The Pulpit Commentary — Romans — Section 12

l'(>!'l'C'l'<'nts hel'll. FnrthC1r, wit.h r<'i;pec-t tC1 or dotermincrl, to be whnt ho nlr!'ndy !11, thc,se tw,, i:,'n0a 10,:i(•g (c-YidPntly ind!'p0nd- when hie being euoh ie deolnrod nnd mnnl- l'Dt C1net1. nnd ooth prohnbly ~I from g<>nea- frstcd. Thu~, it nrn.y, be snid, n )ting nu,y Jogic-nl =rds prPserved Rt JcrusAh:>n1), a be spoken of 11e nppointed king whon ho la JH'<'N>ble 'l\""ay of RC'<'Clunt.ing for the two crowned, though ho wns king before ; or a dim.nt't linl'I! of del'<'E'nt through which saint determined n Bl\int when he ie canon- ,T0S8ph l!C'ems to be tm<X'tl to David. ie to ized ; and the classioal. phrase, dpl (m -rw& ~npp,.llll' one of them to be really Mary's, a,&v, in the sense of deify, ie ndduced ne , he legal repNlSentative of "·hose fR.mily parallel. Thus the expressiou is made to ,l '1t!eph had beoome by mRrringe, so ns to be me.'1.n that •• tho ea.me who item\ ud.p1ta. was entered in legru. doouments a.s the son of her 1,.-nown only as the desoendsut of David, is father (l!ee art. on "Genenlogy of JCl!UII now declared to be the Son of God" (Tho- Christ," in ' Dictinna.ry of the Bible,' W. luok); •op,(ETO.I ~ li~ ,is vlbv 1<al 1<0.-r& .,a 8mith. LL.D.). k; to Meyer's second I\Sl!er- a.vBpwr,voJP" (Cyril); nnd St. Paul's l'eason tion abo"' alluded to. it is trne that St. Paul for thus putting it, in pursuance of his course nowhere refers to our Lord's supernatural of thought, is thus explained by Meyer; <'onception spoken of in the Gospels of St. "Paul gives the two main epoo~s in the Matthew and St. Luke. But it does not history of the Son of God as they had aotuo.lly follow that it. was not e.lready included in occurred, and had been prophetically an- the Church's creed, or that St. Paul him- nounced;" also by BeDgel thus, "Etie.m relf was lllla ware of it or disbelieved it. ante e:i:iuanitionem sue.m Filius Dei i11 This u; not the place for enlarging on the q uidem fuit: sed exinauitione filiatio oconl- <'ndence.. at the present day iucreasiug in tata. fuit, et plene demum reteota post reeur- fnrre, of the early origin of our existing recti.oDem." This interpretation would be Gospels. and of their being a true embodi- more satisfactory than it is if the verb l>pl(e111 ment of the Church's original belief. St. were found similarly used in aDy other pa.rt Paul's silence as to the manner 1WtD the Son of the New Testament. It occurs in the of God became incarnate mav be accounted following passages, and e.J ways in its proper for by his not having had occasion, in his and usual sense: Luke llii. 22; Aots ii. 23; extant Epistles, to speak of it. He is L 42; :xi. 29; xvii. 26, 31; Heb. iv. 7. Of occupied, in BOOOrdauce with his pecnliar these especie.lly significant e.re Acts x. 42 mission, in setting forth the meaning e.nd ("On a.v-ros tu-rw 6 OJPllf"J.LEVOS wo Toii 0eoii purpose of the Inai.rnation rather th.a.n its 1tp,.,.~s (,..S.,.,..,,, 1<al 11•1tpii>11) and Acts xvii. 31 mode, and in p r ~ g rather th.a.n cateche- ( .6.10TI r,,..,.,,,,..,, 71µ<paJ1 Iv ri µEi',11.ei 1tpl11e1V 'N}J/ tical instrn.cti.cm ; and on the essential idea. ol1<ouµJ,,.,,., EJ/ li11<a.,o,,../,vp El' dvlipl f C.p111"e, involved he is sufficiently explicit, viz. the ,r{,rr-111 ,ra.pa.O"x&v 'ITalf"IV, d.va.O"T/ilf"a.S a.b.-bv Elt pecnliar Ditine paternity of Christ, notwith- 11•1<pii>v), In both of these texts the word standing the human birth. denotes God's appointment or detennination Ver. 4.-Who wu declared (so Autho- of Christ to the office of Judge, not merely a riY.ed Venrion) the Bon of God with(literally, declaration or manifestation of his slreedy in) power, according to the spirit of holiness, being so ; and it is to be observed the.t in by the re■urrection of (notes in Authorized the secoDd the laDgna.ge is given as that of Yersion,/rorn) the dead. Supposing the in- St. Paul himself, and the.t it corresponds tention here to be to declare the Son's with the passage before us in that the e,;seutial Deity, notwithstanding his human Resurrection is spoken of as the display to birth, we might have expected ~lf'Tos after the world of Christ being so appointed or th6 -,uoµ.bov preceding. But the word determined. Surely, then, there ought to .sed is l,p.,TBEYros; and, further, the Resurrec- be cogent reu.son for giving 6pu18/v-ros a tion is referred to, not e. pre-existent state. different meaDing here ; and, in spite of the The'l'erb opi(,wmeans properly to "appoint" weight of o.uthority on the other side, it is or ,._ detennine ; " and if this meaning be re- submitted that we a.re under no necessity to 1.ai..nbd, tl.,1: whole J111,1111age would seem to do so, if we bear in mind whet e.ppesred preclude the idea of SollBhip previoDB to the under ver. 8 e.e to the different senses in llc:eurrectioD being in view. Hence commen- which Christ is designated 'l'llis e,oii. In. tators 1u1.eieot 11.Ild modern agree generally the sense apparent is Messie.uio propheoy, in ~ aD unllJ!1IJIJ meanfog I.a l,purB,v- and pervading the Epistle to the Hebrews, ..-o, here, ma.king it signify "declared," as in the sense which seems intcndtid by St. in the A.uthorizoo Version. So Chry110l!iom, Paul himself in Acts xiii. 32, 33, it was not TI 07,,- &,,.,-,., 6pttr6,11-ror; -roii 'IJuxfJ•no,, till after the Re.lurrection thnt Christ e.tto.ined ivtru4'a.v8,.,.,os, 1<p16,v-ros, 6µ.oA0")'718iv-ro,, 'll"a,pa. bis position of royo.l Sonehip; it was thou .,-;:,, 0...-&,,-ru,11 -,,,t1.l'TJ• K«l lj,f,4'ou (Hom. ii. p. that the Divine 6p111"µlis took cffeot iu tho.t ~ 32, V ). lt ui maintained tl.J.at thls use of regard. It is true tho.t St. Po.ul (as w11,11 th1: word, tl,ougli ur,u8ual, is legitimate; seen under ver. 8) himself ooncoivcd of l!lllC(, 1, J>erbOll may be si,.id to be appointed, Clirillt BS cusentially Bon of God frometernlty; OU. 1.1-32.] THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMAXS.