describes Rufus as “chosen,” or “elect.” (This is the same word used to describe the lady addressed in 2 John and her sister). Rufus’ mother is the eighth woman listed in Romans 16:1-16. Paul says nothing about her ministry except that she acted (ministered?) in a maternal way towards him. The fact that she is not named may be a mark of respect and perhaps indicates she is an older person. Was she Simon of Cyrene’s widow?

Asyncritus, Phlegon, Hermes, Patrobas, Hermas. Say hello to Asyncritus, Phlegon, Hermes, Patrobas, Hermas, and the brothers and sisters who are with them. The first four are male names. It’s not totally clear if Herma(s) is a male name. These people probably all belong to the same house church in Rome.

Philologus, Julia, Nereus, Nereus’s sister, Olympas. Say hello to Philologus and Julia, Nereus and his sister, and Olympas, and all the saints who are with them. The Greek grammar shows that Philologus and Julia are a couple. Along with Nereus and his sister, as well as Olympas (which may be a contraction of the male name Olympiodorus —or is it a female name?), these five are probably all prominent members of a house

church. Or perhaps they are the hosts and leaders of three different house churches in Rome.

Of the twenty-nine people, ten are women. What is especially interesting, however, is that seven of the ten women are described in terms of their ministry (Phoebe, Prisca, Mary, Junia, Tryphena, Tryphosa, Persis). By comparison, only three men are described in terms of their ministry (Aquila, Andronicus, Urbanus), and two of these men are ministering alongside a female partner (Aquila with Prisca, Andronicus with Junia).

These are numbers worth remembering.

Other names mentioned, which Marg did not go into, are Timotheus, Lucius, Jason, and Sosipater. They are found listed under “my kinsmen” in verse twenty-one. I take the following information from Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers.

(21-23) The companions of St. Paul add their own greetings to the Roman Church.

Timotheus.—Timothy had been sent on in advance from Ephesus (Acts 20:22). He would seem to have gone on into Greece and to Corinth itself (1Corinthians 4:17; 1Corinthians 16:10). He had thence rejoined St. Paul on his way through Macedonia (2Corinthians 1:1), and he was now with him again in Greece.

In the other Epistles (2 Cor., Phil., Colossians, 1 and 2 Thess., and Philem.), when Timothy was present with St. Paul at the time of his writing, he is joined with him in the salutation at the outset. Why his name does not appear in the heading of the present letter we can hardly say. Perhaps he happened to be away at the time when it was begun; or, St. Paul may have thought it well that a church which was entirely strange to him, and to which Timothy too was a stranger, should be addressed in his own name alone.

Lucius.—This may, perhaps, be the Lucius of Cyrene mentioned in Acts 13:1; but the name is too common for anything to be asserted positively.

Jason.—A Jason is mentioned as having received St. Paul and his companions on their first visit to Thessalonica, and getting himself into trouble in consequence (Acts 17:5-9).

It would be some slight argument for this identification if the word “kinsmen” were taken in its narrower sense; there would then be a reason why St. Paul should have found hospitality in the house of Jason.

Sosipater.—Possibly “Sopater, the son of Pyrrhus, of Berœa,” mentioned in Acts 20:4 (corrected reading).

Tertius is the letter writer and he adds his small part to the letter but is there a take-away

from this chapter? The answer is yes. It is found in verses seventeen through twenty and verses twenty-four through twenty-seven.

17 “Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.”

18 “For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple.”

19 “For your obedience is come abroad unto all men. I am glad therefore on your behalf: but yet I would have you wise unto that which is good, and simple concerning evil.”

20 “And the God of peace shall bruise Satan under your feet shortly. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you. Amen.”

24 “The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen.”

25 “Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began,” 26 “But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith:” 27 “To God only wise, be glory through Jesus Christ for ever. Amen.”

I wish to narrow the focus, here, and deal with what I consider to be the more telling of the closing comments. In verses seventeen, eighteen, and nineteen, there is a warning against contamination. The church and the faith of each individual believer was at peril from rogue members who espoused a less rigid doctrine than the one Paul considered needful to the growth of the body. It was advised that these rogue members be identified and avoided. Their main purpose was in securing personal gain and not in the growth of the body or the doctrine of the gospel of Jesus. There were, of course, newbies among the ranks who were easy pickings for those devious individuals. If they were swayed toward other definitions and other doctrines, divisions and offenses could occur that would only benefit those who sought personal gain.

It was that whole 'house divided cannot stand' thing. Some who attached themselves to the church were of a more base nature, being more catholic and profane in their attitudes toward what is acceptable and what is not acceptable. Paul's approach, here, was black and white. Indeed, the only outcome from a 'gray area' is offense and division. In our

modern experience, we see the effects of such a gray area between the Christians, Jews, Muslims, and non-believers. A body that fights its own immune system is not very healthy. Paul wanted the church to be healthy, to grow. He wanted the members to clearly see the good and avoid the ill, as he stated in verse nineteen, “I would have you wise unto that which is good, and simple concerning evil.”

The author mentioned, in verse twenty-five, “my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ.” I think he saw both as the same. When he said 'my gospel,' it was in regard to gospels contrary to the preaching of Jesus Christ. Those other gospels were the dangers he perceived in the church. In a strict sense of black versus white, those other gospels always took the spirit away from faith, love, and forgiveness. They set boundaries and incited conflict through disaffection. For a seed to grow and produce fruit, many elements must come into play. There must be a concert of growth-oriented influences that are allowed to do their respective works without interruption or degraded force.

There are conditions that apply specifically to early formation which is clearly seen in the extreme care taken with babies. What is common or popular for those already in advanced maturity is a detriment to early growth. We see those in a position of care for the young to both provide what nourishes and shield from dangerous influences.

The closing statements are key to understanding Paul's mission. He was sent to the faithful among all the nations. That is to say, his care for the church was toward all God fearing men and women among the monotheistic ranks. He was a preacher of Christ to all the monotheistic faithful. His take on that matter is clearly seen in his summation.

The one and only God, in his wisdom, set the parameters so that he would receive glory through Jesus Christ. This is not just a Christian thing – it applies, across the board, to all monotheism. Whereas it was formerly hidden from the world, the mystery was revealed and made manifest through the prophets shared in common between all three arms of the truth. Jesus Christ is the commandment of the one true everlasting God and made known to all nations for the sole benefit of those faithful who are willing to take their faith to the obedience level.

End.