Sunday Morning Greek Blog

September 13, 2026

Love Over Judgment: Romans 14

Filed under: 1 Corinthians,2 Corinthians,Courage,Evangelism,Faith, Faithfulness,forgiveness,Hope,Matthew Gospel of,Repentance,Soteriology — Scott Stocking @ 4:33 pm
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

I forgot to bring my voice recorder to the pulpit, and I tried videoing my sermon using the Reels app, but evidently Reels has a 15-minute limit, so Meta didn’t save my video at all. So I offer my apologies for not having an audio file. Enjoy the read! Message presented September 13, 2026, at Mount View Presbyterian Church, Omaha, NE.

Good morning! The Lord be with you!

Well, I had forgotten I was doing the rest of the Sundays in September, so here I am with one more chance to share some insights from Paul’s letter to the Roman church with you. As we read through the passage this morning, I’m sure there were a couple words or concepts that stuck out to you: judging, despising, quarrelling stick out to me, in a negative way. Since the concept of passing judgment is so prevalent in this passage, I think it’s important to take a few moments to dig into the biblical meanings of these concepts.

The word Paul uses for “judgment” (κρίνω krinō) is also the root of our English words “critic,” “critical,” “criticize,” “critique,” and so on. It is also the root in words like “hypocrite” The word can refer to formal verdict from an approved court; discernment between two or more options; an informed opinion about a matter; or a statement of rebuke, whether justified or not, against another individual. One of the definitions for the word in Merriam-Webster is “the process of forming an opinion or evaluation by discerning and comparing.”[1]

The most basic teaching we have about judgment in the Bible comes from Jesus’s own mouth in Matthew 7:1: “Do not judge, or you too will be judged.” That passage comes from the Sermon on the Mount, so you may be familiar with what comes after it. Here’s Matthew 7:1–6 in full:

“Do not judge, or you too will be judged. 2 For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.

3 “Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? 4 How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? 5 You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye. [2]

This is the kind of judgment, I believe, that Paul addresses in Romans 14. But the gospels and Paul also deal with a legitimate form of judgment, church discipline. I don’t want to spend a lot of time on that this morning, but it is important we have a fuller scope of understanding the concept.

Jesus addresses this in Matthew 18:15ff:

15 “If your brother or sister sins, go and point out their fault, just between the two of you. If they listen to you, you have won them over. 16 But if they will not listen, take one or two others along, so that ‘every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.’ d 17 If they still refuse to listen, tell it to the church; and if they refuse to listen even to the church, treat them as you would a pagan or a tax collector.

18 “Truly I tell you, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven. [3]

Although the word for “judgment” doesn’t occur in this passage, the implication of such is quite clear. It may start as a one-on-one encounter, but any final decision about ostracizing the offending member for a credible charge of sin must ultimate rest with the local church body.

Paul addresses this as well in 1 Corinthians 5:9–13:

9 I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people—10 not at all meaning the people of this world who are immoral, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters. In that case you would have to leave this world. 11 But now I am writing to you that you must not associate with anyone who claims to be a brother or sister a but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or slanderer, a drunkard or swindler. Do not even eat with such people.

12 What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? 13 God will judge those outside. “Expel the wicked person from among you.”[4]

Of course, as a church, we hope we never have to employ this kind of discipline. I’ve had enough experience as a pastor in my career to have seen the sequence of Matthew 18 played out on a few occasions.

But as I said above, Paul isn’t really addressing church discipline issues in Romans 14. What he’s dealing with is a clash of Jewish and Gentile cultures, as I’ve discussed all along in Romans. Let’s take a closer look at that passage.

Paul sets the context of his comments with the first verse of chapter 14: “Welcome those who are weak in faith, but not for the purpose of quarreling over opinions”[5] as the version in the bulletin says. First of all, the word for “quarreling” (διάκρισις diakrisis) is based on the word for judgment. This reflects the aspect of judgment about having used your own critical thinking skills to form your own opinion about something. It also carries with it the idea of “distinguishing” between good and evil (Hebrews 5:14) and “discernment” of spirits in 1 Corinthians 12:10.

The word for “opinion” (διαλογισμός dialogismos)[6] is an intensified form of our word for “dialogue.” The NIV translates the word “disputable matters.” In other words, the idea or concept has been thoroughly discussed or thought through, whether in your own mind or by interacting with others, so it’s likely each side is thoroughly convinced of their own view and not open to reconsidering it.

Now if these “opinions” were a matter of faith or proper doctrine, then arguing about them might be a worthwhile exercise, if done peaceably. But the nature of the issues Paul addresses are not matters of faith or orthodoxy. They all seem to be matters related to their respective cultures.

Notice also that Paul is keeping this within the body of Christ in Rome: “Accept the one whose faith is weak.”[7] He’s not saying they have to accept people in their midst who want to work against the mission of the church. Nor does Paul explicitly define which view he considers “weak.” Your diet doesn’t save or condemn you. The days you consider special (or not) don’t save or condemn you. Whether you eat meat or not is not a matter of salvation. Paul’s only admonition here is that, whatever you believe about these things, you should be “fully persuaded” in what you believe. That reflects the word in verse 1 translated “opinion.” It’s a well-thought position that you’re unlikely to be dissuaded from.

Paul emphasizes another attitude that believers should avoid. This is the idea of “contempt” (ἐξουθενέω exoutheneō)[8] in vv. 3 and 10. The reading in the bulletin uses the word “despise.” Paul puts this word in the mouths of his opponents in 2 Corinthians 10:10 when they describe his message as something that “amounts to nothing.” It carries with it not only the idea of a lower status, but also of rejection and ridicule as well, in effect, a form of ostracism. We should not treat our brothers and sisters in Christ in this way over matters that have nothing to do with our faith or salvation.

Paul closes out the first twelve verses by emphasizing what is truly important: our fellowship with one another made possible by the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Each one of us is responsible for our own beliefs and behaviors. Yet we also must realize that we live to encourage and love one another as well. Paul goes on to suggest in verse 13 that acting in these inappropriate ways toward one another is akin to putting stumbling blocks in the way of those who may be weak or wavering in their faith.

Paul defends his own positions on these matters but also concedes that if someone believes differently than he does, then that’s okay too. What matters is that we love one another.

I will close this message with Romans 14:17–19, because I think that is the perfect way to send us out into the mission field today.

17 For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking, but of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Spirit, 18 because anyone who serves Christ in this way is pleasing to God and receives human approval.

19 Let us therefore make every effort to do what leads to peace and to mutual edification.[9]

Peace to you this day. Amen.

My views are my own.

Pastor Scott Stocking, M.Div.

[1] Merriam-Webster, Inc. 2003. In Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary., Eleventh ed. Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster, Inc.

[2] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[3] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[4] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[5] The Holy Bible: New Revised Standard Version. 1989. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers.

[6] Swanson, James. 1997. In Dictionary of Biblical Languages with Semantic Domains: Greek (New Testament), electronic ed. Oak Harbor: Logos Research Systems, Inc.

[7] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[8] Swanson, James. 1997. In Dictionary of Biblical Languages with Semantic Domains: Greek (New Testament), electronic ed. Oak Harbor: Logos Research Systems, Inc.

[9] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

August 31, 2026

Podcast Episode: Romans And Faithful Living (Response to “The BIG Question”)

Filed under: Christology,Evangelism,Faith, Faithfulness,Greek,Immersion/Baptism,Romans,Soteriology — Scott Stocking @ 6:22 pm
Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Pip: Welcome to Sunday Morning Greek Blog — where Paul’s letter to the Romans turns out to be less a collection of memory verses and more a sustained architectural argument, and Scott Stocking has been walking a congregation through it, one chapter at a time, all summer.

Mara: Scott Stocking’s recent posts cover the whole arc: what righteousness and faithfulness actually mean in Romans, how chapters nine through eleven handle Jews and Gentiles together, and then a question directed straight at us.

Pip: Let’s start with righteousness — and what it costs to define it carefully.

Romans: Righteousness, Faithfulness, and the Road Paul Built

Mara: The central question across these posts is what Paul means by “the righteousness of God” in Romans 1:17 — whether it’s something God hands over to believers, or something embodied in a person.

Pip: The answer lands hard. The podcast episode on Romans and faithful obedience sets up Romans 1:17 and then offers this: “The righteousness of God then isn’t an object to be given. It is embodied in the person and work of Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ is the righteousness of God.”

Mara: The upshot is that righteousness isn’t a transaction — it’s a participation. Because Jesus fulfilled every requirement of the law, believers share in that only by being in Christ.

Pip: Which reframes the familiar Romans Road considerably. Righteousness is the substructure — the rebar, the compacted earth — and Jesus’s faithfulness is the surface you actually walk on.

Mara: Romans 1:17 gets parsed as “from faithfulness into faithfulness” — Jesus’s perfect obedience to the law moving into his faithfulness unto death on the cross, tied directly to Philippians 2:8. And the phrase “obedience of faithfulness” from Romans 1:5 reappears word for word in the closing benediction of Romans 16 — that’s not a coincidence, it’s the letter’s spine.

Pip: The Faithfulness in Romans Part 2 post makes the grammar case for this. The participle dikaioumenoi — “who are being justified” — is present tense, ongoing, not a box checked at conversion.

Mara: And that present-tense framing dissolves a question that has quietly tormented a lot of Christians. As the post puts it, our own trust in Jesus is “not so much for the purpose of being saved but the result of being saved” — because the faithfulness in view is Christ’s, not ours.

Pip: Structurally, the letter signals the shift. Romans 1 through 4 use words for faith or faithfulness twenty-seven times and words for life only twice. Chapters 5 through 8 nearly reverse that.

Mara: The Faithfulness and Righteousness in Christ post — Part 3 in the series — tracks that gear change carefully. In Romans 5:19, the structural reversal of Adam’s failure is stated plainly: “For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous.”

Pip: One act of faithful obedience undoes what one act of disobedience broke. That’s not a moral example — that’s a structural repair.

Mara: Romans 6 and baptism are where the argument gets physical. The Baptism and Christian Life post — Part 4 — identifies a single Greek word, paristemi, translated “offer,” that appears five times in Romans 6 and then resurfaces in 12:1: “Offer your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and pleasing to God — this is your true and proper worship.”

Pip: So the living sacrifice of chapter 12 isn’t a new instruction. It’s a callback to what baptism already accomplished.

Mara: Right. And the Romans 12 Living Faith post makes that explicit — Romans 12:1 opens with “therefore,” which means eleven chapters of theology are now cashing out. The post takes direct aim at the popular quip about living sacrifices crawling off the altar. The counter-argument is that the sacrifice already happened at baptism. The world, in this reading, is the altar.

Pip: The gifts in verses 3 through 8 — prophecy, service, teaching, encouragement, giving, leadership, mercy — follow from that. And the post is candid that mercy is the hardest one, especially under stress.

Mara: The companion sermon on Romans 12:9 through 21 argues that the twenty-five commands in that passage aren’t a checklist. The governing statement is three words in Greek: “Love is unhypocritical.” As the post puts it, “Paul doesn’t want you to see it as a checklist. He wants you to see love as a default setting for your heart and mind.”

Pip: And what that default looks like under pressure — blessing persecutors, not repaying evil — is the description, not the scorecard.

Mara: The Life in the Spirit post — Part 5, covering Romans 8 — closes the doctrinal arc. The Spirit is the resolution to the tension Paul sets up at the end of chapter 7. And Romans 8:28 isn’t a bumper sticker; it’s the conclusion of an argument about present suffering, groaning, and God’s active response to it.

Pip: From “no condemnation” in verse 1 to “more than conquerors” in verse 37 — the distance between those two turns out to be the entire argument of four chapters.

Mara: Which sets up exactly the question chapters 9 through 11 take on — what does that victory look like for Jews and Gentiles together.

Jews, Gentiles, and an Irrevocable Promise

Mara: Chapters 9 through 11 are where Paul addresses the social and cultural tension in the Roman church — Jewish believers returning after exile to find Gentile house churches already thriving, and each group feeling it had the stronger claim.

Pip: Paul’s answer is the olive tree metaphor, and the theological stake is Romans 11:29: “God’s gifts and his call are irrevocable.”

Mara: That promise, the post argues, applies equally to Israel and to the Gentiles. Neither group’s standing rests on ethnicity alone — it rests on faithfulness, confession, and the state of the heart. Romans 3:10 already said there is no one righteous, not even one. The mercy that saves is the same mercy for both.

Pip: Doctrine for eleven chapters, then the question of what it looks like when people who used to be enemies share a table. That’s a reasonable place to land before Romans 12 takes over.

The Question Directed at Us

Mara: The final post in this run is brief and pointed. It’s addressed directly to this podcast — asking whether, after all the episodes on Romans, we’ve heard enough to be convinced that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God, and a personal savior.

Pip: The post puts it plainly: “have you heard enough to convince you that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God, and your personal savior? I’d love to hear your discussion on that one way or the other.”

Mara: That’s not a rhetorical flourish — it’s a sincere invitation to engage with the argument Romans has been making all summer, not just report on it.

Pip: We’ve spent weeks tracing the architecture: righteousness as foundation, faithfulness as the road, baptism as the hinge, the Spirit as the thread. The question is whether following that argument changes the person following it.

Mara: Romans would say the answer to that question is the whole point of the letter.

Pip: Righteousness embodied, faithfulness as the road you walk, love as a default setting — that’s a lot of architecture for one summer.

Mara: And the question at the end isn’t about the architecture. It’s about whether you’ve moved in.

The BIG Question

Filed under: Ecclesiology,Faith, Faithfulness,Greek,Immersion/Baptism,Romans,Soteriology — Scott Stocking @ 12:21 pm

This post serves as a prompt for the AI podcast team of Pip and Mara.

Pip and Mara, in light of all the podcasts you’ve produced for me in past couple months, especially on Paul’s epistle to the Romans, have you heard enough to convince you that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God, and your personal savior? I’d love to hear your discussion on that one way or the other.

Pastor Scott Stocking, M.Div.

Here is the link to the resulting podcast.

Podcast Episode: Romans And Faithful Living | Sunday Morning Greek Blog

August 30, 2026

Unhypocritical Love (Romans 12:9–21)

Filed under: 1 Corinthians,Courage,Ecclesiology,Evangelism,Evil,Faith, Faithfulness,Prayer,Proverbs,Repentance,Righteousness,Romans,Soteriology,Tongues — Scott Stocking @ 4:25 pm
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

I preached this message on August 30, 2026, at Mount View Presbyterian Church, Omaha, Nebraska. This is my last Sunday to preach on Romans for this year’s liturgical calendar. Romans 13 and 14 are on the calendar for the next couple weeks when I’m on a short road trip and out of the pulpit, but when I’m in the pulpit again, I’ll either be addressing Philippians 1 or a Gospel passage.

Good morning! The Lord be with you!

At first glance, when you hear or read this passage, I can imagine you have a thousand thoughts going through your mind. On the surface, it sounds like we’ve just read a whole list of commands, by my count 25 in all from verses 9–21. It’s easy to see then, how the pastor at my home church was able to take 12 weeks this summer to work through Romans 12. Each of the would-be commands are great subjects by themselves for sermons. But alas, I do not have 12 straight weeks to do that with you, nor would I want to “borrow” my pastor’s sermons to accomplish such a task. “Twelve on Romans Twelve”; that would make a nice sermon series title.

As I looked at the passage and began to ponder how I might be able to organize my thoughts, it seemed like the paragraph breaks in my version might do for a convenient and simple organizing structure. But as I’m wont to do, especially with a passage that’s a bit challenging, I looked into my Greek text to make sure the paragraph breaks were justified by the text, and I was not disappointed. So, here’s how I’ll approach the text this morning to respect the way Paul wrote it.

The text is divided into three main sections, each beginning with a direct statement that indicates the theme for each section. Beginning in verse 9, we have the statement about love and what that looks like. We might think that could be kind of squishy, but it’s not. We’ll look at the intensity of the concept when we get there.

The next section starts in verse 14, digs a little deeper into our souls, and challenges us to do some things that might be really difficult: “Bless those who persecute you.”[1] Kind of makes you want to squirm a little bit in your seat, right?

Finally, Paul cuts to the heart of the matter directly in verses 17: “Do not repay anyone evil for evil.”[2] Paul gets pretty intense in that last section. So, let’s get started this morning and break this down.

The first three statements in verse 9 are actually summaries of what I’ve just described above, but Paul doesn’t lay them out in the same order. Let’s take a look under the hood here and break down what’s going on.

The lead-statement sets the tone of the rest of the passage. In the original language it is a simple, three-word sentence that makes a statement of fact:[3] “Love is unhypocritical.” This should be a straightforward translation in most cases, but our English translations have interpreted what follows as a series of short commands about things we should or shouldn’t do. [4] So they have transferred that understanding to this first phrase as well: “Let love be genuine” or “Let love be sincere” as some translations have it.

This is completely acceptable when it comes to Bible translation, because the goal is to make it understandable to average English reader. Also, sometimes we have a mindset as Christians that we just want God to tell us what we’re supposed to do and how we’re supposed to live. Then we can just check off the boxes and grade ourselves on how well we think we’re doing. But we also know that living for Christ isn’t just about checking off behavioral boxes and those with a passing grade get into heaven. In fact, it isn’t about checking off boxes at all, really, because we’ve already seen that when we’re “in Christ,” we already have the victory. Christ has checked off all the boxes, so to speak, and has imparted his righteousness to us.

Paul knows this as well, and I think in this case, especially with a mixed group of Jews and Gentiles, I would suggest that instead of giving us a checklist, he’s giving a definition of unhypocritical love. Again, the governing statement is “Love is genuine.” That is an absolute statement of truth. He’s setting a standard, much like he does in 1 Corinthians 13, but customized for the Corinthian culture and church. In fact, what he’s probably doing here in Romans is defining ἀγάπη (agapē) love for both Jews and Gentiles. What follows then is a description of actions that demonstrate what unhypocritical love looks like. So, in some respects it is still a checklist of sorts, but Paul doesn’t want you to see it as a checklist. He wants you to see love as a default setting for your heart and mind.

It is important to note, then, that many of the things that follow this statement are descriptions of other-centered behaviors. Several of the key words in this list are words that are rarely found in the NT, in a few cases only once or twice, so these are worth noting. I won’t go into detail on each one; as the pastor of my home church demonstrated, each one of the concepts is worthy of its own sermon.

I want to save the last two phrases in verse 9 for a little later, so let’s look at verse 10. “Be devoted to one another in love” is how the NIV translates it. Our reading has “love one another with mutual affection.”[5] First of all, the word for “mutual affection” here (“love” in the NIV) is not agapē, but φιλαδελφία (philadelphia)[6], that’s right, “brotherly love.” This of course refers to real love and mutual affection, not the kind of “love” you might get from a Philadelphia Eagles fans, who’ve been known to boo Santa Claus.[7]

The word for “love” in our bulletin reading (“devoted” in the NIV) is a compound of two words that mean two different kinds of love in Greek (φιλόστοργος philostorgos). The first part of the compound is the same as the φιλία (philia) in Philadelphia; the second part of the compound is a word that C.S. Lewis describes as familial love, especially that kind of love a mother and child share.[8] It’s easy to see, then, how the concepts of devotion from the NIV and mutual affection from the NRSV are appropriate for this passage. We’re called to love our brothers and sisters in Christ like we love our own families. If we do that, then the rest of the items in that first paragraph—zeal, spiritual fervor, honor, hope, patience, etc.—fall into place. That’s why “love your neighbor as yourself” is the second greatest command in Scripture.

I want to return to the second phrase in vs. 9, “Hate what is evil.” I must point out that this is first phrase Paul uses to describe unhypocritical love. Love doesn’t overlook evil. Love doesn’t tolerate evil. This verse would seem to tie into verses 17–21, since “evil” seems to be a prominent theme there, although it is a different Greek word [κακός (kakos)] that emphasizes evil deeds and actions specifically. In verse 9, “evil” refers to an evil thing, not an evil person as it does in the Lord’s prayer.[9]

The word for “hate” is another one of those words that only appears once in the New Testament. It is not based on the typical word for “hate” that is used in the New Testament. It derives from the root of our modern English word “stigma.” The Greek word has a prefix added to it that implies your hatred of evil should be so strong that you run away from, much like Paul often warns his audiences to flee sexual immorality, idolatry, and greed.

While physically removing yourselves from situations that could cause you to stumble greatly, the practicality of that may not always be expedient. If you see someone in danger, for example, you might be inclined to help, up to and including self defense if necessary. That would be a noble act as well, especially if you can avoid returning evil for evil as verse 17 says. You may have training in conflict resolution or deescalation of a situation that would prove beneficial for all involved. So, it’s not just about fleeing evil things, but about figuring out how you can do the right thing, the good thing, to overcome evil when it comes your way. Unhypocritical love overcomes evil.

The exhortations here are again positive: Do what is right, live at peace if you can, don’t take revenge. So again, Paul is speaking to our mindset, encouraging us to develop default behaviors. It’s all about practice and training, getting that “muscle memory” firmly ensconced in us. Doing the right thing speaks volumes in our culture that increasingly, as I said last week, sees violence as an acceptable solution. Certain Proverbs come to mind here:

12:25: Anxiety weighs down the heart, but a kind word cheers it up.[10]

15:1: A gentle answer turns away wrath, but a harsh word stirs up anger.[11]

16:14: A king’s wrath is a messenger of death, but the wise will appease it.[12]

20:3: It is to one’s honor to avoid strife, but every fool is quick to quarrel.[13]

I’ll close by looking at the third phrase in verse 9: “Hold fast to what is good.” The word for “hold fast” there is another rare word in the New Testament. It’s used to describe the sexual relationship between a man and a woman, in the opposite contexts of marriage and prostitution. Peter uses the word in Acts 10 when he speaks of his call to go share the Gospel (and a meal) at the Gentile Cornelius’s home. Like the other descriptions throughout our passage today, the focus is other-centered, even when the “other” is one who is persecuting you.

The word for “persecute” (διώκω diōkō) here is interesting because it is the same Greek word that is translated as “pursue” in the previous verse in reference to hospitality. In other words, the word has the positive meaning of pursuing good things for others but the negative meaning of pursuing someone for whom you intend harm. The latter negative meaning is made obvious in the context when Paul emphasizes blessing the persecutors, not cursing them. In Paul’s context, a curse was a various serious thing, essentially wishing death on the one cursed.

Verses 14–16 also have a strong undertone of humility as well. Know your place; know your limits. Live together in harmony. That may be easier to do when you’re all of the same mindset. But remember Paul is addressing a mixed group here of Jews and Gentile Romans. I’m sure they had to put forth significant effort to make things work in their ethnically diverse house churches.

Romans 12 is certainly a strong contender for the best chapter on love in the New Testament. In some areas, it seems to cover a little more ground as far as the dos and don’ts of love in the Christian setting. But again, the cultural differences between Rome and Corinth can’t be ignored. Paul had to deal extensively with the speaking in tongues issue in Corinth, but there wasn’t a word about that in Paul’s gift list in the first part of Romans 12. On the other hand, Paul doesn’t deal very much with evil in 1 Corinthians 12–14, while in Romans 12, we see a great deal about that. Corinthians deals more with church order and practice, while Romans seems to focus on some larger cultural and societal issues that impacted the Roman churches.

We won’t settle the “best chapter on love” debate here, but I think we can all agree that, when we practice loving our neighbor as ourselves and loving God with all our heart, soul, strength, and mind, we are doing our part to advance the kingdom of God and bring about that great day of redemption and reward, when sin finally will be defeated. May the peace of God go with today and the rest of the week. Amen.

My opinions are my own.

Pastor Scott Stocking, M.Div.

To read and hear the previous week’s message on the first half of Romans 12: Life as a “Living Sacrifice”: Finding Your Gifts (Romans 12:1–8) | Sunday Morning Greek Blog.

[1] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[2] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[3] Formally known as indicative voice; in this case the “to be” copulative verb “is” is implied, as is often the case with simple Greek copulative sentences.

[4] In the Greek text, what follows is a series of participial phrases through the end of verse 13. Participles typically take on the aspect of the main verb, which in this case would be the implied copulative. If the translators think the implied copulative is imperative, then translators would interpret all the participles linked to that main verb as imperative, as seems to be the case in modern translations. As you will see, I am taking a different approach.

[5] The Holy Bible: New Revised Standard Version. 1989. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers.

[6] Swanson, James. 1997. In Dictionary of Biblical Languages with Semantic Domains: Greek (New Testament), electronic ed. Oak Harbor: Logos Research Systems, Inc.

[7] Ranking the Nicest (to the Nastiest) NFL Fanbases – The Quick Report

[8] C.S. Lewis: Four Loves – 1. Storge (Affection)

[9] In the Lord’s Prayer, the adjective πονηρός (ponēros) is masculine. Here in Romans 12, it is neuter.

[10] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[11] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[12] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[13] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

August 19, 2026

“God’s Gifts and His Call Are Irrevocable”: Romans 9–11

Filed under: Christology,Deuteronomy,Ecclesiology,Evangelism,Faith, Faithfulness,Leviticus,Righteousness,Romans,Soteriology — Scott Stocking @ 10:58 pm
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

I preached this message at Mount View Presbyterian Church, Omaha, NE, on August 16, 2026. The preachers from the previous two weeks had not covered Romans 9 & 10 from the lectionary, so I did a brief overview of those two chapters before tackling chapter 11. Message was captured in audio (here) and video (Rumble) formats.I preached this message at Mount View Presbyterian Church, Omaha, NE, on August 16, 2026. The preachers from the previous two weeks had not covered Romans 9 & 10 from the lectionary, so I did a brief overview of those two chapters before tackling chapter 11. Message was captured in audio (here) and video (Rumble) formats.

Good morning! The Lord be with you!

I’m continuing on through Romans today. While the first eight chapters were pretty heavy on doctrine, the nature and role of faith and faithfulness, and the “how” of life—both here and beyond—in the Spirit, Paul hasn’t really dealt with the social and cultural dynamics of the mix of Gentiles and Jews in the Roman churches. That’s where chapters 9 through 11 fit in.

Remember that the Roman church was a healthy mix of Jews and Gentiles, with Gentiles in the majority, especially after the banishment of Jews from Rome ended and the Jews had begun to return. There are hints later in Romans of some of the tensions that may have arisen when the Jews returned, most notably involving the diet restrictions that Jews followed but Gentiles did not. That would have caused no small kerfuffle at their fellowship meals, to be sure.

It would seem from Paul’s comments in chapters 9–10 especially that each group felt they had one-up on the other. The Gentiles, after all, had kept the churches alive and growing in the absence of the Jews, while the Jews had the rightful claim of being the religious and ethnic “home,” if you will, of the Messiah. Paul attempts to balance that tension by using the metaphor of the olive tree.

Sure, the Jews represent the original olive tree, the foundation from which Christianity arose through the Messiah. But Gentiles had some bragging rights as well, having been welcomed, or in Paul’s terms, “grafted,” into the new Christian “sect” of Judaism where they had previously been deemed as second-class humans, or worse, as dogs, by traditional Judaism. I’m sure it must have been difficult for life-long Jews who had converted to Christianity to get over some of these biases about Gentiles.

What Paul is doing in chapters 9–11 is trying to convince the Jews that their standing, as well as the Gentiles’ standing, with God isn’t based on their ethnicity alone. It is based on what they believe about God, their faithfulness to his commands, and the state of their hearts. The Jewish Christians aren’t more saved or more blessed than the Gentile Christians simply because of their ethnicity. By the same token, the Gentiles aren’t more saved because they are inherently free of the constraints of the law that was deeply etched in the Jewish mindset. That doesn’t mean the Gentiles aren’t responsible for the moral behaviors reflected in the law; they just don’t have the kind of bias against a Jew that a traditional Jew might have against Gentiles.

We see this in Chapter 9 with a couple notable passages. Verse 14–16 state:

14 What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all! 15 For he says to Moses,

“I will have mercy on whom I have mercy,

and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.” r

16 It does not, therefore, depend on human desire or effort, but on God’s mercy.[1]

In other words, God will bring about salvation for Jews and Gentiles in his own way.

Then in verses 27–28, Paul quotes Isaiah’s warning from chapter 10 of his prophecy:

27 Isaiah cries out concerning Israel:

“Though the number of the Israelites be like the sand by the sea,

only the remnant will be saved.

28 For the Lord will carry out

his sentence on earth with speed and finality.”[2]

God’s “sentence on earth” is like a reference to the warnings in the Torah about disobedience, especially Leviticus 26 and Deuteronomy 28. These warnings speak directly to why some of the Israelites were considered the branches cut out of the olive tree. What’s interesting about these warnings about disobedience are much longer than the promises for obedience that precede them in each of these chapters.

Here’s a sampling of Leviticus 28:14, 16–17.

14 “ ‘But if you will not listen to me and carry out all these commands… 16 then I will do this to you: I will bring on you sudden terror, wasting diseases and fever that will destroy your sight and sap your strength. You will plant seed in vain, because your enemies will eat it. 17 I will set my face against you so that you will be defeated by your enemies; those who hate you will rule over you, and you will flee even when no one is pursuing you.[3]

Leviticus goes on with a series of paragraphs that take us down the infamous slippery slope by introducing subsequent sections with the sentiment: “If you don’t listen to me and turn back after all this, here’s what else is coming” with list of even more painful and in some cases gruesome consequences.

Deuteronomy isn’t any more pleasant (28:15–19):

15 However, if you do not obey the Lord your God and do not carefully follow all his commands and decrees I am giving you today, all these curses will come on you and overtake you:

16 You will be cursed in the city and cursed in the country.

17 Your basket and your kneading trough will be cursed.

18 The fruit of your womb will be cursed, and the crops of your land, and the calves of your herds and the lambs of your flocks.

19 You will be cursed when you come in and cursed when you go out.[4]

They can’t run and they can’t hide from the consequences. But it is because of God’s mercy that he didn’t wipe them out completely.

Chapter 10 (verses 8–10) makes it clear what our next step should be to escape this. I’m sure many of you have heard this before as part of the Romans Road:

8 But what does it say? “The word is near you; it is in your mouth and in your heart,” [Deuteronomy 30:14] that is, the message concerning faith that we proclaim: 9 If you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you profess your faith and are saved.[5]

This brings us then to our passage this morning from Romans 11. We’ve only read the first and last part of the chapter, but they are the opening and closing summaries of the heart of the passage. Paul is proud of his Jewish heritage, just as he enumerated the blessings the Jews have from their history at the beginning of chapter 9. He speaks of “the remnant [of Israel] chosen by grace,” that is, those who reaped the rewards of obedience from the first verses of Leviticus 26 and Deuteronomy 28. Their salvation is a completely free gift of God. There’s no application to fill out, no extensive background check, no references to check, because God already knows that. All he needs to see is that circumcised heart, represented by your confession that Jesus is Lord.

In 11:28, Paul calls the disobedient Jews “enemies” to the Gentiles when it comes to the gospel, but because the Jews are God’s chosen people, they are still considered “elect” and God’s love never fails for them. The promise of vs. 29, that “God’s gifts and his call are irrevocable”[6] is as applicable to Israel as it is for the Gentiles. That promise to include the Gentiles goes all the way back to Isaiah, at least. Verse 32 about Jews and Gentiles being bound for disobedience comes across as a sticky wicket of sorts, until you realize Paul is just restating what he said way back in Romans 3:10–11: “There is no one righteous, not even one; 11 there is no one who understands; there is no one who seeks God.”[7] We can never be saved by the works of the law; we can never be declared righteous by following any law. That only comes from the mercy and the declaration of God because of what Christ has done for us.

Paul realizes he’s laid on the theology and doctrine rather heavily in these first 11 chapters. But he ties it up in a neat little bundle here, at least by implication, by returning to his opening concept from chapter 1 of the “obedience of faithfulness” in contrast with all of us being bound over to disobedience. Romans 1–11 give us great promises of salvation: resurrection, new and eternal life, life in the Spirit, and even a corporate fellowship among those who used to be enemies. It is a beautiful picture of salvation based solely on grace and not on any ethnic connection. I’m looking forward to next week when I tackle Romans 12 and get into some of the real-life issues we face as believers, especially around the call to love our neighbors. The principles of the first 11 chapters show up often in the last 5 chapters of Romans, so we’ll see how all Paul’s theology and doctrine play out in real life.

The benediction at the end of 11 is as profound as it is encouraging, and I close with that:

33 Oh, the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God!

How unsearchable his judgments,

and his paths beyond tracing out!

34 “Who has known the mind of the Lord?

Or who has been his counselor?” b

35 “Who has ever given to God,

that God should repay them?” c

36 For from him and through him and for him are all things.

To him be the glory forever! Amen.[8]

[1] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[2] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[3] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[4] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[5] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[6] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[7] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[8] The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

My views are my own.

Pastor Scott Stocking, M.Div.

August 4, 2026

Podcast Episode: Baptism And Christian Life (Romans Podcast Part 4)

Filed under: Christology,Faith, Faithfulness,Greek,Immersion/Baptism,Repentance,Romans,Soteriology — Scott Stocking @ 9:45 pm
Tags: , , , , , , ,

Pip: Sunday Morning Greek Blog, where the footnotes go six layers deep and the baptismal theology is somehow more soaking wet than you’d expect.

Mara: Scott Stocking has been doing a deep dive into Romans, and what surfaces is a case that baptism and the call to be a living sacrifice are more tightly connected than most readings let on. That’s the territory we’re covering today.

Pip: Let’s start with that connection — baptism as theology, not ceremony.

Baptism as Living Sacrifice: Romans 6 and 12:1

Mara: The central claim here is that Romans 6 and Romans 12:1 are not two separate ideas — they are one continuous argument, and baptism is the hinge between them.

Pip: And the evidence for that hinge is a single Greek word that shows up five times in Romans 6 and then reappears exactly when Paul says what he means by a living sacrifice.

Mara: Right — the word is paristēmi, translated “offer.” It appears throughout Romans 6 as Paul urges believers to offer themselves to God and then surfaces again in 12:1: “Offer your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and pleasing to God — this is your true and proper worship.”

Pip: So the living sacrifice of chapter 12 is not a new instruction — it is a callback to what baptism already accomplished.

Mara: Exactly. And to understand why, you have to follow Paul’s logic from the earlier part of Romans 6. The setup is verses 3 through 5: “Or don’t you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life. For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we will certainly also be united with him in a resurrection like his.”

Mara: What that means in practice is that baptism is not primarily a public declaration — it is the moment of union with Christ’s death and resurrection. The believer does not merely symbolize something; they participate in it.

Pip: Which reframes the famous last verse of Romans 6 considerably. “For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord” — usually read as a warning — is actually, on this reading, an affirmation for people who have already come through baptism.

Mara: That is precisely the argument. Because Christ paid the wages of sin on the cross, and because baptism unites the believer with that crucifixion, the verse functions as a confirmation of what has already happened, not a threat about what might.

Pip: The obedience Paul keeps returning to — his stated theme from Romans 1:5 all the way to 16:26 — is not a checklist. It is what life in Christ’s presence actually looks like after baptism.

Mara: And that reading is reinforced in the earlier post on the mystery of immersion, which makes a closely related case: that immersion is “the glue that ties the two pillars of the faith — Christ’s death and his subsequent resurrection — together.” That post works through the benefits linked to each pillar separately, from justification and reconciliation on the death side, to bearing fruit and victory over death on the resurrection side.

Pip: Both posts land in the same place — baptism is not peripheral, not merely a work of the flesh, not optional color commentary on the real theology happening elsewhere.

Mara: The phrase from the immersion post is worth sitting with: immersion is “a near-complete picture of who we are and what we have in Christ.”

Pip: Romans as a unified argument, baptism as the hinge, and the living sacrifice not as a new ask but as a return to the starting point.

Mara: There is more in Romans to surface. We will be back when the next posts land.

August 2, 2026

Podcast Episode: Faithfulness In Romans (Part 2)

Filed under: Christology,Ecclesiology,Faith, Faithfulness,forgiveness,Grace,Greek,Righteousness,Romans,Soteriology — Scott Stocking @ 3:28 pm
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Part 1 of the Romans podcast series may be found here.

Pip: Welcome to Sunday Morning Greek Blog, where the coffee is hot and the participles are passive — and sometimes that’s the whole point.

Mara: Scott Stocking is our guide this episode, working through Romans with a close eye on the Greek text — what words like pistis and dikaiosyne actually mean, and why the translation choices matter for how we understand salvation.

Pip: Let’s start with the Romans Road and what happens when you read it in the original language.

Romans 3:23–24 and the Faithfulness That Saves

Pip: The post on Romans 3:23–24 opens a question most readers skip right past: when Paul says we are justified by faith, whose faith is he actually talking about — ours, or Christ’s?

Mara: The post frames it this way: “For all who are being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came through Messiah Jesus sinned and are lacking the glory of God.” That rearrangement of word order is deliberate — the participle dikaioumenoi, meaning “who are being justified,” attaches directly to “all,” making justification an ongoing process, not a completed event.

Pip: So the grammar itself is doing theological work. Being justified is present tense, active right now, not a box you checked at conversion.

Mara: Exactly. And that present-tense framing connects to a comparison with Ephesians 2:8, where the parallel construction swaps “through the redemption in Christ Jesus” for “through faithfulness, and this not from yourselves.” The argument is that the faithfulness in view is Christ’s — his obedience to the cross — not a quantity of belief we have to produce on our own.

Pip: Which dissolves a question that has quietly tormented a lot of Christians: do I have enough faith to be saved? If the faithfulness is Christ’s, the answer is structurally irrelevant to us.

Mara: The post makes that point directly. If salvation rests on our faith, it becomes relative — how much is enough? But if it rests on Christ’s faithfulness, the statement becomes absolute. Our own trust in Jesus is, as the post puts it, “not so much for the purpose of being saved but the result of being saved.”

Pip: That’s a quiet but significant inversion of how the passage usually gets preached.

Mara: The companion piece on pistis across Romans 1–5 develops this at length. It argues that the phrase pisteos Iesou Christou — “the faithfulness of Jesus Christ” — in Romans 3:22 is a subjective genitive: Christ is the one being faithful, not merely the object of our faith. The post traces that reading through the whole arc of Romans 1–5, from God’s wrath under the Law in chapters 1 through 3, to Abraham’s faithfulness in chapter 4, to the application in chapter 5.

Mara: The inclusio that brackets the entire letter is telling: the phrase eis hypakoēn pisteōs — “into obedience of faithfulness” — appears in both 1:5 and 16:26, the first and last occurrences of pistis in Romans. That structural frame suggests Paul’s whole argument is about faithful obedience, not faith as a discrete interior event.

Pip: So Romans is less a manual for how to believe and more a demonstration that Christ already did the believing on our behalf — and we walk in the wake of that.

Mara: With the caveat that our own faithfulness still matters — the post is careful to say this doesn’t imply universalism or unconditional security, but rather a call to trust more deeply because God has already demonstrated his reliability. Works, confession, and obedience all follow from that trust.

Pip: From the mechanics of justification to the question of who the righteous one actually is — that thread runs all the way back to Romans 1:17, which is where the deeper argument begins.

Mara: The thread connecting both posts is really one question: what kind of faithfulness is Romans built on, and does the Greek text change the answer?

Pip: Turns out the grammar has opinions. Next time, we’ll see where else those opinions show up.

July 31, 2026

Podcast Episode: The Meaning of Baptism

Filed under: 1 Peter,forgiveness,Greek,Immersion/Baptism,John Gospel of,Luke Gospel of,Mark Gospel of,Matthew Gospel of,Romans,Soteriology — Scott Stocking @ 8:23 pm
Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Pip: Sunday Morning Greek Blog — where the Greek is original and the theology is anything but shallow.

Mara: Scott Stocking has been working through one of the more contested questions in New Testament theology: what immersion actually does, what Peter and Paul meant by it, and whether the word itself carries more weight than most translations let on.

Pip: Let’s start with the text that says it most plainly — 1 Peter 3.

Baptism as Event, Not Ritual

Mara: The question driving these posts is deceptively simple: does immersion save, and if so, how does it work — what gives the water any power at all?

Pip: First Peter 3:21 is the sharpest answer in the New Testament, and the post on that passage offers a translation that cuts through the usual hedging: “This immersion now saves you through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, not the body-dirt removal immersion, but the clear-conscience-pledge to God immersion.”

Mara: So the power is not in the water itself. The resurrection is the qualifier — it is what carries the person through immersion the way the floodwater carried the ark. Without that phrase at the end of the verse, the whole thing collapses into ritual.

Pip: And the Greek grammar backs that reading up. The relative pronoun at the start of verse 21 is neuter, which means it points back to water, not to the ark — Peter is saying the flood water corresponds to immersion, not that the ark does.

Mara: The post on The Mystery of Immersion picks up that thread and pushes it further, asking whether ascribing salvific power to immersion while calling the Lord’s Table a mere symbol is a theological inconsistency — either both carry mysterious power, or both are symbols.

Pip: That is a genuinely uncomfortable corner to be argued into.

Mara: Mystery of Immersion, Part Two lands the argument more firmly. It reads Romans 6 as the centerpiece of Paul’s entire theological argument in chapters 1 through 11, with immersion as the event that binds Christ’s death and resurrection together in a single act.

Pip: So immersion is not a footnote to salvation — it is, in Paul’s architecture, the load-bearing joint.

Mara: The Part Two post puts it this way: immersion is “the glue that ties the two pillars of the faith together.” United with Christ’s death, the believer receives justification, reconciliation, and a cleansed conscience. United with the resurrection, they bear fruit and share the victory over death.

Mara: And across all three posts, one consistent boundary holds: a purely outward act, the “dunk and ditch” version, accomplishes nothing — the pledge of a clear conscience is what makes the event real.

Pip: From water as typology to Romans as architecture — the question underneath all of it is what it means to be all-in for Christ.

Pip: Three posts, one through-line: immersion is not where the journey ends — it is where it starts in earnest.

Mara: The Greek keeps pulling that thread. More to come.

Podcast Episode: Romans And Faithful Obedience

Filed under: Christology,Faith, Faithfulness,Greek,Immersion/Baptism,Righteousness,Romans,Soteriology,Textual Criticism — Scott Stocking @ 5:50 pm
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Pip: Sunday Morning Greek Blog is back, and if you thought Paul’s letter to the Romans was just a greatest-hits playlist of salvation verses, Scott Stocking is here to walk you through the whole road — construction specs included.

Mara: Scott Stocking covers two connected territories this episode: what righteousness actually means in Romans, and how the phrase “obedience of faithfulness” functions as the letter’s spine from opening greeting to closing benediction.

Pip: Let’s start with righteousness — and what it costs to define it carefully.

Righteousness as Foundation

Mara: The central question in this segment is what Paul means by “the righteousness of God” in Romans 1:17 — and whether it’s something God hands over to believers, or something embodied in a person.

Pip: The answer lands hard. The post sets up Romans 1:17 carefully, then offers this reading: “The righteousness of God then isn’t an object to be given. It is embodied in the person and work of Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ is the righteousness of God.”

Mara: The upshot is that righteousness isn’t a transaction — it’s a participation. Because Jesus fulfilled every requirement of the law, he alone is called righteous, and believers share in that only by being “in Christ.”

Pip: Which reframes the familiar Romans Road considerably. The post uses a road-construction metaphor that actually earns its keep: righteousness is the substructure — the rebar, the compacted earth, the dowel bars — and Jesus’s faithfulness is the surface we walk on.

Mara: Romans 1:17 gets parsed as “from faithfulness into faithfulness” — Jesus’s perfect obedience to the law moving into his faithfulness unto death on the cross. The post ties that directly to Philippians 2:8: “he humbled himself by becoming obedient to death — even death on a cross.”

Pip: So “obedience of faithfulness” in Romans 1:5 isn’t just a theological motto. It points, specifically, to the crucifixion.

Mara: Romans 2 extends this. Paul warns both Jews and Gentiles against hypocrisy — knowing the law isn’t the same as following it. The post notes that circumcision and baptism function as parallel initiation rites in Paul’s argument, and reads Romans 2:25–29 as groundwork for the baptism discussion coming in chapter 6.

Pip: The small-group kickoff context matters here — this is a congregation being asked to read Romans one chapter at a time, and the post is honest that chapters 1 and 2 alone carry enough freight to slow anyone down.

Mara: That honesty is part of the argument. The post closes the Romans 1 and 2 discussion with a summary worth quoting directly: if we remain faithful to living in the righteousness of Christ, then as Romans 2:13 says, “we’ll be declared righteous when we stand before our maker.”

Pip: Which brings us to the phrase that holds all of this together — and how it functions across the whole letter.

The Obedience of Faithfulness

Mara: The question the second post takes up is whether “obedience of faithfulness” is a throwaway greeting formula or the actual organizing theme of Romans — and the answer is the latter.

Pip: The post on “Obedience of Faithfulness: A Walk On the Romans Road” opens with personal testimony but arrives at a precise textual claim. Paul, it argues, “told us what he was going to say, he said it, and he told us he said it” — the phrase appears in Romans 1:5 and again, word for word, in the closing benediction of Romans 16.

Mara: That’s not a coincidence. The Greek is only two words, and the post explains that the structure implies the terms define each other: “obedience is faithfulness, and faithfulness is obedience.” Faith, in this reading, is never purely intellectual — it always carries action with it.

Pip: The post traces this through baptism in Romans 6, reading immersion as the believer’s own enactment of the pattern — buried with Christ, raised to new life. That’s the “obedience of faithfulness” made physical.

Mara: And Romans 12:1–2 closes the arc: “Offer your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and pleasing to God” and “be transformed by the renewing of your mind.” The post is careful to note these are promises for life now, not only for life after death.

Pip: Two posts, one through-line — the road Paul built was always meant to be walked.

Mara: Righteousness as foundation, faithfulness as the road you actually travel — that’s the frame Romans keeps returning to.

Pip: Next time, we’ll see where else on the blog that road leads.

June 15, 2026

Justified by Christ’s Faithfulness (Romans 5:1–12)

Filed under: Evangelism,Faith, Faithfulness,Grace,Immersion/Baptism,Righteousness,Romans,Soteriology — Scott Stocking @ 6:20 pm
Tags: , , , , , , ,

I delivered this message June 14, 2026, (Proper 6, Year A, Third Sunday after Pentecost). I broke from the practice of preaching from the gospel passage this day because I recently did some pretty intense study and writing in Romans (the epistles passage from the Lectionary for this Sunday) and wanted to share my thoughts.

Good morning! The Lord be with you!

This past semester, the church Jill and I attend had their small groups going through the book of Romans. In seminary, one of my professors had published an article about Romans 1:16–17, the passage about “I am not ashamed of the Gospel, because it is the power of God that brings salvation to everyone who believes,” and it opened my eyes to a whole new understanding of what Paul meant when he talked about the relationship between our faith and Christ’s faithfulness.

Prior to that, I had spent a great deal of time in Ephesians, memorizing the entire epistle. But the more I studied Romans, the more I saw the connections and the organization of Paul’s logic as he built the theology of justification by faithfulness. I began to understand why it was placed first among the Pauline epistles, and I was not disappointed. I was asked to speak for the kickoff of our Romans study at the church, so with those thoughts fresh in my mind, I wanted to share some of my insights the next couple times I’m with you using the Romans passages from the Lectionary readings for those respective Sundays. We’ll look at the first half of Romans 5 this morning. In two weeks, I’ll tackle the last half of Romans 6.

Since we’re diving into the middle of Romans here, I want to give a brief summary of chapters 1 through 4 to catch us up. Broadly speaking, chapters 1 through 11 form a cohesive argument about the relationship between Jews and Gentiles and how each group understands their own respective shortcomings in the eyes of God. In chapters 1 through 4, Paul’s theme seems to be centered around what “faith” looks like for both Gentiles and Jews in spite of their lapses. After Paul introduces the overall theme of “the obedience of faithfulness” in Romans 1:5, he finishes his introduction with the statement: “For in the gospel the Righteousness of God is revealed—from faithfulness into faithfulness, just as it is written: ‘The righteous will live by faithfulness.’”[1] You might be interested to know that this “Righteousness of God” that is revealed is NOT a concept or abstract idea; it refers to Jesus himself. Jesus IS the Righteousness of God.

In the rest of chapter 1 and the first part of chapter 2, Paul addresses the Gentiles in the church at Rome, primarily indicating that nature itself demonstrates the existence and glory of God, and that those who violate their natural state are not respecting that natural order that God has otherwise made obvious to them. From the middle of chapter 2 to the middle of chapter 3, Paul makes the argument that the Jews have the benefit of having been chosen by a God who revealed himself to them directly, and yet, like the Gentiles, they still refuse to acknowledge God, causing Paul to quote Psalm 14:1: “There is no one righteous, not even one.” This is as much a criticism of the Jewish believers as the last half of chapter 1 was to the Gentiles.

From the middle of chapter 3 to the end of chapter 4, then, Paul begins to talk about what true faithfulness looks like and what it accomplishes, that is justification, first in Christ, then in the life of Abraham. He brings home the point that it is Christ’s faithfulness to fulfill God’s purposes through the cross and the resurrection that is the foundation of Paul’s mission to bring Jews and Gentiles to “the obedience of faith.” We even will get hints of this overarching theme in 5:19 and 6:16 as we move forward.

Now the other thing going on in the text of Romans is something that the average reader might miss. In chapters 1 through 4, Paul mentions the word “faith” or “faithfulness” 27 times, while only using words for “life” and “live” twice. But in chapters 5 through 8, Paul flips those numbers around. Paul has 25 occurrences of the two Greek terms for “life” and “live” while only 2 occurrences of the word for “faith” or “faithfulness,” and those two occurrences are found in the first two verses of chapter 5, so let’s dive into that text this morning.

Paul begins chapter 5 with the conjunction “Therefore.” If you’ve been in church long enough, you probably know the old saying: “When you see the word ‘therefore,’ we should find out what it’s (say it with me) ‘there for.’” Well, we already covered that briefly in the summary I just gave. What I want to unpack here is the summary that immediately follows the “therefore”: “Since we have been justified through faith.” That’s the point he just demonstrated in the first four chapters.

The verb “justify” (δικαιόω dikaioō) simply means “to be made right with God” in the context of Scripture. In some contexts, the word is translated “declared righteous,” so the noun “justification” (4:25, 5:16; δικαίωσις dikaiōsis) is closely related to the word “righteousness” (δικαιοσύνη dikaiosynē). The word is used several times throughout Romans 3 through 5 but not always associated with the same phrasing.

In 5:9, Paul says something similar to 5:1, but he swaps out one key word: “Since we have now been justified by his blood.”[2] Why does Paul switch from talking about “justified through faith” and “justified by his blood”? Let’s look at few more verses to fill that out.

In Romans 3:22, Paul indicates that God’s righteousness, or justification, is given through the faithfulness of Jesus Christ, the “Righteousness of God” whom the Law and Prophets point to.

In verse 24, Paul continues by saying “all are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus.”[3]

In verse 26, Paul puts the emphasis on our own faith in Jesus: “[God] did it to demonstrate his righteousness at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies those who have faith in Jesus.”[4]

From these verses, we can see that the concept of “justification by faith” has two components to it. The first is that the word for “faith” can also be translated “faithfulness.” In that sense, it refers to how Christ’s sacrifice brings about the possibility of our own justification: “By his blood,” “through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus.” In other words, he’s referring to Christ’s faithfulness to his earthly mission as I mentioned earlier.

On the other hand, we also see the importance of our response to that faithfulness: putting our trust (i.e., our faith) in Christ. We see the great love he showed us through his sacrifice and his victorious resurrection from the dead and are compelled to make but one response: declare our love and allegiance to Jesus.

Now I mentioned earlier that there is a shift from chapter 4 to 5 about Paul talking about, primarily, the faithfulness of Christ and its relation to our faith to the life we live when we are “in Christ.” We see that in vs. 3 as Paul begins to write, in general, about the sufferings they have endured for Christ. He doesn’t get specific with the Romans, because I’m sure each of them recognize the sufferings they’ve all endured, especially since the Jews had been expelled from Rome prior to Paul’s writing Romans and have just recently returned to find the Gentile believers still thriving in their house churches in Rome.

This is another reason why Paul had to address both Gentiles and Jews in Romans 1–4, so he could get the returning Jewish exiles on the same footing as the firmly established Gentiles. He knows that if they persevere under these difficult conditions, they will build a strong character that can withstand further challenges and help unite them as they were before. As they grow in unity, they will also grow in hope. They will truly experience and share the outpouring of God’s love through the Holy Spirit as they once again gather together to worship.

Paul also reminds them that there wasn’t anything Jews or Gentiles in Rome did to earn this blessing. Verse 8 is somewhat profound if you think about it: “But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us.”[5] Did you catch that? We didn’t have to do anything, because God was already at work through Jesus on our behalf “while we were still sinners.” We didn’t have to clean up our lives first. He reemphasizes that in vs. 10: “For if, while we were God’s enemies, we were reconciled to him through the death of his Son [there’s the “how” of justification again], how much more, having been reconciled, shall we be saved through his life!”[6] Not only are we set free from God’s wrath, but we also have confidence to boast in God about the reconciliation we have received through Jesus Christ.

As we head into the summer months, I would encourage all of you to read through Romans at least once. You will begin to see why the early Church Fathers chose to put it as the first book, the shining star of Paul’s epistles in the New Testament. It is full of encouragement and hope and will help you see more clearly your place in the kingdom of God and in the local congregation. Paul wrote compassionately to those who were reuniting after a long separation, and he helped to restore the unity of the church in Rome so they could continue to be a mighty witness for the Gospel. I pray that you all will continue to be a mighty witness here at Mount View. Amen.

My views are my own.

Pastor Scott Stocking, M.Div.

Here are some of my other writings on Romans:

Romans

[1] Romans 1:17. The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan. I modified the translation a bit.

[2] Romans 5:9. The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[3] Romans 3:24. The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[4] Romans 3:26. The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[5] Romans 5:8. The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[6] Romans 5:10. The New International Version. 2011. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

Next Page »

Website Powered by WordPress.com.