#1. Romans 1:1-7 - What's Going On?

 

Part I: Introductions

Paul, a slave of Christ Jesus, a called apostle, severed for the evangel of God…

There were a number of ways I wanted to try dissecting Scripture, but I figured the best way to do it would be to read line by line and add notes after everything, considering how tough some of these run-on sentences can be (leave it to God to pick a writer that forgets to use periods!)

Let’s start with our man “Paul.” Paul’s name is at the head of every letter he writes to the nations. His name has the Greek root “CEASE,” as though God has ceased dealing with Israel for the time being, instead dealing with the nations. This can be proven Scripturally by recalling when he is first named “Paul,” being in Acts 13:9, his first documented instance of preaching the evangel to one who isn’t a Jew. I’ll definitely have more to explain on this topic in the coming chapters, but let’s let that sit for now.

There’s the question of who Paul is. Paul is an ex-Pharisee – an ex-religious zealot. He was, indeed, one of the priesthood’s finest. He was called out of this in the famous story in which he was blinded on the road to Damascus by Christ. People know all about this story, they can cite the verses (Acts 9:1-5,) but they fail in explaining why exactly Christ did this to Paul (then Saul) specifically. The answer is that Paul had to be called out this way, by the ascended Christ, to show that his evangel was not in line with Jesus’ teachings while he was on earth, nor was it in line with Peter (Gal. 1:1, and, if you study the structure of the book of Acts, you will find a notable contrast between Peter’s ministry in the first half of the book, and Paul’s ministry in the second half.) Christ, ascended, as opposed to descended, gives Paul the charge to herald a separate message to the nations. I won’t be making any major moves to prove this statement, as it will become evident in this very chapter before Paul even gets into any doctrinal teachings (not to mention Paul clarifies it outright in other places.)

This is, interestingly enough, already a notable point of contention among mainstream Christianity. Even some in the body of Christ cannot understand that there is a separation between the evangel that Peter presents, and the evangel that Paul presents (Gal. 2:7-8.) Yet it is crucial if we are to properly understand the secrets unveiled by Paul in this letter – lest we remain ignorant to God’s simple statements.

Then there’s the ominous term “slave.” It stands out, doesn’t it? No one considers themselves “slaves” to Christ these days considering the negative connotation, but is it really all that inaccurate, considering how much Paul and his buddies suffered at the time (see: the whole book of Acts)? In Galatians 1:4, Paul calls this world part of the “current wicked eon,” which is a super fancy way of calling the world evil. Paul also calls the world “enslaved” to sin itself later in this letter (Rom. 6:20.) “Slave” to Christ gives us the notion of property, or servitude. When man calls another man their “slave,” people riot in the streets and Tarantino makes a movie – this is clear. So why isn’t Paul rioting, and how, in fact, did this ex-Pharisee-murderer (yes, we’re reading the words of one we’d call a convicted felon) end up so humbled, even in this affliction, calling himself a slave? It’s so blatant and powerful that it’s the second word God displays in His Greek evangel.

He (and us in the body of Christ, in effect) endure this world that does not know Christ, and keep the faith through these trials, whether we would like it or not. If you know you are one in Christ, then you know that everything you face is a lesson, designed to teach you… something (we’ll get there as we read.) Regardless, whether you accept the knowledge or not, you are a slave to it. How you feel does not change the fact either way.

Who is Paul enslaved to? Christ Jesus. This is the reverse of what we are commonly taught by religious institutions; the Greek puts “Anointed,” or “Christ,” or “Christos,” first. This is to show that we are dealing with a celestial, ascended Lord (the ascended One that blinds Paul.) When Jesus Christ is in reference, we are dealing with Christ in relation to His terrestrial sojourn, not His celestial position.

Paul speaks authoritatively, too. Ironic, isn’t it? In contrast to the term “slave” (which many instinctively correlate with “under” or “beneath,”) Paul calls himself an “apostle,” which is a dignifying title – he is commissioned with something, from God. Interesting that this murderer is given such a high position. Moreover, anyone who says “I only follow the words in red” are instantly missing someone that God severed and dedicated to them specifically to give them answers to the tougher questions on His character and heart, as we’ll see throughout His evangel.

Speaking of, check out that word “evangel.” The Greek elements of the word “evangel” is “WELL-MESSAGE,” and literally has to do with “good news.” If someone is giving you an “evangel” that is not good news, then you won’t find it here in Romans (and there will be numerous examples of this throughout the study.) This is because this is the evangel of God, that is, good news of God. It’s important to note that this is first proclaimed as God’s evangel, not Paul’s. Again, we’re dealing with an ex-murderer, here. Paul is the channel in which this evangel is being delivered, but he isn’t the Source. He is the dealer, not the manufacturer. He didn’t whip this up in an RV somewhere and call himself “Heisenberg,” and further study will indeed show that he (nor could any one man or group of people) have a story so consistent for it to be a falsehood, and who would willingly say they’re a slave to something otherwise?? In the words of George Rogers, “The evangel is good news, not good advice.” Indeed God is the Source, no other. So what does He have to say?

…(which He promises before through His prophets in the Holy Scriptures)…

I find it nice that Paul points out that he wasn’t called out of the blue; he is a part of a bigger picture promised beforehand by other prophets. Paul is going to reference what we now call the “Old Testament” 84 times, to prove this statement. Each and every time, I’d like you to remember verse two of God’s evangel.

The bigger perspective is, literally, that he was promised beforehand – thousands of years before Paul even existed (Eph. 1:4.) Don’t mistake God for a big oaf; He prophesied and dictated Christ’s coming and crucifixion in Isaiah, hundreds of years beforehand. He has certainly written me at my computer, listening to Low Rider while I write. Paul is spitting facts in the first sentence of Romans; God planned at the beginning for everything he’s about to explain, and if you look back, you’ll see everything fit perfectly (more on this as we study Scripture.)

And, finally, I want to note that this presents yet again another issue with folk that believe Paul’s message is “similar,” or “the same” as other prophets, as the other prophets built to Paul’s message, while Paul presents a new message. If he points backwards, then the atheists are correct and Scripture is just circular reasoning. He references the Old Testament as proof text that his message is legitimate, but it’s not proof that he’s teaching something that’s been taught already. Otherwise the message presented here would be pointless. It was promised beforehand, not revealed beforehand.

…evangel of God, Concerning His Son…

This is the first example of Paul’s letters being written with Christ as the central focus. Every verse that we read concerns Christ, and is an exact effect of His death and resurrection. Jesus told the Israelites about God while on earth – shortly thereafter we have God now telling us what His Son truly accomplished through their murder.

Everything Paul discusses directly and indirectly points back to Christ. At no point do these letters concern us with anyone else. Christ is the center by which we are given belief (Rom. 1:16, 1 Cor. 15:3-4.)

…Concerning His Son (Who comes of the seed of David according to the flesh, Who is designated Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by resurrection of the dead)…

This statement in parenthesis is designed to literally define Jesus. I noticed Paul does this a lot: he breaks down definitions to an extreme in order for people to understand. It’s so plain you almost miss it! 1 Timothy 2:5 calls Jesus a “mediator” of God and of man (serving as a bridge between us and God.) A mediator, by definition, must be able to represent both parties in a matter. In John 14:6, Jesus Himself says “No one is coming to the Father except through Me.” It would make sense, then, that Jesus is of the seed of David (flesh and kingly for Israel,) and is designated a power bestowed by the Spirit of God (spirit and Son of God.) There is a heavy distinction between flesh and spirit that will be pointed out multiple times throughout these letters, and I’ll dive into them as we go. For now I’ll cite this as an excellent example of two components that make up the entirety of Christ.

Furthermore, let’s think about this: David’s a descendant of Abraham, who is called the “forefather” of faith, and thus father to us faithful laid out later in this letter (Rom. 4:1, 16.) This knowledge, as well as knowledge that He is the Son of God, gives His death in these verses a universal context, and not a conditional salvation.

This is a small note, but I feel a need to mention it: why do you think Paul says “spirit of holiness” here instead of “holy spirit?” So often in Scripture we read, “holy spirit,” yet here we read of the “spirit of holiness.” This, literally, is describing the nature of Christ’s spirit. It is, literally, a spirit “of holiness.” The “holy spirit” is a separate topic, one that we will cover at a later time, because it’s not mentioned here.

Finally, I’d like to take a moment and acknowledge that He is proven “Son of God” status with his ability to raise the dead. We’ll get into the whole “what is death” thing later, but for now I’d like to say that it’s interesting that this is the overt qualification for “Son of God,” and, uh, there are many mentions of Jesus’s raising of the dead.

…Concerning His Son, Jesus Christ, through Whom we obtained grace and apostleship for faith-obedience among all the nations, for His name’s sake, among whom are you also, the called of Jesus Christ…

Knowing he received this grace and apostleship, again, from Christ, literally on the road to Damascus, Paul’s writing style is clear. This man does not have time for a “previously on” skit. God forbid, that would be too easy! So instead, we must remember that Paul is still the subject, after four different verses. The entire sentence, with no insertion, reads, “Paul, a slave of Christ Jesus, a called apostle, severed for the evangel of God, Concerning His Son, Jesus Christ, through whom…” Do you see yet why any of this is so complicated to the average reader? Understanding this doctrine requires time and patience, and once you understand, well… it’s difficult to explain. You can return to your normal life, but you truly are a slave to these writings. It’s like clockwork; complicated, but purposeful and intentional.

All this to say that Paul obtained this grace and apostleship on the road to Damascus. Note that it was not Paul finding Christ, but Christ blinding Paul. It was not Paul that achieved a faith, but Christ that instilled the faith in him. Future letters will challenge this call to apostleship, as we’ll study.

Paul says “we,” here, but there is no indication thus far that he is referring to the twelve Jewish apostles, as their standard of apostleship is different from his (Acts 1:21-22.) Paul is severed for the evangel, here. Who is he referring to, then? Beats the hell outta me. Possibly Tertius, his scribe, but far more likely, other apostles (they did exist; they simply weren’t the “head” of this evangel the way that Paul is – Eph. 4:8,11.)

The term faith-obedience is fun! We are obedient through the faith that’s been instilled in us. Tamed by it, if you will. In Greek, the original term ‘obey’ represents ‘hearing or heeding words.’ Our faith instills words we naturally heed. The faith crafts obedience toward it. This is interesting because it’s not an unknown concept; it’s obvious, if you think about it. Many are willed by their faith! Baptists forbid alcohol, Catholics forbid sex, so on and so forth. The difference, then, is that many Baptists and Catholics are what is called “infirm in faith,” a concept we will discuss more in Romans 14. Paul says that true faith in God’s absolute grace wills obedience for His sake.

The grace, and the commission, is what we are given, here. The faith-obedience is the effect of these first two objects. The questions that arise are: what exactly is this faith, what are our terms for obeying it, and why should we do so?

One more thing I’d like to note is that this is the first book of the Bible that speaks to those outside of Israel, very obviously – “among all the nations.” Paul is the first apostle to do this, and it’s reinforced in the next verse:

…the called of Jesus Christ: to all who are in Rome, beloved by God, called saints: Grace to you and peace from God, our Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ.

To all in Rome. He is talking to the nations, strongly displaying that, per Israel’s crucifixion of their Messiah, God’s directive has changed, and those He is imparting His evangel to are not solely Israelites, but the entire world. Paul is going to cover this newfound discrepancy in later chapters, but for now we can ask, how has this come to pass?

Those called of Jesus Christ are beloved by God, called saints. This is an effective definition of the term “saint,” being “beloved by God.” Don’t correlate “sainthood” with “all magically-perfectly not sinning,” either, please, because, for lack of a better term, that’s shallow and untrue.

The phrase “Grace to you and peace from God, our Father,” is a statement that, as it’s our first in the evangel, deserves some special consideration. Grace is a cause, here, and peace is the effect. God gives grace, that peace is effected. This will be a huge point later, as we’ll read in later epistles, but having that down now will be beneficial to us in many ways. Even more importantly: God gives. It is God Who imparts this, again, not Paul.

But what of this phrase? Well, I’ll quote James G. Poole’s “Notes on Romans,” here:

“[The phrase] occurs in all his epistles with slight variations. It is addressed to those worthy of praise, like the Thessalonians and also to those who need censure, like the Corinthians. It reflects God’s attitude to all of us whether we be worthy or unworthy! The source of blessing is the grace of God our Father, the channel through which it comes is our Lord Jesus Christ. Grace comes first, then peace. This is the divine order.”

I want to note an important distinction at the end – he mentions grace from both God and Christ, explaining right off the bat for you Trinitarians out there that these are two different Beings. While it is indeed true that we are made in the image of God (Gen. 1:27), and that Christ is the image of the invisible God (Col. 1:15), there is zero confirmation thus far that These are the same being, as the church implies with its trinity. As Mr. Poole said, the Source of grace is God, the Channel through which He provides it is Jesus Christ. If this notion is challenged or contradicted at any point in this letter or the following, or I find a verse that states this notion, I will cement my view in Scripture. Guess we will only see with further study!

*   *   *

This is the end of Paul’s first sentence, seven verses in. Long, isn’t it? Kinda complicated, too, but nothing we can’t grasp so far, with efficient and careful study of the words when properly translated, with a careful eye not to add or remove anything from the text. In this short window we’re given vital information on Paul, the subject, the context, the credits and credibility, the Source of the word, our relation to Christ (Paul calling God his “Father” is no small matter,) and facts for believers to carry with them throughout their lives. The only thing we’re missing so far is the weighty purpose, which will be laid out in the next section.

- GerudoKing