| Coffman
Commentaries on the Old and New Testament
Romans
13
Verse 1
Let every
soul be in subjection to the higher powers: for there is no
power but of God; and the powers that be are ordained of
God.
The state itself, no less than God's church, is a divine
institution, existing by God's permission and authority, and
absolutely necessary for the continuity of the race of people
upon the earth; and it is the unqualified duty of the
Christian to submit to it, except in whose situations where
doing so would break the commandments of God. This cannot mean
that the shameful deeds, of evil rulers are ever in any manner
approved of God. It is not any particular implementation of
the state's authority which is "ordained of God," but the
existence of such an authority. Without such constituted
authority, the whole world would sink in me chaos and ruin.
Unbridled human nature is a savage beast that lies restless,
and uneasy under the restraint imposed by the state, being
ever ready, at the slightest opportunity, to break its chains
and ravage the world with blood and terror.
Civilization itself is but the ice formed in
process of ages over the turbulent stream of unbridled human
passions. To our ancestors, that ice seemed secure and
permanent; but, during the agony of the great war, it has
rotted and cracked; and in places the submerged torrent has
broken through, casting great fragments of our civilization
into collision with one another, and threatening by their
attrition to break up and disappear altogether. F1
Thus, Stanley Baldwin described the disastrous effects
which always accompany the dissolution of states and the
breakdown of authority. Paul's revelation that the state is
"ordained of God" and an effective instrument of the holy will
is not a new doctrine invented by him to ease the Christian
community through a difficult political period, but it is
essential element of Jesus' teachings. In this connection, a
little further attention to Christ's teachings in this sector
is helpful.
CHRIST AND THE STATE
Jesus said, "My kingdom is not of this world" (John
18:36). His kingdom lies, for the most part, within a
sector totally removed and separated from the secular state,
that institution being also "ordained of God" but charged with
a different function, that of preserving order upon earth.
Christ himself honored God's ordained institution, the state,
ordered the payment of taxes to Caesar (Matthew
22:21), declared that the authority of the procurator,
Pontius Pilate, was given to him "from above" (John
19:11), prophetically identified the armies of Vespasian
and Titus as those of God himself sent for the purpose of
destroying those evil men and burning their city, the city of
Jerusalem (Matthew
22:7), submitted to arrest, even illegal and unjust arrest
(Matthew
26:47-56), refused to allow Peter to defend with the sword
against such an outrage, and meekly accepted the death penalty
itself, which the state unjustly exacted, and which Christ had
ample means of avoiding (Matthew
26:53), but did not.
Christ never led a riot, organized an underground,
criticized the government, or took the part of the Jews
against Rome. He did not offer himself as an advocate against
society on behalf of any so-called victim of social injustice;
and, once, he even refused to aid a man who claimed that he
had been robbed of his inheritance (Luke
12:13). Jesus Christ was not a revolutionary in any sense
of that word today. Although it is true that his holy
teachings had the profoundest influence upon the course of
history, it was always as leaven and not as dynamite that his
influence worked.
Some of Jesus' parables had as their significant and active
premises the institutions of civil government, as exemplified
by the "king" who stood for God (Matthew
22:2), the legal contract of the householder who let out
his vineyard, and even the "unrighteous judge" who granted the
plea of the importunate widow, his unrighteousness in no way
preventing his appearance in the parable as analogous with
God! Had the state and its institutions been otherwise than
"ordained of God," it is unthinkable that Christ would have
borrowed such illustrations and made them analogies for the
conveyance of eternal truth. Christ's usage of such terms as
the officer, the judge, and the prison, in the Sermon on the
Mount (Matthew
5:25) also fits this conclusion.
All of the apostles understood and reiterated' Jesus'
teaching in this field. Both Paul (here) and Peter (1 Peter
2:13-17) emphatically underscored this teaching. Not
merely those laws of the state conceived of as "just laws" are
to be obeyed; but, as Peter said, "every ordinance of man" was
to be obeyed. In the New Testament, there was never any hint
of Christians organizing any kind of campaign to change or
nullify laws. That some laws were unjust was clear to all; but
Paul sent a runaway slave back to his Christian master (Philemon
1:17), and provided specific instructions to both masters
and slaves in his epistles to Ephesus and Colosse.
There is no suggestion here that the evil laws of Rome may
be justified, nor the evil laws of any other state; but, in
the light of Christian acceptance of such laws under the
direct guidance of Christ and the apostles, the conclusion is
demanded that the constituted government must be viewed as
"ordained of God" and entitled to Christian obedience. Over
and above all this, there stands the commandment of the
apostles that the public prayers of Christians should
constantly be directed to God upon the behalf of the state and
its lawful representatives, on behalf of "kings and all that
are in high place" (1 Timothy
2:1,2), to the intent that Christians might be permitted
to "lead a tranquil life in all godliness and gravity," thus,
by implication, making the provision of such privilege for
Christians being the state's intended function.
To those persons, present in every age, who reject the meek
and submissive attitude of Christ regarding earthly
governments, and prefer instead the belligerent posture of the
aggressive revolutionary, it should be pointed out that this
is not a new attitude but an old and discredited one. It
existed contemporaneously with Christ and the apostles. The
Jewish people preferred Barabbas the seditionist to the gentle
Jesus; but it must be added that when they finally got the
revolution they wanted, it terminated in a situation far worse
than what existed previously. The tragic results of taking the
route of Barabbas, instead of the way of Christ, may serve as
a classical example of the superiority of Jesus' way. In our
own beloved America today, those people who are flirting with
revolutionary schemes, if they should ever have their way,
shall certainly overwhelm themselves and their posterity with
sorrows, and far from attaining any worthy goals, will reap a
gory harvest of tragedy and disappointment.
Then, may it never be overlooked that the established order
in the civilized world, in spite of its deficiency, despite
the inequalities and injustices, despite its halting and
stumbling, is still far better than anarchy; and that, even if
some complete overthrow of established institutions should
occur, the new order, judged in the light of what history
invariably discloses, would be no better than the old and
would probably be much worse, especially when contrasted with
the magnificent and benevolent policies already existing in
our own beloved United States.
To that affluent host of Christians in present-day America,
let it be thundered that they must not now allow the submerged
torrent of blood, lust, and anarchy to break through. This may
be prevented by their love, support, honor, and prayers for
the present government, and by the necessity of their voting
in a manner consistent with their prayers, to the end that the
government may be able to survive the assaults being made upon
it by forces of evil; and may their diligence in this be
stimulated by the thought that if a breakthrough against the
government succeeds, none will survive it, least of all, those
who sought the tranquil life as God directed.
Present-day Christians are the privileged heirs of the
greatest earthly inheritance ever known in the history of the
world, a fact that angers Satan. Don't throw it away, or allow
some revolutionary to rape you intellectually and rob you of
it. And if, through indifference or tacit support, you should
ever contribute to the overthrow of present institutions, and
if you should live for a single day without the legacy you now
hold in your hands, an ocean of tears could not ease your
heartbreak or give you another inheritance like the one in
which you now stand secure. Keep it! We currently pass through
an era that glorifies the extremist; the seductive voices of
the far left are calling; stop your ears and bind yourselves
to the mast, like the sailors of Ulysses. Death and
destruction shall reward you if you turn your back upon the
teachings of the Saviour and cast in your destiny with the
seditionists. The Marxists, revolutionaries, Rousseauists, and
screaming agitators are not the friends of the people but
enemies. To trust them is to have your throats cut and to lose
your souls also.
Take up the whole armour of God that ye may be
able to stand against all the fiery darts of the evil one,
and having done all, STAND (Ephesians
6:13f).
Reject every form of extremism, and heed the apostolic
injunction to "Let your moderation be known unto all men" (Philippians
4:5).
Implications of the Christian attitude toward the state are
far-reaching and include the deduction that Christians may
serve in military or political capacity, vote, and engage
freely in the participation allowed and encouraged by the
state itself, the only restriction being that conscience,
being under God above all, should not be defiled. It is a
comment upon the extreme worthiness of our own government, as
compared to other worldly states, that many Christians do
share in the management of its institutions and hold offices
of public trust, the nation being far better off for the
presence of such citizens within the structure of its
political and civil institutions.
Verse 2
Therefore,
he that resisteth the power, withstandeth the ordinance of
God: and they that withstand shall receive to themselves
judgment.
Not merely sedition and violent opposition to human
government are proscribed for the child of God, but
"resistance" which is inclusive of all forms of opposition and
disobedience. Jesus Christ our Lord never disobeyed any law,
nor did he ever advocate civil disobedience, or any other kind
of disobedience. As he said, "I came not to destroy but to
fulfill" (Matthew
5:17). This verse teaches that breaking the laws of human
governments is equivalent to breaking God's laws, because such
laws are also of God's will and authority. The "judgment" in
this place refers primarily to the legal punishment of
violators of the state's laws; but the displeasure of God
regarding such violations implies that there will also be an
eternal accounting to God for such sins. As Moule said,
This is founded on the idea of law and order,
which means by its nature the restraint of public mischief
and the promotion of, at least the protection of, the public
good. "Authority," even under its worst distortions, still
so far keeps that aim that no human civic power punished
good as good, or rewards evil as evil; and thus, for the
common run of lives, the worst settled authority is
infinitely better than real anarchy. F2
Verse 3
For rulers
are not a terror to the good work, but to the evil. And
wouldest thou have no fear of the power? do that which is
good, and thou shalt have praise from the same.
It is a comment upon the effectiveness and success of the
state as God's ordained institution that such a statement as
this stands as truth. Aberrations may be catalogued and
failures noted; but, in the principal part, and in the
overwhelming number of examples afforded by history, Paul's
language here must stand as unchallenged truth. There has
hardly been a state in history where the private exercise of
Christian faith has been the object of governmental hatred and
punishment. The glaring exception to this is in the ruthless
Marxist governments which have appeared in the present
century; and, should that type of government gain ascendancy
in areas populated by Christians, there could well be another
age of martyrs like that which descended upon the first
century, shortly after these noble words were penned. The
truth of Paul's words here is not contravened, either by the
persecutions of the first century or the threat of
persecutions now.
Verse 4
For he is a
minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is
evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he
is a minister of God, an avenger of wrath to him that doeth
evil.
The word rendered "he" in this verse could be translated
"it"; but the translators are correct in making it personal,
for only a person could be spoken of as bearing the sword. The
person in view, therefore, is the policeman, the legally
constituted arm of human government, making the
law-enforcement men of cities, states, and nations to be every
whir as much "ordained of God" as any minister of the gospel.
A gutless namby-pambyism has come to characterize far too many
Christians of this age, who naively and stupidly suppose that
police departments are dispensable, that love can just take
everything, and that our own enlightened (?) age does not need
the old fashioned relics of barbarism, such as policemen and
jails. Let all hear it from the word of God, if they are so
blind as to be unable to read it in history, that the
policeman also is God's man, and that without him there is
nothing. The writer once invited two New York policemen into
his living room, gave them a cup of coffee, and read this
chapter to them, with the same exposition as here. Their
astonishment and gratitude were nearly incredible. One of them
reached for the New Testament to read it himself and said, "I
do wish that everyone knew this." The other spoke up and said,
"Well, it would help a lot if all the clergymen in our city
knew it!" We say the same. Much of the vilification,
harassment, and warring against policemen in the current era
has blinded some good people to the absolute indispensability
of governmental authority, including an effective police
establishment.
Capital punishment is clearly allowed to be a legitimate
prerogative of human government, by Paul's statements here.
Those states which have yielded to the naive "do-gooder-ism"
of the present era by abolishing the capital penalty will
eventually pay the price of their foolishness. Present-day
lawgivers are not wiser than God who laid down such penalties
and enforced them in the Old Testament dispensation. True, the
Decalogue says, "Thou shalt not kill" (Exodus
20:13); but the same God who said that also said, "Thou
shalt surely kill him" (Numbers
15:35). These commandments do not nullify each other,
because they speak of different things. Moffatt's translation
made the difference clear, thus:
Thou shalt do no murder (Exodus
20:13).
The man must certainly be put to death (Numbers
15:35).
Moffatt took account of the essential difference in two
Hebrew words, [ratsach] and [harag], the latter meaning "put
to death," the other meaning "murder." Murder is, of course,
forbidden; but the imposition of the death penalty by
government is not forbidden. Humanity will never find a way to
eliminate such a penalty completely, because it is the threat
of death alone which enables policemen to apprehend and
capture perpetrators of crime. Taking the gun out of the
policeman's hands is the surest way to make all people victims
of the lawless.
Verse 5
Whereofore
ye must needs be in subjection, not merely because of the
wrath, but also for conscience' sake.
There are twin reasons for the Christian's observance of
society's laws: first, as a matter of conscience, it is a sin
for him to break the law; and second, in order that he might
not incur the legal penalty of lawbreaking. The preeminent
consideration is that of pleasing God, as Peter expressed it,
"Obey every ordinance of man, for the Lord's sake" (1 Peter
2:13).
Verse 6
For this
cause ye pay tribute also; for they are ministers of God's
service, attending continually upon this very
thing.
Thus, all that was said of policemen in Rom. 13:1-5 is
likewise applied here to all civil servants and officers of
the secular state. Being part of the institution "ordained of
God," which is the state, they partake of the dignity and
authority pertaining to it, and are entitled to obedience,
respect, courtesy, honor, and the cooperation of all
Christians, who, in the discharge of such obligations, are
doing so "as unto the Lord," and not "as unto men," for such
is the commandment of the scriptures.
Verse 7
Render to
all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due: custom to whom
custom; fear to whom fear; honor to whom honor.
Had there been any doubt, up to here, that the total
establishment of human government is to be honored, respected,
and obeyed by Christians, upon pain of God's displeasure if
they fail, it would have been effectively removed by this
blanket inclusion of "all." Peter's words, already referred
to, are:
Be subject to every ordinance of man for the
Lord's sake: whether to the king as supreme; or unto
governors, as sent by him for vengeance on evil-doers and
for praise to them that do well. For so is the will of God,
that by well-doing ye should put to silence the ignorance of
foolish men: as free, and not using your freedom for a cloak
of wickedness, but as bondservants of God. Honor all men.
Love the brotherhood. Fear God, Honor the king (1 Peter
2:13-17).
Before leaving this section of Romans which details the
relationship of the Christian to his government, one other
consideration needs emphasis. Such is the attractiveness to
the masses of mankind of the idea of overthrowing governments
which they consider unjust or oppressive, that even Christian
ministers sometimes make a distinction between obeying "good"
governments and "bad" governments, actually suggesting in
their specious logic that it is all right for conscientious
and well-intentioned activists to go forth and pull down the
government if they think it is bad. No. A Christian is
prohibited from any such role, nor may he even "resist" (Romans
13:2), a conclusion that is based not alone on what Paul
wrote here, but also upon the fact that no Christian of the
apostolic age ever did anything remotely akin to pulling down
a government.
The great apostle Paul was proud of his Roman citizenship,
invoked its protection, and refused to pay a bribe to Felix,
despite the fact that a bribe was solicited and would have
procured his release from prison. As just noted, Paul
commanded Christians to obey civil laws, honor policemen as
ministers of God, pray for the establishment, and insisted
that the total arm of human government be respected, honored,
and obeyed.
Paul spent many years in prison, being hailed before many
judges; but there is no record that he was ever required to be
bound and gagged to preserve order in the courtroom. No
Christian, much less an apostle, ever organized an underground
for runaway slaves, edited a radical newspaper, bombed the
baths of the emperor, scrawled obscene slogans on the walls of
the palace (even though it was Nero's palace), nor disturbed
the public peace. Was it because they did not care for
injustices under such evil rulers as Nero? No, indeed. None
ever cared as much as they; but, inspired men of God, they
KNEW that extremist methods would have done no good, but would
have, on the other hand, done much harm in the multiplication
of human misery and sorrow.
Thus, the conclusion must be allowed, that if one considers
the vice, wickedness, and terror of that age, the consummate
wickedness of human government under the control of men like
Nero, Caligula, etc., coupled with the government's support of
such institutions as human slavery, witchcraft, and
prostitution - that if one considers all this, along with the
Christian community's total refusal to engage in any actions
of opposition or subversion against such a government, and if
it be further understood that the Christian's refusal to
obstruct or oppose such a regime was due to reasons of
doctrine and conscience, honoring the commandments of Jesus
and the apostles - then the conclusion is inevitable and must
be received as binding that it is a sin for a Christian to
engage in the projected overthrow of an earthly government,
despite any faults or injustices that might either correctly
or falsely be ascribed to the state they would overthrow.
The problem of military service and participation as a
soldier in any kind of a war is also related to the questions
in focus here; and those desiring to know further scriptural
teaching in that sector are referred to "The Ten Commandments,
Yesterday and Today," chapter 8.
Verse 8
Owe no man
anything, save to love one another: for he that loveth his
neighbor hath fulfilled the law.
Greathouse understood the first clause here as the negative
statement of the first clause in Rom. 13:7, thus referring it
to the obligations of custom, tribute, honor, etc. He said:
This means, do not continue in a state of owing
any of the obligations referred to in Rom. 13:7, but fulfill
them and discharge them. There is only one debt of which you
can never get rid - the debt of love. F3
The discharge of all debts and the keeping of all
commandments is summed up in the one word of a man's loving
others as he loves himself. This applies to all commandments
of a social or man-ward nature. There are other commands which
spring out of the love of God, this dual direction of human
obligation being demonstrated in the fact of there having been
two tables of the Decalogue. Paul made this nice distinction
by quoting only man-ward obligations in his next statement.
Verses 9, 10
For
this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, thou shalt not kill,
Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not covet, and if there be
any other commandment, it is summed up in this word, namely,
Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. Love worketh no ill
to his neighbor: love therefore is the fulfillment of the
law.
As noted above, Paul here adhered to the pattern of Jesus'
summation of all the Decalogue under the two headings of love
to God, and love to people (Matthew
22:34-40; Mark
12:29-31), the latter division being the one considered
here. The Christian life is realized, not by an item
tabulation of commandments kept or broken, but by a conscious
filling of the heart with love toward others, a fulfillment
being made possible only by the sacred enthronement within, of
the Holy Spirit.
That Paul consciously followed the teachings of the Master
throughout is observable in several particulars, as noted by
Lenski:
Already in connection with Rom. 13:1-7, we noted
that Paul is repeating the very teachings of Jesus with
regard to government and taxation; he certainly repeats the
Master's instructions here, ... has the same order of the
commandments as that found in Mark 10:19; Luke 18:20, where
the sixth commandment is named before the fifth. F4
This passage does not teach that if one loves his neighbor
he has license to break any of the commandments, but that
truly loving one's neighbor will positively restrain from any
sinful action against one's neighbor. This is profoundly true
and means that the first and uppermost concern of God is that
human hearts should indeed overflow with love to mankind, such
love making it impossible that specific evil deeds in the
social spectrum could be committed.
Verse 11
And this,
knowing the season, that already it is time for you to wake
out of sleep: for now is salvation nearer to us than when we
first believed.
This is eternally true of them that sleep from either
lethargy or sin, and it is positively not required in
understanding this verse to believe that Paul thought the
second advent of Christ was to be expected any day. True, he
said the day is at hand in the next verse; and from this, the
commentators have jumped to the conclusion that all the
Christians of that era believed the end of the ages was upon
them. Christ so mingled his prophecies of his final coming and
of the coming destruction upon Jerusalem (Matt. 24) that it
was nearly impossible to avoid thinking that the two events
would occur simultaneously, instead of being separated by many
centuries. "The day" in the sense of Christ's coming in
judgment upon Jerusalem was indeed "at hand," and only a
little over a decade removed from the time when Paul wrote
this letter. Paul used the words exactly as Jesus used them;
and there is a tremendous weight of material in Paul's
writings that shows he did not fall into the common error of
confusing the two events as to their simultaneous occurrence.
He knew, for example, that his own death would precede the
final judgment (2 Timothy
4:6), that a space of time sufficient to allow the
revelation of the man of sin would intervene before it (2 Thessalonians
2:3ff), and that the fullness of the Gentiles would come
in first (Romans
11:25), all of which knowledge on Paul's part made it
impossible for him to have considered the judgment day as
being just around the corner. His reference to Christ's
coming, and such expression as "the day is at hand," applied
to the impending destruction of Jerusalem and the judicial
coming of Christ in that epic event. There is no ground for
supposing that Paul was ignorant to the point of confusing the
judicial coming with the final coming.
CONCERNING SLEEP
Paul's mention here of a spiritual condition called
"sleep," and his call for people to awaken out of it, provide
strong emphasis upon the dangers of such stupor. The person
who sleeps is in a state of insensibility, not knowing
anything that is going on. A fire may sweep through the city,
a revolution rage in the streets, or a tornado bear down upon
him, but he knows it not. An assassin may slay him, a thief
despoil him, or any unexpected peril overcome him; and,
regardless of what might occur, he is vulnerable, asleep, in
danger. It is also a state of inactivity. The sleeper is doing
nothing, all activity being suspended. Further, it is a state
of illusion, the dreamer and the sleeper being identical as to
their state. Many a spiritual sleeper has delusions of
grandeur and glory which pertain not at all to him. Many a
soul has been lost while its possessor slept.
Illustration: On the night of September 2, 1757, when the
soldiers of the Marquis de Montcalm, commandant of the French
army of Quebec, retired to their tents, they slept the sleep
of insecurity. Only a few sentries were left to guard the
heights overlooking the mighty St. Lawrence river; but, while
they slept, the soldiers of General Wolfe scaled the heights
of the river and defeated the French the next morning on the
plains of Abraham. The Dominion of North America changed hands
while people slept! A thousand examples from history could be
brought forward to show what a disastrous thing sleep may be.
- Some sleep the sleep of Jonah, an unrealistic sleep. He
went aboard a ship putting out to sea, descended into the
hold of the vessel and went to sleep. Not even the mighty
storm which descended upon them aroused him. What a perfect
picture is that of a man who will not face reality! Many a
sinner is sleeping the sleep of Jonah. Sin is a roaring
tornado all around. It reaches out to destroy; it tosses to
and fro; but people give no heed. They are asleep (Romans
13:11; Ephesians
5:14).
- Some sleep the sleep of the weary, as did the disciples
Peter, James and John in the Garden of Gethsemane. They were
tired. That tremendous week in Jerusalem had been enough
nearly to overwhelm them. The tired fishermen of Galilee
were not accustomed to being stretched out in such an
endurance contest as that which marked the Lord's final week
in Jerusalem. They simply could not stand the strain and
went to sleep. The spiritual counterpart of this is seen
everywhere. People tire of the ceaseless struggle, become
worn out with the dull routine, and, numbed by the deadly
monotony, they fall asleep; but, while they nod Judas is
making a deal with the high priest; and, in a little while,
the soldiers will appear to lead the Lord away. Of such, one
can hear the Master say, "What, could ye not watch with me
one hour?"
- Some sleep the sleep of presumption, like Samson upon
the knees of Delilah. There was a man who knew all the
dangers, but slept anyway. He could always rise to the
occasion. He could always go out and "shake himself as at
other times," so he thought and was therefore contemptuous
of the danger. Many today sleep like that. They know the
folly and peril of the neglect of prayer, study, and
worship; they know how deadly is the sting of sin; but they
sleep. "I know! I know the truth!" they cry, but they sleep
anyway; and, while they sleep, there comes inevitably the
hour when it is too late, and for them, as for Samson, they
are led away to the blinding irons and the mill and the work
of an ass until life is ended. Why will not people wake up!
- Some sleep the sleep of the sluggard (Proverbs
24:30-34). These are they who are going to be saved
tomorrow, who plan to stir themselves in a convenient
season, who fully intend to obey the Lord, but not now.
- Some sleep the sleep of Eutychus, the sleep of the
injured. Eutychus fell out the third-story window during one
of Paul's sermons and was taken up for dead; but Paul said,
"His life is in him." Thus, it might be concluded that he
was merely unconscious due to the fall. It is of that kind
of sleep that we speak. Spiritually, some have sustained
near-fatal injuries and continue in a state of sleep. Gross
sin, terrible disappointment, the traumatic experience of
church division or some other catastrophe has left them
insensible through spiritual sleep, and they must be aroused
or perish.
- Some sleep the sleep of the foolish, the negligent, or
the careless. Jesus' parable of the tares sown in the wheat
emphasized that such a disaster took place "while men slept"
(Matthew
13:24,25). Someone just went to sleep when he should
have been on guard. Many sleep like that. Parents sleep
while the devil is seducing their children. Elders sleep
while error is advocated in the church. Some young people
sleep, thinking that they have many years in which to make
their peace with God; but, while they sleep, they are taken
away.
- Still others sleep the sleep of spiritual death, as did
certain Christians in Corinth. "Some sleep ..." (1 Corinthians
11:30). This, of course, is a euphemism for death, the
sleep from which one does not awaken until the sound of the
trumpet and the gathering of the hosts for judgment. Some
are already so far gone into such a fatal sleep that they
cannot hear the cries of loved ones, nor the message of the
gospel, nor the roar of the waves of Jordan. The sleep of
those Christians had been induced by their neglect of the
Lord's Supper and public worship, which shows how easily
people may slip into such a deadly sleep.
May all the sleepers be aroused by the call of the
apostle's words here. They ever stand, electric, upon the
sacred page:
Awake, thou that sleepest. Arise from the dead
and Christ shall shine upon thee (Ephesians
5:14).
Nearer than when we first believed
...
is far from being a statement that it was,
even at that time, "near" in the sense of soon. This is
invariably true of all, that salvation is nearer than when we
first believed. Every man's salvation is nearer as life
unfolds; and, for every man, it is sealed and assured, when
his faithfulness has been manifested even unto the end.
Writing to Timothy, in the last of his apostolic messages,
Paul said,
I have fought the good fight, I have finished
the course, I have kept the faith: henceforth there is laid
up for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the
righteous judge, shall give to me at that day; and not to me
only, but to all them that have loved his appearing (2 Timothy
4:7,8).
Significantly, even in that last statement, Paul did not
indicate that he expected the immediate second coming of
Christ. "That day ..." as discreetly used here, leaves the
time element of when it will occur absolutely out of sight.
Verse 12
The night
is far sent, and the day is at hand: let us cast off the works
of darkness, and let us put on the armour of
light.
Paul's imagery here still refers to sleepers waiting too
long to rouse out of slumber. They were such as had slept long
past the normal time of awakening. It was not merely dawn, but
daylight had fully burst upon them. This metaphor applied with
specific force to the lifting of the long night of pagan
darkness which had wrapped the world in Woe. Paul was saying
that darkness was lifted a generation ago; the glorious
daylight of the gospel is already shining. There are
Christians, of all places, in Rome itself! The old sins and
debaucheries of the pagan darkness must be cast off. The armor
of light was available for all who would receive and wear it.
That such was actually Paul's meaning here is evident from a
comparison with Eph. 5:14, quoted under Rom. 13:11, above,
where "Christ will shine upon you," does not mean at the
judgment, but right now! Thus, "day" in this passage, having
reference to the same time, means "at the present time, in the
gospel age."
The armour of light
...
is one of Paul's favorite metaphors for the
gospel of Jesus Christ, which he called the "whole armour" in
Eph. 6:13-17). In that exceptional passage, Paul made the
"whole armour" to be the truth, or the gospel of salvation.
Even in the piece-by-piece consideration of the armor, their
intimate connection with and identity with the word of God is
evident.
Verse 13
Let us
walk becomingly, as in the day; not in revelling and
drunkenness, not in chambering and wantonness, not in strife
and jealousy.
Becomingly, as in the day
...
suggests the beauty and adornment of
Christian behavior, which is of a kind not to be ashamed of in
broad open daylight, contrasting sharply with the Gentile
debaucheries usually committed at night, and therefore called
the works of darkness. Deeds that are becoming to Christians
are those of virtue, integrity, faithfulness, purity, and
love. It was becoming of Christ to fulfill all righteousness
(Matthew
3:15). Even the discussion of gross sins was forbidden to
Christians upon the ground that such guarding of the
conversation "becometh saints" (Ephesians
5:3). A further glimpse of the meaning of "becometh" is
seen in the word chosen to replace it in the various
translations. "Worthy of" (Philippians
1:27) and "befitting" (Titus
2:1) are two examples.
Revelling and drunkenness
...
refers to riotous and boisterous conduct,
such as undisciplined behavior that follows indulgence in
alcoholic beverages. Anyone familiar with this type of
behavior will testify to its obscene, profane, and repulsive
nature.
Chambering and wantonness
...
as retained in the English Revised Version
from the KJV, mean "debauchery and licentiousness" (RSV), or
"debauchery and vice" (New English Bible).
Strife and jealousy
...
refer to the animosities of men inflamed
with liquor, sated with vice, and living the lives of
debauchees. To say that such conduct does not become
Christians must have been intended by the apostle as a
meiosis, an understatement for the sake of emphasis.
Verse 14
But put ye
on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make no provision for the flesh,
to fulfill the lusts thereof.
Paul had already mentioned (Romans
13:12) the new investiture of the Christian, calling it
the armor of light; and here is a return to the same figure,
only here it is Christ himself who is to be put on by the
Christian. Barmby observed that
Christians are said to have already put on
Christ in their baptism; here they are exhorted still to do
so. There is no real contradiction; they are but exhorted to
realize in actual life the meaning of their baptism. F5
Provision for the flesh, to fulfill
the lusts thereof ...
refers to the investment
of time, preparation and money in such a manner as to allow or
facilitate the gratification of fleshly lusts. When one thinks
of the countless pleasure palaces, and other hideaways bought
and provided for no other purpose than that of facilitating
the fulfillment of fleshly lusts, the apostle's wisdom in
forbidding such investments to Christians is evident.
Footnotes for Romans 13
1: Sir Stanley Baldwin, Address: Truth and
Politics, delivered at Edinburgh University, November 6, 1925.
Modern Essays of Various Types (New York: Charles E. Merrill
Company, 1927), p. 213.
2: H. C. G. Moule,
The Epistle to the Romans (London: Pickering and Inglis), p.
254.
3: William M. Greathouse, Beacon Bible
Commentary (Kansas City, Missouri: Beacon Hill Press, 1969),
p. 253.
4: R. C. H. Lenski, The
Interpretation of St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans
(Minneapolis, Minnesota: Augsburg Publishing House, 1963), p.
799.
5: J. Barmby, The Pulpit Commentary
(Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company,
1963), Vol. 18 (ii), p. 392.
6: Kenneth
Wuest, op. cit., p. 206.
7: Charles Hodge,
Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans (Grand Rapids,
Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1968), p.
395.
8: Ibid., p. 396.
9: J.
W. McGarvey and Phillip Y. Pendleton, The Standard Bible
Commentary (Cincinnati, Ohio: Standard Publishing Company,
1916), p. 498.
10: David Lipscomb, A
Commentary on the New Testament Epistles (Nashville: Gospel
Advocate Company, 1969), p. 226.
11: R. C.
Bell, Studies in Romans (Austin, Texas: Firm Foundation
Publishing House, 1957), p. 138.
12:
Griffith Thomas, St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans (Grand
Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1970),
p. 341.
13: Moses E. Lard, Commentary on
Paul's Letter to Romans (Cincinnati, Ohio: Christian Board of
Publication, 1914), p. 391.
14: F. Godet,
Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans (Grand Rapids,
Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1970), p. 436.
15: Ibid., p. 437.
16: John
Murray, The Epistle to the Romans (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm.
B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1968), Vol. II, p. 137.
17: Ibid., p. 138.
18: R. L.
Whiteside, A New Commentary on the Epistle of Paul to Saints
in Rome (Denton, Texas: Miss Inys Whiteside, 1945), p.
256.
19: Richard A. Batey, op. cit., p.
157.
20: James Macknight, Apostolic Epistles
(Nashville: Gospel Advocate Company, 1960), p. 121.
21: William M. Greathouse, Beacon Bible Commentary
(Kansas City, Missouri: Beacon Hill Press, 1968), p.
248.
22: R. C. H. Lenski, op. cit., p.
703.
23: Moses E. Lard, op. cit., p.
362.
24: C. K. Barrett, op. cit., p.
218.
25: Richard Trench, Notes on the
Parables (Westwood, New Jersey: Fleming H. Revell Company,
1953), p. 164.
26: R. L. Whiteside, op.
cit., p. 241.
27: Moses E. Lard, op, cit.,
p. 370.
28: J. W. McGarvey and Phillip Y.
Pendleton, The Standard Bible Commentary (Cincinnati, Ohio,
Ohio: Standard Publishing Company, 1916), p. 473.
29: John Locke, Paraphrase and Notes on the
Epistles of St. Paul (Boston: 1832), p. 359.
30: Charles Hodge, op. cit., p. 273.
31: John Murray, op. cit., p. 302.
32: Charles Hodge, op. cit., p. 272.
33: The Emphatic Greek Diaglott, p. 531.
34: Charles Hodge, op. cit., p. 270.
35: John Locke, Paraphrase and Notes on the
Epistles of St. Paul (Boston, Mass., 1832), p. 331.
36: Emil Brunner, op. cit., p. 75.
37: James Macknight, Apostolical Epistles
(Nashville: The Gospel Advocate Company, 1960), p. 98.
38: Ibid.
39: John Locke, op.
cit., p. 332.
40: F. Godet, op. cit., p.
315.
41: James Macknight, op. cit., p.
98.
42: John Locke, op. cit., p. 332.
43: Emil Brunner, op. cit., p. 75.
44: Ibid.
45: W. Sanday, op.
cit., p. 237.
46: Moses E. Lard, Commentary
on Paul's Letter to Romans (Cincinnati, Ohio: Christian Board
of Publication, 1914), p. 277.
47: John
Locke, op. cit., p. 333.
48: F. Godet, op.
cit., p. 321.
49: John Locke, op. cit., p.
334.
50: Emil Brunner, op. cit., p.
77.
51: Sir Francis Bacon, in Bartlett's
Quotations, p. 109.
52: Moses E. Lard, op.
cit., p. 280.
53: Ibid.
54: Ibid., p. 281.
55: F. Godet,
op. cit., p. 325.
56: John Locke, op. cit.,
p. 334.
57: F. Godet, op. cit., p.
323.
58: W. Sanday, op. cit., p. 238.
59: Moses E. Lard, op. cit., p. 285.
60: John Locke, op. cit., p. 335.
61: Ibid.
62: R. L. Whiteside,
op. cit., p. 193.
63: H. C. G. Moule, op.
cit., pp.
242-243.
|
Printer friendly
version
HOME 
TOP