Big Idea: Romans 5:1–11 presents three new-covenant blessings: peace, hope, and love (love will be covered in the next unit).
Understanding the Text
Romans 5 has been much debated in terms of its context: does it belong with 1:18–4:25, or does it begin a new unit?1Most scholars today believe that although chapter 5 does connect back to 1:18–4:25 (since the topic of justification so pervasive there occurs also in 5:1, 9, 16–19, 21), it most likely begins a new unit that concludes in 8:39. Several arguments indicate that this is the case. First, the opening words of 5:1, “Since we have been justified by faith,” summarize the theme of 1:18–4:25 while preparing the way for a new topic. Second, the polemical tone of 1:18–4:25 is replaced in chapter 5 with one of camaraderie, signaled by Paul’s use of the first-person plural. Third, the prevalence of key vocabulary from Romans 1:17—“the righteous will live by faith”—indicates that a shift in focus occurs between 1:18–4:25 and 5:1–8:39. Thus, the words “faith” and “believe” dominate 1:18–4:25, while “life” and “live” pervade 5:1–8:39.2
I agree with this assessment that chapter 5 begins a new unit. Moreover, it seems to me that the prevalence of “life/live” in 5:1–8:39 suggests that Paul is thinking in these chapters of the life of the new covenant—that is, the blessings of the new covenant. He describes this life as consisting of seven blessings corresponding to Old Testament covenant blessings (chapters 9–11 correlates with covenant curses). New-covenant blessings are based on the stipulation of faith in Christ apart from the law of Moses. In table 1, therefore, I summarize seven covenantal blessings paraded by Paul in this new unit.
With that context in mind, I suggest the following outline for Romans 5:1–4 (note that verses 2b–4 form a chiasm suggesting that hope is conditioned on suffering):
1. Peace with God (through justification) (5:1–2a)
2. Hope (through suffering) (5:2b–4)
a. Hope of the glory of God (5:2b)
b. Suffering (5:3–4a)
a?. Hope (of the glory of God) (5:4b)
Historical and Cultural Background
1. Romans 5:1–8:39, as we saw above, taps into the covenant format, notably the blessings section of the covenant. This connects with the story of Israel—sin, exile, and especially restoration. Because of Israel’s sin, God poured out on that nation the curses of the covenant in the form of exile. Yet God always held out the promise to Israel that if they repented, he would restore to them the blessings of the covenant. For Paul, those blessings are here now in Christ for those who believe in him.
2. The term prosag?g? (NIV: “access”) in 5:2a probably has two backgrounds. The first may be cultic, in terms of the Jewish worshiper coming to God in the temple (the term does not occur in the LXX, but it has a parallel in the Dead Sea Scrolls [1QS 11.13–15]). Second, and more pronounced, in Paul’s day the term would have evoked access through the royal chamberlain into the king’s presence (see Xenophon, Cyr. 7.5.45). Whether to translate prosag?g? as “introduction” or “access” is a matter of debate, but the first translation might imply that Christians have gained entrance before God only once, while the second rendering indicates continual appearance before God.
3. The theme of glory through suffering (see 5:2b–4) has two backgrounds: Adamic and eschatological. The first has to do with the cherished hope in Second Temple Judaism that righteous suffering would restore the lost glory of Adam (e.g., 1QS 4.22–23; CD 3.20; 1QHa 4.15; 2 Baruch; 4 Ezra).3Second, Paul’s term for “suffering” in 5:3, thlipsis, can simply indicate distress brought on by outward circumstances, but more likely it refers to the tribulation of the last days (compare, e.g., Dan. 12:1 LXX; Mark 13:19, 24; Rev. 6–19 with 2 Cor. 1:4, 8; 2:4; 1 Thess. 1:6; 2 Thess. 1:4), as I have argued elsewhere.4These two backgrounds—Adamic and eschatological—are related: the belief emerged in Second Temple Judaism that those who suffered the end-time tribulation for righteousness’ sake would inherit the lost glory of Adam. Paul seems to be drawing on these backgrounds to say that Christians ensure the lost glory of Adam for themselves as they suffer for Christ in the tribulation of the last days. We also see in 5:2b–4 the “already but not yet” tension: Christians have the hope now (the “already”) that they will share in the glory of Christ at his return (the “not yet”).
Interpretive Insights
5:1–2a we have peace with God . . . this grace in which we now stand.[5] Verses 1–2a give the first blessing of the new covenant belonging to the Christian: peace with God based on justification by faith. We noted above that this peace is the peace associated with the new covenant. And such peace is based on the stipulation of faith in the Lord Jesus Christ (note that the full title is used here). The access, or acceptance, that believers have with God in Christ is their participation in the state of grace. The Dead Sea Scrolls are interesting in this regard, for they speak of entry into the “covenant of grace” (1QS 1.8; cf. 1QHa 12.21–22; 15.30–31).6This seems to be what Paul has in mind in using the unusual description “this grace in which we now stand.” Through faith in Christ believers have entered the new covenant of grace.
5:2b–4 we boast in the hope of the glory of God . . . we also glory in our sufferings. Here is the second new-covenant blessing: hope. We noted above that 5:2b–4 forms a chiasm, indicating that hope is conditioned on suffering. These verses also form a rhetorical graditio, whereby words are repeated creating a climactic effect: “suffering,” “perseverance,” “character,” all of which crescendo in “hope” (cf. James 1:2–4; 2 Pet. 1:6–7). We also noted previously that this idea of suffering leading to the hope of the glory of God is both Adamic and eschatological. Suffering during the end-time tribulation for righteousness’ sake will restore the lost glory of Adam to the believer. It is interesting that Paul juxtaposes suffering and the new covenant in 2 Corinthians: the former in 4:7–5:21, the latter in 3:1–4:6. Indeed, suffering for Jesus proved that Paul was a true apostle of the new covenant, even as it identifies the true Christian (see Rom. 8:16–17). All of this is to say that suffering for Jesus’ sake is proof positive that a person is a member of the new covenant and awaits the full realization of the glory of the age to come.
Theological Insights
At least two theological insights can be gleaned from Romans 5:1–4. First, Paul’s metaphor of reconciliation (v. 11) forms an inclusio with justification (v. 1) such that the two concepts are but different sides of the same coin. Reconciliation, with its personal touch, provides a nice balance to the legal language of justification that he has been using since 1:17. After all, God is the Father of Christians, and they are at peace with him. Second, suffering does not negate the fact that a person is a true Christian. Contrary to the “health and wealth gospel,” which declares that well-being and prosperity are proof of genuine Christian faith, Paul maintains that it is suffering that marks true Christians, because in their afflictions they are identifying with the cross. Moreover, trials are intended by God to mature Christians and therefore should be welcomed. On the other hand, Paul is not promoting masochism. Christians need not bring about their own troubles, nor should they relish the pain that suffering inflicts. Indeed, the ultimate hope for Christians is the resurrection of the body and deliverance from all hurts (see Rom. 8:16–30).
Teaching the Text
In teaching or preaching Romans 5:1–4, it is useful to divide the two major points above into two messages. The first is “Romans 5:1–2a: Peace with God; Two Aspects.” This would develop the two aspects of God’s acceptance of the believer in Christ, justification (5:1) and reconciliation (5:11), since they are complementary ideas. As such, peace with God accords the believer a new legal standing before God as well as a restored relationship with him. Both aspects are needed. The former without the latter would provide a correct but cold relationship, while the latter without the former would fail to satisfy the holy character of God. Thankfully, we do not have to choose between the two, as they are different sides of the same coin. The second message is “Romans 5:2b–4: Hope in God—No Pain, No Gain.” Two points emerge from these verses: suffering proves that one is truly a Christian, and suffering matures the Christian. Jesus said that we should rejoice if we suffer for his name’s sake because it indicates that we are taking up his cross and following him. Believers living in modern democracies know little about that aspect of the Christian life, but followers of Jesus living under totalitarian regimes or extremist theocracies experience such affliction daily for the sake of their Christian faith. One wonders what might await believers in the West as Christianity decreases in size and influence. The other positive aspect about suffering for Christ is that hardships make Christians stronger in their faith. The more God sees us through our afflictions, the more we learn to trust in him; and the more we trust him, the more we grow spiritually.
Illustrating the Text
Peace with God comes through justification and reconciliation, which he initiates.
Poetry: “The Hound of Heaven,” by Francis Thompson. Thompson (1859–1907) was a poet and essayist who struggled throughout his life with an addiction to opium. His poem “The Hound of Heaven” is a powerful narrative of God’s steady, majestic, but uncompromising pursuing and reconciling work in his life. Although the poet flees from him, God remains unhurried and unperturbed until finally the pursued understands that this is the true love of a determined God. It would be worth reading several of the memorable, often-quoted stanzas aloud.
Suffering allows the Christian to mature and to identify with the cross.
Film: Molokai: The Story of Father Damien. This moving film (1999) tells the true story of Father Damien (1840–89), a Catholic priest from Belgium who volunteered to go to the island of Molokai to minister to abandoned lepers, living in squalor and need. He was the first priest to go to Molokai. Although warned by his bishop not to touch lepers, he risked his health and life to reach them, and eventually he contracted leprosy himself. His influence was far-reaching; his pleas for help for these people were heard. His ministry is now often cited as an example of how society should care for persons with HIV/AIDS.
Personal Testimony: For over twenty-five years, my wife has suffered from a rare, chronic illness. Although through the years I (Marvin) tried to understand and comfort her, since I did not actually have the condition I could not really relate to her pain. So about thirteen years ago, I decided to ask the Lord to allow me to get the same disease so that I could meaningfully identify with her. And the Lord answered that prayer. About two years later I was diagnosed with my wife’s rare condition. Now, I truly relate to her suffering and can better serve her. My suffering has allowed me to identify with her affliction.
The New-Covenant Blessings: Love
Big Idea: The preceding unit treated the covenantal blessings of peace and hope in 5:1–4. In this unit we look at the covenantal blessing of love in 5:5–11. Love is God’s hesed—the covenant-keeping faithfulness of God to his people that is confirmed by the indwelling Holy Spirit and, above all, by the death of Christ.
Understanding the Text
We may outline Romans 5:5–11, the covenant blessing of love, thus:
1. The source of love is God (5:5a)
2. The medium of love is the indwelling Spirit (5:5b)
3. The proof of love is the death of Christ (5:6–11)
a. Christ’s death was eschatological (5:6)
b. Christ’s death was sacrificial (5:7–8)
c. Christ’s death provides eternal security (5:9–11)
Historical and Cultural Background
1. Christ’s suffering and death as portrayed in Romans 5:6–11 recall two Jewish themes. The first is the Old Testament sacrificial system, which Paul alludes to in 5:6–8: Christ died “for” (hyper [4x]) us. The preposition hyper means “on behalf of” and is related to another term used for Christ’s death in the New Testament, anti, meaning “in place of.” Christ’s dying for and in place of the sinner draws on the imagery of an animal being sacrificed on behalf of the worshiper for the remission of sins. Second, as James Dunn shows, Christ’s sacrificial death is also portrayed against the backdrop of the Maccabean martyrs, whose deaths were viewed as atonement for the sins of ancient Israel (2 Macc. 7:9; 8:21; 4 Macc. 1:8, 10).1
2. The words “much more” in 5:9, 10, 15, 17 indicate that Paul is using another rabbinic hermeneutical technique, qal wahomer (light and heavy) (see, in the unit on Rom. 4:1–8, the sidebar on Rabbi Hillel’s rules of biblical interpretation). This is an argument from the major premise to the minor premise. Applied to 5:9–10, the argument goes like this:
Major premise: justified us in the past (5:9a)
Minor premise: will deliver us in the future (5:9b)
Major premise: reconciled us in the past (5:10a)
Minor premise: will deliver us in the future (5:10b)
The argument, then, says this: if God justified/reconciled us as sinners in the past (the really hard thing to do), then God surely will keep us eternally safe in the future (something that is relatively easy compared to saving us as sinners in the past). One can also see from the parallelism of 5:9–10 that justification and reconciliation are referring to the same reality—acceptance before God—but using different metaphors.
3. The term “reconciliation” (verb katallass?; noun katallag?) in 5:10–11 has a very interesting history that sheds wonderful light on these verses. “Reconciliation” is not used in ancient Greek literature for humans being restored to the deities they worshiped, since the mindset of the Greeks toward religion was that one could not have a personal relationship with the Greek pantheon of gods. The LXX is an obvious advancement over classical Greek thinking in that humans can be reconciled to God because they can have a personal relationship with him. But in the places where “reconciliation” is used of humans and God, it is uniformly the case that humans must initiate that restoration by once again obeying the Torah (2 Macc. 1:5; 7:33; 8:29). But here in Romans 5:5–11 (cf. 2 Cor. 5:18–21), Paul declares that God is the one who initiated our reconciliation with him by sending his Son to die for us, even when we were still sinners.
Interpretive Insights
5:5 God’s love has been poured out into our hearts through the Holy Spirit. In 5:5–11 we meet with the third new-covenant blessing discussed in 5:1–11: love. The whole of the Trinity is involved in God’s love for the believer: the source of love is God the Father (v. 5a); the medium of love is the indwelling Holy Spirit (v. 5b); the proof of love is the death of Christ (vv. 6–11). Regarding the source of love, Paul’s Greek phrase is h? agap? tou theou (“the love of God”). Based on the flow of Paul’s thought in 5:5–11, it is undeniable that here the genitive (“of God”) is subjective (= God’s love for us) rather than objective (= our love for God). God the Father is the initiator of our salvation, even as he was for ancient Israel (Deut. 4:37; 10:15; see also Deut. 7:8; 23:5). It was the sheer love of God that called Israel into covenant with him, and it was God’s hesed—faithful love—that maintained the covenant with Israel. Yahweh did not disqualify Israel; Israel disqualified itself from being the permanent people of God by breaking the stipulations of the covenant. Now God’s covenant love rests upon the church, composed largely of Gentiles.
The medium of love is the indwelling Holy Spirit (5:5b). Many commentators rightly observe that the clause “God’s love has been poured out into our hearts” should be equated with the indwelling Holy Spirit. Thus, the Holy Spirit is the subjective medium by which God communicates his love for Christians. And not to be overlooked in this discussion is the well-known connection between 5:5 and the pouring out of the Spirit on the day of Pentecost, the inauguration of the new covenant (compare Acts 2:17–18 with Joel 2:28–29).
5:6–8 at just the right time . . . While we were still sinners, Christ died for us. In 5:6–11 Paul spells out the proof of God’s love for us: the death of Christ. Paul here draws on three aspects of Christ’s death: it is eschatological (v. 6), it is sacrificial (vv. 7–8), and it provides eternal security (vv. 9–11). The word kairos (“right time”) in 5:6 indicates more than ordinary “time” (chronos). Here kairos taps into the early church’s belief that the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ inaugurated the age to come, the new covenant (see Rom. 13:11–14). Jesus’ death spelled the defeat of this present age with its powerlessness before sin and has opened up the kingdom of God for sinners. Verses 7–8 indicate that Jesus’ death was sacrificial; it was “on behalf of” (hyper) sinners. There has been much debate concerning these two verses, whether Paul here differentiates a righteous person from a good person relative to the death of Christ. They could be synonymous, or the first could be a morally correct person and the latter a benefactor. Either way, the point is the same: most people would not die for a well-respected, upstanding person, much less for a sinner. But that is precisely what Christ did. He died for us when we were still sinners.
5:9–11 justified by his blood . . . saved from God’s wrath. Verses 9–11 highlight the eternal aspect of Christ’s death as it relates to the believer’s assurance on judgment day. As mentioned above, Paul uses the qal wahomer interpretive technique in 5:9–10 to the effect that if God has already accomplished the really difficult task of justifying/reconciling us as sinners to himself, then preserving the Christian spiritually on judgment day (“saved from God’s wrath” / “saved through his life”) is a relatively easy task by comparison. This message assures believers that they are eternally secure in Christ. In 5:11 the reader is returned to 5:1 in rejoicing that believers are reconciled with God, the flip side of justification. The first is relational, while the second is legal, but both convey the truth that Christians are accepted by God in Christ.
Theological Insights
Two important insights can be seen in Romans 5:5–11. First, God is the initiator of justification and reconciliation. It was his love for humanity that motivated him to send his Son to die for our sins. Second, the Christian’s eternal destiny is secure in Christ. Since God saved us as sinners, he will keep us as his children for all eternity.2
Teaching the Text
A message on this unit is “Romans 5:5–11: The Love of the Trinity.” This topic could simply use three subpoints from above: the source of love is God the Father; the medium of love is the Holy Spirit; the proof of love is the death of Christ. Augustine mused that love is at the basis of the Trinity’s relationship in that the Spirit proceeds from both the Father and the Son (much to the vexation of the Greek Orthodox Church, which argues that the Spirit proceeds only from the Father [see the sidebar]). Here in Romans 5:5–11 Paul provides us with perhaps the most explicit mention of the delineation of the loving roles of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit toward humankind. God the Father is the author of love. The love that he shares with the Son and the Spirit he also demonstrated by creating the world as the object of his love. In fact, God loved the world to the point that he was willing to give up his Son—that is, to withhold his love from his Son on the cross. The death of Christ on the cross for humankind obviously revealed his immense love for sinners. That love not only absorbed the sin of a hostile world but also was willing to suffer divine abandonment and hostility, even if only for a time. And the Holy Spirit is the one who transcends time in order to bring to the sinner’s consciousness the depth of love displayed on the cross, making the death of Jesus an existential reality.
Illustrating the Text
The Trinity shows the source (Father), medium (Spirit), and proof (Son) of love.
Hymn Text: “The Love of God,” by Frederick M. Lehman. Lehman (1868–1953) wrote this song in 1917 in Pasadena, California. The text is based on a Jewish poem called Haddamut, written in Aramaic in 1050 by Meir Ben Isaac Nehorai, a cantor in Worms, Germany. The cantor’s poem has been translated into at least eighteen languages. The hymn is a beautiful testimony to the love of God, using metaphors to illustrate, and is summed up in the refrain: “O love of God, how rich and pure! / How measureless and strong! / It shall forevermore endure / The saints’ and angels’ song.”
Art: The Trinity, by Lucas Cranach the Elder. A German Renaissance painter and printmaker, Cranach (1472–1553) is famous for his woodcut designs of the first edition of the German New Testament and for portraits of Martin Luther, who was a close friend. In The Trinity, a powerful painting in oil on wood, God the Father, crowned and robed as king, stands upright holding the limp, crucified Christ, on whose left knee is perched the Holy Spirit, in the form of a dove with unfurled wings. Around the edge of the painting are young angels looking on. It is an intriguing visual illustration (see photo).
Believers are eternally secure in Christ.
History: “A Confederate Soldier’s Prayer,” author unknown. This prayer is attributed to a battle-weary Confederate soldier whose body was found near the end of the Civil War. In his poem he expresses the irony that in response to everything he asked from God he was given the opposite, which created in him compassion and growth and blessing.
I asked God for strength, that I might achieve;
I was made weak, that I might learn humbly to obey.
I asked for health, that I might do greater things;
I was given infirmity, that I might do better things.
I asked for riches, that I might be happy;
I was given poverty, that I might be wise.
I asked for power, that I might have the praise of men;
I was given weakness, that I might feel the need of God.
I asked for all things, that I might enjoy life;
I was given life, that I might enjoy all things.
I got nothing that I asked for, but everything I hoped for.
Almost despite myself, my unspoken prayers were answered.
I am among all men most richly blessed.
Love is the basis of the Trinity’s relationship.
Book: The Shack, by William P. Young. This best-selling novel (2007) has captured Christians’ imagination in its portrayal of the three persons of the Trinity as in a dynamic, loving relationship with one another. The book has been commended by some prominent biblical scholars such as Eugene Peterson, who calls it The Pilgrim’s Progress for our time, and denounced by others, such as James DeYoung, who sees it as embedded with errors that strike at the heart of the gospel. Thus, the book’s take on the Holy Spirit’s relationship to the believer might be worth pursuing by way of discussion and education.
Moreover, the fellowship of the Trinity portrayed in The Shack taps into Augustine’s view of the filioque debate mentioned above in that the Spirit proceeding from the Father and the Son “completes” the Trinity. Furthermore, Augustine said that the Holy Spirit is the love that connects Father and Son. Thus it is that The Shack dramatizes what the Spirit as love linking Father and Son might look like and how the Spirit might be experienced by the believer.