What? A real post? Here goes nothing…

Paul, a servant of Christ Jesus, called to be an apostle and set apart for the gospel of God—the gospel He promised beforehand through His prophets in the Holy Scriptures regarding His Son, who as to His human nature was a descendant of David, and who through the Spirit of holiness was declared with power to be the Son of God by His resurrection from the dead: Jesus Christ our Lord. Through Him and for His name’s sake, we received grace and apostleship to call people from among all the Gentiles to the obedience that comes from faith. And you also are among those who are called to belong to Jesus Christ.

To all in Rome who are loved by God and called to be saints:

Grace and peace to you from God our Father and from the Lord Jesus Christ.

—Romans 1:1-7 (NIV)

Some friends and I are studying through the book of Romans, and as we zoomed through the first two chapters this week, I felt that I should unpack these first seven verses some more.

The first thing I notice when I read through this passage is Paul’s succinct summation of the gospel. In verses 2-5, he hits pretty much the major points of the “gospel of God” for which he is set apart.

• God promised this gospel in the past through His prophets in the Holy Scriptures. I don’t want to get into an apologetic discussion of this, so I’d refer to the book of Matthew for further reading – it details how Jesus Christ uniquely fulfills the prophecies made by the Old Testament prophets.


• These prophecies were regarding God’s Son. Again, refer to Matthew.


• This Son of God had a human nature. I see this as establishing that the Son of God was in human form – therefore discounting beliefs that might say that the Son of God was at all times spirit and never human. I honestly don’t know Paul’s original intentions in writing that, and I don’t really have time to expound on that either. If I’m way off base on this, please let me know.


• The Son of God was a descendant of David. This is a pretty huge one for those who knew the Old Testament Scriptures. In 2 Samuel 7:11b-16, God promises King David that He would establish a royal lineage through David, and that this kingdom would endure forever. So I see Paul saying here that the Son of God is of royal descent in human terms as well as by divine purpose.


• This man was declared to be the Son of God through the Spirit of holiness by His resurrection from the dead, and His name is Jesus Christ. That’s a mouthful to say. But I can’t think of a better way to say it. Even with the fulfillment of prophecy and the establishment of His lineage isn’t enough to prove this man as the Son of God. The resurrection is what makes it complete. It’s the power of God, the physical parallel to the new life we now have through Jesus Christ. Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 15 about how vitally important the resurrection of Jesus Christ is to this message. ”...And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith…” (1 Corinthians 15:14). Yes, Jesus came to die and save us from our sins, but it is in the resurrection that we have hope. For while a completely righteous man who dies for another’s sins is noble and strong, the resurrection from the dead is what gives true power to the message. And it is in this hope of a resurrected life, eternity with Almighty God, that people who claim identity with Jesus Christ preach to the world the paradoxical message of the cross.


• There is a call to obedience that is made to all people. There is no one in the world who is disqualified from hearing this call, the message of salvation. Later on in Romans Paul points out that God does not show favoritism. So this statement attacks exclusivism and other cliqueish behavior that have crept into the Christian church as of late. All people are worthy and deserve to hear this message of hope, death and resurrection. The responsibility of calling these people is on us. So when I’m too lazy or fearful to preach this gospel and to call others to this obedience, I am shirking my own call. Ouch.


• The obedience we are called to comes through faith. This is the last point I want to examine. I’ve always found this phrase to be rather odd, since most of the time I equate obedience with respect and submission, not faith. But this puts a new spin on the “drudgery” of self-discipline, following God’s commands, etc. Faith could probably be summarized as an act of the will, based on confidence established through the knowledge of one’s character in relationship. I realize that’s a somewhat incomplete definition, but I think it brings out most of the major aspects of faith. Obedience out of faith is much different than simple “blind obedience” in that there is a trust placed in a person’s character. I suppose it could be argued that there is some trust and assumptions being made in blind obedience as well, but I think it’s a bit different. Blind obedience, by definition, suspends one’s reasoning and thinking to carry out someone else’s will – there’s certainly the trust that the person issuing the orders is not evil, but there’s no room for questioning. I see the obedience that comes from faith as a reasonable choice – I choose to obey because I’ve considered the request and know that the person who gives the orders has been proven trustworthy and is asking me to obey for my benefit as well as theirs. There is a relationship between me and that person that is much deeper, much more intimate than a relationship I might have with someone I’m blindly obeying. I know I butchered that explanation, but hopefully that makes sense to the few people that still read this blog.

Well, that’s taken much of my morning to type up, and I’d better be getting back to the studying, so hopefully you all enjoyed reading this as much as I did typing it up. Later!