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.

September 12, 2011

Speaking in Tongues (γλῶσσα glōssa, 1 Corinthians 12–14)

Filed under: 1 Corinthians,Biblical Studies,Ecclesiology,New Testament,Pneumatology,Theology, Biblical,Tongues,Tongues — Scott Stocking @ 10:16 pm
Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

 

Check out this exclusive Logos Affiliate Deal from SMGB! Logos 10 Package Deal

James was right when he warned believers about the deadly power of the tongue (James 3:5–12). With it we can praise God and curse men, or curse God and praise men for that matter. Of course, James was using metonymy here, with the tongue representing the words we say. But the issue of “tongues,” a special form of speech empowered by the Holy Spirit, has been just as divisive and destructive to Christian unity around the world. Some Christ-followers insist that a demonstration of tongues is absolutely essential for confirming the presence of the Holy Spirit in one’s life, while others on the opposite extreme view tongues as a gift given to the early church and only the early church—it has no place in the kingdom of God in the modern world.

Paul’s instructions in 1 Corinthians 12–14 have been the focal point of the debate. Paul seems to think speaking in tongues is a great idea (1 Cor 14:5, 18), but he issues some caveats and warnings about the use of tongues in the life of Christ-followers and the congregations with which they are associated. I will address the key issues surrounding tongues in this blog post.

Word Studies on γλῶσσα, γένος, and φωνή

First, an examination of the word for “tongues” is in order. The Greek word γλῶσσα (glōssa \GLOHSS sah\) is used 49 times in the Greek New Testament. By far, the most prominent use of the word is in these three chapters of 1 Corinthians, where it is found 21 times. The next closest competitors are Revelation (8 times) and Acts (6 times), each of which is more than the 5 times it is found in all four Gospels combined (including one use in the spurious ending of Mark).

The word can mean the physical tongue, as in Mark 7:33. It is also used as a metonym for “speech” or “mouth” (as in James or Romans 3:13). In Acts 2, the word represents known languages miraculously spoken by those in the upper room (or miraculously heard by those in the crowd). In 1 Corinthians 12–14, Paul does not explicitly state that “tongues” is a known language, but there is an undeniable implication that tongues is capable of interpretation. The debate is whether tongues is a known language (“tongues of men”) spoken in the world at the time (or the world today), or if it is the “tongues of angels” mentioned in 1 Corinthians 13:1. My premise in this post is that the gift of tongues represents a language primarily known to the hearer, but the speaker is divinely enabled to address the hearer in his or her own language and interpreted so that the tongues-speaker can edify those of his native tongue.

The word is found four times in 1 Corinthians 12: twice in vs. 10 and once each in verses 28 and 30. The first thing to notice about 12:7–10 is that the words ἄλλος (allos \AHL loss\, ‘other’, ‘another’) and ἕτερος (heteros \HEH teh ross\, ‘other’, ‘another’) are used interchangeably; classic (mistaken) distinctions like ἄλλος being another of a different kind or another of many versus ἕτερος being another of the same kind or the other one of a pair do not hold up (Friedrich Büchsel, ἄλλος, in TDNT). As such, there is no suggestion that those identified by ἄλλος have any special reason to be given one set of gifts or that those identified by ἕτερος a different set of gifts. The word choice is simply for variety.

The second thing to notice in verse 10 (and later in 28) is that γλῶσσα is modified by the noun γένος (genos \GEH nawss\ ‘family’, ‘offspring’, ‘kind’). This is the word from which Latin speakers derived the word genus and English speakers the word “gene” and related words. Of the 18 times this word is used in the New Testament, only twice does it expressly refer to something outside of the realm of humanity, and one of those outside the natural realm. In Matthew 13:47, the word is used of all “kinds” of fish, while in Mark 9:29, it describes the “kind” of demon that can only come out through prayer. Every occurrence in Acts through Revelation, along with one other occurrence in the Gospels (Mark 7:26), refers to some form of human relationship: offspring, family, born, people (usually Israel or Jews), or native of a particular country.

The other time γένος is found in 1 Corinthians 12–14, it modifies φωνή (phōnē \foe NAY\) and refers to a foreign (human) language. Of the 138 times φωνή is used in the NT, 93 occurrences are translated “voice.” In 1 Cor 14:7–11, the word is found four times, with the first two occurrences referring to the sound of musical instruments. Paul carries over the comparison to human speech using the same word (instead of switching back to γλῶσσα), so the word is a synonym for γλῶσσα, and I don’t believe Paul intended to make any distinction between a supernatural language and natural language by using the two different words.

1 Corinthians 12–13

So how do γένος and φωνή inform our understanding of γλῶσσα? It seems very clear to me that in 1 Corinthians 12 at least, along with Acts 2, the reference is to a Spirit-enabled human language that the speaker may or may not have encountered in the past and that is (or should be) understood by native speakers of that language. Through the interpretation, it should be understood by those who do not otherwise know the Spirit-enabled language. But does chapter 14 modify this understanding? Before answering that question, there are a couple more issue to address in 1 Corinthians 12:29–30 and chapter 13.

The questions in 12:29–30 have an untranslated word that readers should understand. Each question begins with μη (mē \may\), which usually means “not.” But when it begins a Greek question, it is a rhetorical device to indicate to the reader that the question has a “no” answer. So when Paul asks, “Does everyone speak in tongues?” (μὴ πάντες γλώσσαις λαλοῦσιν; Mē pantes glōssais lalousin?) the answer is an emphatic “No.” Tongues is definitely not a gift for everyone, and it’s not something to be used as a universal confirmation that a person has received the Holy Spirit.

The use of γλῶσσα in chapter 13 doesn’t have much bearing on the meaning of the word in this context. Its use in 13:1 (“tongues of men and of angels”) strikes me as more of a hyperbole rather than a statement about the type of language used. Yes, I think it is possible that angels have their own language, but if tongues is not a human language, would it be angelic, or would it be something completely different? Admittedly, if it’s not human language, I’d only be speculating about what kind of language it is. But verse 8 makes me think that tongues is indeed a human language, because Paul says tongues will cease. I can’t imagine angelic language ceasing unless angels themselves will cease to exist after God establishes his new heaven and new earth for the rest of eternity.

1 Corinthians 14

Chapter 14 is where Paul gives an extended treatise on the use of tongues in the local congregation. Γλῶσσα is used 15 times in this chapter, and Paul clearly teaches that prophecy (the speaking forth of God’s word, not necessarily predicting the future) is far more beneficial to the Christ followers than tongues. Just as the Old Testament prophets preached to Israel and Judah to call them to repentance and righteous living, so prophecy here is intended to call believers to a higher standard. That’s why Paul can say that prophecy is for believers in 14:22.

So what is the benefit of tongues to the unbeliever or seeker? I think part of that answer depends on who the local congregation leaders in Corinth were and where they met. If there were some meeting in a synagogue, it’s possible Hebrew may have still been the main language of worship, at least for some of the service. Any “foreigners” coming into the service likely would not have understood Hebrew, so God could use tongues to get the word out.

More likely, I think, is that there were several house churches that had sprung up in Corinth. Since Corinth was a crossroads for numerous trade and shipping routes, peoples of many “tongues” would have frequented the city. It would certainly make proclaiming the Gospel a challenge in a multilingual culture. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to assume that tongues would have been a very useful gift in Corinth, because God wanted to reach the whole world. This was a truly metropolitan city, and the Gospel could certainly spread the Gospel quickly if the local church is on top of its evangelistic outreach.

This brings me to 1 Corinthians 14:2: “For those who speak in a tongue do not speak to other people but to God.” A couple verses later, Paul says that the tongues speaker edifies himself, but the one who prophesies edifies the congregation. Paul spends a great deal of time talking about who benefits from the exercise of spiritual gifts, especially tongues and prophecy. Now when our English versions say that the tongues speaker speaks “to God,” that sounds like a simple instance of an indirect object, which is called the dative case in Greek. But if you’re a regular reader of this blog, you know that Greek grammar is not always a matter of simple and straightforward translation. The dative case has some diversity to its usage in the New Testament.

In the case of 1 Corinthians 14:2, since Paul spends so much time speaking about who benefits from these gifts, I don’t think it is unreasonable to suggest that the dative case θεῷ·(theō, from θεός, theos ‘God’) is what grammarians call “the dative of advantage.” A clear incidence of this is found in Ephesians 5:19, “speaking to one another with psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs.” Paul uses the dative of advantage in 1 Corinthians 14:3 as well: the prophet speaks to people for their “strengthening, encouragement, and comfort.” So if 14:2 is in fact a dative of advantage, what advantage does God have? It’s just as I indicated above: God takes advantage of the presence of Christ followers in a world-class city (even if it is corrupt) to get the word out to the rest of the world. Paul could only do so much as one man, but God could use his people to get the word out to rest of the world through the natural comings and goings of humans conducting their business.

But what is the edification to the tongues speaker, as Paul indicates in this passage? I think the edification is very basic: the tongues speaker knows he or she is being used of God. If the tongues is interpreted, there is a double benefit as the rest of the church will benefit. The benefit is not that this is some mysterious prayer language: if it were, Paul would not say that uninterpreted tongues is of no benefit to the speaker. The one who speaks in a tongue needs to have it interpreted if he wants any understanding of it beyond being used of God. Add to that the command that the tongues speaker keep quiet if there is no interpreter. If you know an interpreter is present, then I don’t think this is some mysterious spiritual language. It is a human language that someone in the congregation knew well enough (or had demonstrated the gift of interpretation often enough) that a reliable translation could be voiced.

Conclusion

Tongues, then, is a human language, divinely enabled, subject to human interpretation, which may or may not be divinely enabled. God used tongues to get the word out quickly in a world-class city with plenty of foreigners going to all points of the compass. For that reason, I do believe tongues is still manifest today, especially as missionaries continue to encounter people groups whose languages still have no written form.

I also recall an anecdotal story from a trusted colleague who had spent some time as a missionary in Eastern Europe, the Ukraine if I remember correctly. He and his wife, after returning to America, awoke one night and began praying in the Ukrainian tongue, even though they were not fluent in it. As it turned out, an earthquake (again, if I remember correctly; it was some sort of natural disaster) had hit the country hard in the area where they had ministered. They had exposure to the language as missionaries, and God used that seed to call them into service as prayer warriors united with those Christ followers through their language even though thousands of miles apart.

Everything God does through us, he does for his glory, not ours. We should not think that we are something special just because we have the ability to speak in tongues. If we speak in a tongue and we’re not interpreting, or if someone isn’t interpreting for us, it’s not doing us much good, and it’s not doing the body of Christ any good. “Everything must be done so that the church may be built up” (1 Corinthians 14:26c). Whatever gifts we have, if we’re only using them for selfish reasons, we should probably reevaluate our priorities (and I speak to myself when I write that as well).

Finally, the exhortation of 1 Corinthians 13 is most appropriate. Whatever we do, let us do it in love, because without love, all else that we do is dust in the wind.

Peace!

Scott Stocking

A qr code on a white background linking to an exclusive deal from Logos Bible Software.

Website Powered by WordPress.com.