Reflecting on Romans (2)

THE GOSPEL OF GOD

Romans 1:1-4

Paul was “set apart for the gospel of God.” (1:1). Paul sees himself as “set apart.” This separation is to something, not from something. His calling and separation were to preach the gospel to the Gentiles (Gal. 1:15; Rom. 1:5). Paul was “set apart” for this purpose at birth [Gal. 1:15-16]; conversion [Acts 9:15]; and by commission [Acts 13:2]. It has the thought of dedication, especially in the Old Testament. It was used of the firstborn (Ex. 13:12); the first of the harvest which is to be given to the Lord (Num. 15:20); service by the Levites to the Lord (Num. 8:11); and the nation itself as God’s possession (Lev. 20:26).

One of the most important aspects of Paul’s teaching is the gospel. Paul has many different terms in referring to the gospel. Since in Romans the gospel is referred to numerous times by Paul and 60 times in his writings it is vital to see what he means by the term. The word gospel means good news or glad tidings and presents the message of God or His saving work. The verb (evangelizomai) means to announce or preach the gospel (1 Corinthians 1:17; 9:16, 23).

Paul uses this phrase, “Gospel of God,” six times (Romans 1:1; 15:16; 1 Thessalonians 2:2, 8, 9; 1 Timothy 1:11). Mark (1:14) and Peter uses it once (1 Peter 4:7). This has two possible meanings; both related: First, it could mean God’s ownership, or second, the giving of the gospel by God. A survey of the expression as used in Scripture indicates that this is a generic term referring to any type of good news given by God. A survey of the term reveals:

The preaching and message of John the Baptist (Mark 1:14). Popularly called the gospel of the kingdom. It is identified as the Gospel of God.

Paul connects the term with the gospel he was called and set aside for, which reached back to the promise of Jesus’ humanity and exaltation. (Romans 1:1-6). This promised was through the prophets and Old Testament scriptures, certainly refers back to the promise given to Abraham. 

Ministering the gospel of God to Christ and to the Gentiles (Romans 15:16).

Paul preached the gospel of God (1 Thessalonians 2:2, 9).

God imparted the gospel of God to believers (1 Thessalonians 2:8).

Peter uses the term (1 Peter 4:17) in the context of the rejection of the gospel of God.

We can safely conclude that the term does not apply automatically to any particular form of the gospel. It is a generic term. All gospels or aspects of the gospel can be said to be the gospel of God. He is the origin and giver of good news in all dispensations. It can be said that the gospel of God is the core of any gospel. The common core in all the uses of the gospel of God is Jesus Christ—his person, work, and exaltation. Two vital things need to be understood as to the term.

It does not rule out the fact that there can be different aspects or gospels under this general heading, such as the gospel of the kingdom; the gospel of grace; the gospel of peace, and others. He is the origin, communicator, and definer of the the different gospels and its aspects.

Each Gospel of God is determined or identified by the context or modifiers in the text. Gospels can have a different focus, forms, instructions, and limitations; but all are the Gospel of God and have a common core—Jesus Christ (cf. Mark 1:1; Rom. 15:19).

Dispensationally we could diagram the Gospel of God as:

GOSPEL OF GOD

TO ISRAEL                                                        TO THE CHURCH

Gospel of the Kingdom                                       Gospel of Grace Gospel of the Circumcision                         Gospel of Uncircumcision                                                                          Gospel of Peace

The Earthly Kingdom                                Church, the Body of Christ

The gospel of God opens and closes the book of Romans (1:1-4 cf. 16:25-27). The focus is on the gospel of God which Paul identifies as “my gospel.” It concerns the proclamation of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles (1:3 cf. 16:25). It is in accordance with, but not in fulfillment of the Old Testament (1:2 cf. 16:25). It is now directed to the Gentiles apart from Israel (1:5 cf. 16:26). This new avenue of the gospel is part of the mystery revealed to Paul (16:25; Eph. 3:1-10). Paul also uses the terms “the gospel of His Son;” “the gospel of Christ;” and “my gospel” to describes this gospel in Romans. 

The foundation of the Gospel of God^[1] is threefold. While some dispensationalists seem confused as to this foundation by either holding Paul preached the gospel of the kingdom during his early ministry; or that Paul’s gospel of grace was prophesied in the Old Testament. Neither is the case. There is a threefold foundation common to all the gospels of God (Rom 1:1-4 cf. 1 Cor 15:3-4; 2 Tim 2:7-8).

The Promise of Christ: “Which He promised beforehand through His prophets in the holy Scriptures” (Rom. 1:2). This could be understood as phase 1 of the gospel. It is to be understood as the promise given beforehand in the Word of God (i.e. Old Testament). He marks the source of the promise, with the Word of God being the channel by which the promise was made known. The promise is akin to prophecy. The clause “concerning His Son” should be understood with the subject of prophetic promise. The basis of the promise is found in Genesis 3:15. He is the star out of Jacob (Num. 24:17). He will be a prophet like Moses (Deut. 18:15). He is the fulfiller of the covenant made with David (2 Sam 7).

The Incarnation of Christ: “concerning His Son, who was born of a descendant (seed) of David according to the flesh” (1:3).^[2] The prophecy reaches its climax with the coming of the promised one. The word born or made (KJV) is the Greek verb which has the meaning of transition from one state to another.^[3] This is phase 2 of the gospel of God, which focuses on the Son of God becoming a man. This brings out His preexistence to His existence of manhood—the incarnation. He was born as a descendant of David. This involves his qualification as Messiah. He came as the seed of David. He became one of us taking on flesh which indicates His human existence with all it features—yet without sin.  

The Resurrection of Christ: “who was declared the Son of God with power by the resurrection from the dead, according to the Spirit of holiness, Jesus Christ our Lord” (1:4). This is phase 3 of the gospel. The resurrection is a public declaration of the deity of Christ. It also is in connection with the Holy Spirit (Spirit of holiness). The gospel rests on the cornerstone of Christ—who was promised, incarnated, and resurrected.

There is no gospel apart from these elements. Paul calls the death, burial, and resurrection the “first importance;” (first of all—KJV) (1 Cor. 15:3).    

The gospel gives three aspects in relation to the believer:

      It has the power to save (Rom. 1:2; 1 Cor:1-4).

It has the power to keep the believer secure (1 Pet. 1:5),

It has the power to establish (Rom. 16:25). The knowledge of the mystery is essential to establish us as a member of the body of Christ. The mystery aspect of the gospel was kept secret until it was made know through Paul (Eph. 3:2-3). This mystery explains that the earthly kingdom (preached in the Old Testament and Gospels) has not come and will not come until after the dispensation of the mystery is

Stam asserts:

“In the light of the Word of God as a whole, and especially of the Epistle to the Romans itself, it is clear that Paul here refers not to the contents of his gospel but simply to the fact that God had predicted that He had wonderful good news in store for mankind.”^[4]

---

[1]  God is a most important word in this epistle. It is found 153 times in Romans (once every 46 words), yet this is often overlooked. This is a book about God and His message and work on behalf of mankind. See Leon Morris, PNTC: THE EPISTLES TO THE ROMANS, [Grand Rapid MI, Eerdmans, 1988], 20.

[2]  Some scholars hold that verses 3-4 are part of an early hymn or confession formula quoted by Paul. I do not think that is likely. 

[3]  Leon Morris, TNTC: ROMANS, 42.

[4]   Cornelius R Stam,  ROMANS, 26.

INCARNATION

INCARNATION

One of the books that influenced me the most is J.I. Packer’s KNOWING GOD. I would like to share with you a few words from his work. As it is Christmas, we are not to simply celebrate a birth of a baby, but the incarnation of God.

“The baby born at Bethlehem was God made man.

The Word had become flesh: a real human baby. He had not ceased to be God; He was no less God ten than before; be He had begun to be man…

The mystery of the incarnation is unfathomable. We cannot explain it; we can only formulate it…

The New Testament does not encourage us to puzzle our heads over the physical and psychological problems that it raises, but to worship God for the love that was shown in it….

The key text in the New Testament for interpreting the incarnation is not, therefore, the bare statement in John 1:14, ‘the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us’, but rather the more comprehensive statement of 2 Corinthians 8:9, ‘ye know that grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that, though he was rich, yet for your sakes he became poor, that ye through his poverty might become rich.’ Here is stated, not only the fact of incarnation only, but also its meaning; the taking of manhood by the Son is set before us in a which shows us how we should set it before ourselves and ever view it—not simply as a marvel of nature, but rather as a wonder of grace.”

MERRY CHRISTMAS TO ALL!

Source: J.I. Packer, KNOWING GOD, [IVP, Downers Grove IL, 1973], 50-51.

Study of Philippians 2:5-11 (Part 2)

The Attitude of Service or a Servant 2:7-8a

This attitude is exemplified by His incarnation. This action was produced by His selfless mind-set. “But emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, [and] being made in the likeness of men.” The word “but” (alla) denotes a contrast. A contrast to what? It is clearly a contrast with Phil. 2:6. It has been suggested that it should be rendered—“instead of this.”^[1]—instead of pride for having the prize. The Greek text reads literally: “but Himself emptied.” The emphasis is on an action He took Himself. The word Himself is emphatic. This action is described as “emptied.” The Greek word for emptied is keno, meaning empty, to divest one’s self, abase one’s self. Volumes have been written on what this entailed and various answers given. The problem is clearly and correctly stated by Muller: “Of what did Christ empty Himself? This verse gives no answer.”^[2] It is a mystery. Calvin is correct in saying, “Christ, indeed, could not renounce His divinity, but He kept it concealed for a time, that under the weakness of the flesh it might not be seen.”^[3] It cannot mean He became less than God. To empty Himself of any of his attributes or character would make him less than God. Brown states: “The attributes of omniscience, omnipotence and omnipresence are in fact essential attributes of divinity. God would not be God without them.”^[4] We may not be able to comprehend it, but we dare not deny it—Jesus was fully God and fully man.

While Jesus did not become less God to become man, there are certain privileges of being God that were lessened or emptied when he become man. These are clearly indicated in Scripture:

·         His riches (2 Corinthians 8:9). “For we know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though He was rich, yet for your sake He became poor, so that you through His poverty might become rich.” Here again is a contrast between His preexistence and his incarnation. The contrast is clothed in the words, rich/poor. The riches of deity that is exchanged for the poorness of humanity. It is not His deity that is exchanged, but the riches. His riches are not defined. However, in giving up (or empting) Himself of these riches, He became poor so by that poverty we may become rich.

·         His glory (John 17:5). “Now, Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was.” The phrase “which I had” indicates that this glory was given up, and it was glory He had before His incarnation.

However, MacLeod points out that: “There is some truth to the idea that the Lord surrendered the use of the prerogatives of deity. But grammatically that idea is not related to the verb kenoo.”^[5] He favors the metaphorical usage of the word.^[6] The word implies status; this status is defined as being made in the form of a servant, in the likeness of man. Thus, the word is a metaphor for his humiliation, without implying a loss of character. “In other words, the phrase is intended to encapsulate for the readers the whole descent of Christ from highest glory to lowest depths.”^[7]

Notice the participle “taking,” it indicates an addition to what he had, not a subtraction. It explains how the emptying took place. He did not exchange deity for humanity. He added humanity to His deity. This is reinforced by two other participial phrases “having made” and “being found.” The three participle phrases define precisely the self-humiliation of Christ. In the incarnation Christ emptied or poured Himself out “by taking the form of a slave, by being made in the likeness of men, and by being found in appearance as a man” (2:7-8a). Motyer says thought clearly: “It is not ‘Of what did he empty himself?’ but “Into what did he empty himself?”^[8]  Even today we speak of an actor emptying or pouring out himself into his character, which indicates he put his own being into it so that his own attributes are rarely seen. This is the idea here. “The verse sets forth the coming of the pre-existent One into the world and His taking of our humanity upon Him.”^[9] “God dwelt among us” says John 1:17. He did so in the form of a servant, in the likeness of man, and in the appearance of men. God is wrapped up in humanity. Walvoord notes:

It is obvious that He gave up the outer manifestation of deity, but the act of assuming humanity and the form of a servant was superimposed upon His deity without taking away His divine attributes. He was like a king who temporarily puts on the garments of a peasant while at the same time remaining king, even though it was not outwardly apparent.^[10]

But let us not get lost in theological detail here and miss the point. Paul goes into these truths to show the attitude or mind of Christ. He had a mind or attitude of service. That is why he humbled himself and poured out himself into the form of a servant. He came to serve not be served. His mindset was to serve God and man. He did so by becoming man and dying for man, that through His poverty we may become rich.

The Attitude of Humble Obedience 2:8b

“He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross” (Phil. 2:8b). Obedience requires humility. It is the putting aside your own will to do the will of another. This part of the verse focuses on His humility and what he endured as a man though obedience. He humbled himself and became a man. The word found here is tapeinoo and means to humiliate; make small; to assign to a lower place or rank. He was fully human, being made lower than the angels (Heb. 2:5).  “The limitations and weaknesses of Christ’s human nature were not because He assumed fallen humanity, but because He assumed true humanity.”^[11] By Jesus becoming man, he takes on the attitude of obedience and decided to obey His Father completely (Heb. 10:7).  Paul explains that this obedience was “to the point of death.” It was the decision of Christ to humble Himself to that point. This is the climax to his selfless, subservient, and obedient attitude—the mind of Christ. It led to a sacrificial state of mind and the action of death, even the death on the cross.

Notice the word humble leads us back to the exhortation of Philippians 2:1-5, and ties in with verse 3. The mind of Christ as demonstrated in his incarnation and death on the cross forms the basis for the exhortation for us to “have this attitude.” As MacLeod notes:

Jesus’ supreme example of selflessness and obedience beckons believers to lead lives of selfless living and obedience. Seeing Him abandoning the glories and prerogatives of heaven, pouring Himself out for others, should encourage Christians to abandon their self-serving attitudes.^[12]

To be continued

---

[1]  Ibid, 25.

[2]  Muller, 81. Hawthorne,  85, likewise states there no basis for speculation “simply because it gives no clue whatsoever as to what it was that Christ emptied himself of.”

[3]  Calvin, 248.

[4]  Colin Brown, “Empty,” THE NEW INTERNATIONAL DICTIONARY OF NEW TESTAMENT THEOLOGY, 1:549.

[5]  MacLeod, 318

[6]  Metaphorical translations are found in the KJV—“made Himself of no reputation;” NIV—“made Himself nothing;” or “poured out himself,” which MacLeod seems to favor. Loh and Nida A TRANSLATORS HANDBOOK ON PHILIPPIANS, 58, notes that Paul uses the metaphorical sense elsewhere in the epistles. . Martin, Ralph P, CARMEN CHRISTI, 194: “The verb…seems to carry in this context a metaphorical as distinct from a metaphysical meaning.”

[7] Silva, 121.

[8]  Quoted by MacLeod, 319.

[9]  Martin, 195.

[10]  Walvoord, John F., EBC: PHILLIPIANS, 54-55.

[11]  MacLeod, 325 fn 101.

[12]  Ibid, 330.