... his resurrection from the dead. It is likely that Paul is citing a christological formula with which the Romans were already familiar, not unlike 2 Timothy 2:8. This is a much debated passage, but a straightforward reading of it offers the most credible understanding. The subject is God’s Son who was revealed in two stages or is known in two time periods: according to the flesh he was born of Davidic descent, according to the Spirit he was declared Son of God in power. The Greek word for “flesh” (NIV ...
... for their moral philosophy. Nevertheless, although Paul does not mention Jews by name in this section, it is fairly certain that he is speaking to them, for when he mentions Jews in 2:17 he does not appear to introduce a new subject, but to identify a subject already under consideration. Moreover, just as 1:18–32 echoed many of the ideas from Wisdom of Solomon 11–14, chapter 2 echoes Wisdom of Solomon 15, which asserts the moral superiority of Jews over unrighteous Gentiles: “But thou, our God, art ...
... We love because he first loved us” (1 John 4:19). God’s love is no abstraction. The supreme expression of God’s love is the death of Christ “on our behalf” (vv. 6–8). The love of God, therefore, must be understood objectively rather than subjectively, i.e., as God’s love for us rather than our love for God. Interestingly, Paul does not say “the love of Christ,” as verses 6–8 would suggest. This implies that the crucifixion promotes not the heroism of Jesus, but rather the saving purpose ...
... not be more correct to speak of handing over doctrines to hearers than hearers to doctrines? In defense of the wording Barrett notes that “Christians are not (like the rabbis) masters of a tradition; but are themselves created by the word of God, and remain in subjection to it” (Romans, p. 132; see also 2 Cor. 2:9; Gal. 1:6). Käsemann is more specific, seeing the form of teaching not as the gospel in general, but as an early baptismal creed to which believers were entrusted at their baptism (Romans, p ...
... for the struggle, and hope for the future. Paul had alluded to the Spirit briefly in 7:6 when he mentioned “the new way of the Spirit.” But because of the need to clarify the problem of indwelling sin (7:7–25) he had to hold the subject in abeyance until now. But in chapter 8 the Spirit commands center stage. Before this chapter the Spirit is mentioned only five times, and afterwards only nine times. But in chapter 8 the Spirit occurs twenty-one times—a record for any chapter in the NT. The Spirit ...
... with the law (so 2 Cor. 3:13–14; Heb. 8:13). Reference to the Greek only complicates the matter, for telos (NIV, end) carries at least four different meanings in the NT. The meaning of the phrase in 10:4 has been the subject of long debates and monographs (Gaugler, for example, devotes twenty-four pages to these seven words). The dogmatic distinction in theology between law (OT) and grace (NT), which is particularly common to Protestantism and Orthodoxy, normally interprets verse 4 in the second sense, i ...
... .” This is a remarkable claim, and they may have learned this statement from Paul himself, for he never denies its validity; rather, he qualifies the idea with his arguments. Beyond the generic notion of everything, Paul initially mentions food, which will become the subject of detailed discussion in later chapters of the letter. For now, one should know that in antiquity many meals were served in pagan temples, and often the food itself was from the sacrifice(s) offered to a pagan god or goddess. In this ...
... the Corinthians that he quoted in 6:12. This quotation signals the dialogic nature and pattern of thought in the ensuing discussion and informs the reader to be alert for Paul’s use of rhetorical devices. In essence, Paul introduces the subject of consuming idol sacrifices and offers his thinking about what should occur in Corinth. Then, he anticipates the objections of those who would differ with him, stating these objections in a diatribe-like fashion as an imaginary opponent might raise the objections ...
... not praise.” This introductory line is transitional and, at a glance, ambiguous in point of reference. The NIV rightly recognizes that Paul is looking forward at this point rather than back to the previous lines, so one reads, In the following directives. The subject that Paul is about to address is the meetings of the Corinthian congregation. In what follows he will take up a sequence of unpraiseworthy activities that include behavior at the Lord’s Supper (11:17–34) and the use of spiritual gifts in ...
... , involving total commitment as well as deep love and affection. In v. 3 David makes it explicit he is talking about this kindness, God’s ḥesed. 9:2 Both Ziba and Mephibosheth (v. 6) refer to themselves as David’s servant, or, in modern terms, his loyal subject. This is probably a polite response to the king’s greeting but may be a deliberate attempt to set themselves apart from any group that might oppose David. 9:6 21:8 speaks of Mephibosheth as Saul’s son by Rizpah, one of the seven who were ...
... his awesome power crashing down on Job like a hapless shipwreck survivor repeatedly smashed by wave upon wave. The Approach of Death 10:18–19 At rock bottom again, Job wonders why God would expend such intricate care in shaping and forming Job for birth only to subject his life to such pain and terror. Job would rather have died before any eye saw him. Although he wishes he had never come into being, to have gone straight from the womb to the grave would have been the next best thing! 10:20–22 Once ...
... from the assumption that humans are “born to trouble” (5:7) and therefore “reap” what they “sow” (4:8). It is impossible for “a mortal to be righteous before God.” Since even God’s servants, the angels, are untrustworthy, “how much more” are humans subject to “error” (4:18–19). As a result, Job must deserve his suffering. His only hope is to accept God’s discipline (5:17) and throw himself upon the mercy of God (5:8). Eliphaz does not change his argument much in chapter 15 ...
... a) “If God does not turn, God will . . .” (so apparently the NIV text). (b) “If the wicked does not turn, God will . . .” (so the NIV margin). (c) “If the wicked does not turn, the wicked will . . .” Each of these options involves an unannounced change of subject (i.e., a pronoun with no immediate antecedent). Even if the “he” of vv. 12–13 is the “God” of v. 11 (option [a]), the wicked “he” of v. 14 has no near antecedent. And each option retains the awkward shift to referring to a ...
... collective noun (“the upright ones”). We should observe, however, that Hb. yōšer is the normal form for the singular noun and Hb. yešārîm for the collective noun (as in v. 2). In addition, it is unclear which of these two Hb. words is the subject of the pl. verb and which is the object (sing., collective nouns can be combined with pl. verbs, as in 74:18). There are thus three possibilities: “His face will see the right” (a claim consistent with the rest of the v., so LXX), “His face will see ...
... those who have felt that it was wrong to take an oath of any kind. Yet Jesus allowed the high priest to put him under an oath (Matt. 26:62–64), and Paul called on God to be his witness (2 Cor. 1:23; cf. Gal. 1:20). The subject under consideration in Matthew is not so much the taking of a vow as it is the necessity of speaking the truth at all times. Jesus inevitably penetrates behind all legislation to the essential principles it intends to express. To codify his teaching is to destroy it. His “rules ...
... of Yahweh’s oracle about the wicked: may they not come against me, nor . . . drive me away. Thus, after hearing Yahweh himself describe the character of those he rejects, the congregation is given greater motivation to say their “Amen” to these petitions. To be subject to the influence of the wicked is to be driven away from “the abundance of your house,” because they are the ones not permitted to enter the temple. Thus, as the psalm progresses, the circle narrows from all God’s creatures (v. 6 ...
... impressing upon God the investment he has made in the people. This is noted by the imagery, by references to their past history together, and by the mere fact that in the clear majority of cases Yahweh is the subject of the verbs. Even where he is not the grammatical subject, the action follows as a result of divine initiative. The people’s dependence on God is made prominent by imagery: they are helpless sheep of the shepherd, a defenseless vine, and even their kingship is a vassalage. The psalm remains ...
... , a form-critical analysis of each reveals they are designed for very different purposes. Psalm 105 is hymnic praise throughout, and so God and his praiseworthy acts are the grammatical subject. Psalm 106 is a corporate prayer psalm that confesses and laments the people’s failure, and so they are the grammatical subject. Thus, both psalms cover the same historical period, but their selectivity from that narrative is directly opposite. Psalm 105 reads the story of Israel’s beginnings as an occasion for ...
... John had done, they were indignant. It would appear that they were prompted more by jealousy than by any sense of inappropriateness on the part of the two. Jesus speaks to all of them in pointing out that, although pagan rulers lord it over their subjects, this is not the way it is to be among his followers. The secret of greatness is not the ability to tyrannize others but the willingness to become their servant. Whoever would become first must become “the willing slave of all” (NEB). The great example ...
... The theme of royal rage repeats (see 3:13) as king Nebuchadnezzar becomes furious at the obstinacy of his three subjects. His anger manifests itself in his countenance. The NIV says his attitude toward them changed (3:19), but the Aramaic ... teʿem. However, the expression sim teʿem, meaning “to make a decree,” does occur toward the end of the chapter, when the king commands his subjects to “fear and reverence the God of Daniel” (6:26 [6:27 MT]). It is used similarly in Dan. 3:29 and 4:6 [4:3 MT ...
... are paralleled by Antiochus’s final illness and deathbed conversion. His arrogance diminished and he “came to his senses” (2 Macc. 9:11 NRSV). This is similar to Daniel 4:34, when Nebuchadnezzar gets his human knowledge back. Antiochus declares, “It is right to be subject to God” (2 Macc. 9:12 NRSV). This is comparable to Daniel 4:34, where Nebuchadnezzar praises the Most High, and also to Daniel 4:17, which tells us the purpose of this chapter: that all may know that God is ruler over all ...
... God of the Jews. Here he does this by writing to all the peoples, nations and men of every language throughout the land (6:25). He addresses them with a customary greeting: May you prosper greatly! (6:25). Then he issues a decree that all his subjects must fear and reverence the God of Daniel (6:26). This is an advance over the decree in chapter 3, which is intended merely to prevent a behavior; people are forbidden from saying “anything against the God of Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego” (3:29). Here ...
... who was dying. While going to his home, Jesus is delayed in the throng of people by the touch of the woman who had been subject to bleeding for twelve years. At the moment that she touched the edge of his cloak she was healed, for power had gone out of Jesus ... synagogue president” and notes that “he is to be distinguished from a civic official and from a Sanhedrin member.” 8:43 subject to bleeding for twelve years: According to Lev. 15:19–30 the woman would have been considered unclean, and all that ...
... retains the right of redemption for one year. When that year passes and the seller has not reclaimed the house, it permanently moves to the buyer and family. It is not subject to return in the year of the Jubilee. In contrast, houses in villages without walls are considered as the fields or open country and thus are subject to the redemption and Jubilee customs. Such a village might be any kind of settlement, some of which would be attached to cities. The exception of city houses from the Jubilee practice ...
... , involving total commitment as well as deep love and affection. In v. 3 David makes it explicit he is talking about this kindness, God’s ḥesed. 9:2 Both Ziba and Mephibosheth (v. 6) refer to themselves as David’s servant, or, in modern terms, his loyal subject. This is probably a polite response to the king’s greeting but may be a deliberate attempt to set themselves apart from any group that might oppose David. 9:6 21:8 speaks of Mephibosheth as Saul’s son by Rizpah, one of the seven who were ...