Lectionary Calendar
Friday, July 18th, 2025
the Week of Proper 10 / Ordinary 15
the Week of Proper 10 / Ordinary 15
video advertismenet
advertisement
advertisement
advertisement
Attention!
StudyLight.org has pledged to help build churches in Uganda. Help us with that pledge and support pastors in the heart of Africa.
Click here to join the effort!
Click here to join the effort!
Bible Commentaries
Meyer's Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament Meyer's Commentary
Copyright Statement
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.
Bibliographical Information
Meyer, Heinrich. "Commentary on Romans 12". Meyer's Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament. https://studylight.org/commentaries/eng/hmc/romans-12.html. 1832.
Meyer, Heinrich. "Commentary on Romans 12". Meyer's Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament. https://studylight.org/
Whole Bible (53)New Testament (19)Gospels Only (1)Individual Books (16)
Introduction
CHAPTER 12
Romans 12:2 . Instead of the imperatives, which Tisch. also defends, Lachm. has, what Griesb. already approved: ÏÏ ÏÏημαÏίζεÏθαι and μεÏαμοÏÏοῦÏθαι , according to A B** D F G, min. Theoph. The preponderating evidence of the codd. is in favour of the infinitives , while that of the VSS. (Vulg. It. Syr. etc.) and Fathers is in favour of the imperatives . But, since the frequent practical use of the precept in the direct paraenetic form of expression at any rate suggested especially considering the closely similar pronunciation of the infinitives and imperatives the writing of the latter rather than the former, the infinitive reading is to preferred, which × also supports by reading μεÏαμοÏÏοῦÏθαι , although it has ÏÏ ÏÏημαÏίζεÏθε .
á½Î¼á¿¶Î½ ] is wanting in A B D* F G, 47, 67*, Copt. Clem. Cypr. Omitted by Lachm. and Tisch. The preponderance of evidence, as well as the circumstance that á½Î¼á¿¶Î½ very readily suggested itself to mechanical copyists for repetition from Romans 12:1 , justifies the omission.
Romans 12:5 . Lachm. and Tisch. 8 : ÏÏ , according to A B D* F G P × , 47*, Antioch. Damasc. Rightly; Ïὸ δὲ Ïαθʼ Îµá¼·Ï , not being understood, was exchanged with ὠδὲ καθʼ Îµá¼·Ï , as the antithesis of οἱ Ïολλοί .
Romans 12:11 . Ïá¿· καιÏá¿· ] So Griesb., after Erasm. 2, Steph. 3, Mill, and others. But Erasm. 1, Beza, Elz., Matth., Lachm., Scholz, Tisch., and Rinck have Ïá¿· ÎºÏ Ïίῳ . The former is found in D* F G, 5, and Latin Fathers; the latter in A B D** E L P × , and most min. VSS. and Greek Fathers. See the accurate examination of the evidence in Reiche, Comm. crit. p. 70 ff., who decides for ÎºÏ Ïίῳ , and in Tisch. 8. ÎÏ Ïίῳ is certainly the oldest and most diffused reading. Nevertheless, if it were original, we cannot well see why καιÏá¿· should have been substituted for it; for Î´Î¿Ï Î» . Ïá¿· ÎºÏ Ïίῳ is a very usual Pauline thought (Acts 20:19 ; Ephesians 6:7 ; Romans 14:18 ; Romans 16:18 ; Colossians 3:24 , et al.), and would suit our passage very well. It would be far easier to take exception to καιÏá¿· than to ÎºÏ Ïίῳ (as in Romans 13:11 , instead of καιÏÏν , the reading κÏÏιον is already found in Clement), especially as the principle itself, Ïá¿· καιÏá¿· Î´Î¿Ï Î»ÎµÏειν , might readily seem somewhat offensive to a prejudiced moral feeling. Hardly can ÎºÏ Ïίῳ , considering its great diffusion, be a mere copyist’s error (in opposition to Fritzsche).
Romans 12:13 . ÏÏÎµÎ¯Î±Î¹Ï ] D* F G, Clar. Boern. codd. Lat., in Rufinus and some Latin Fathers: Î¼Î½ÎµÎ¯Î±Î¹Ï (defended by Mill). Its origin is due to the reverence for martyrs: “lectio liturgica pro tempore ficta,” Matth.
Romans 12:17 . á¼Î½ÏÏιον ] A** has á¼Î½ÏÏιον Ïοῦ Îεοῦ , καὶ á¼Î½ÏÏιον . F G, Arm. Goth. Vulg. and several Fathers: οὠμÏνον á¼Î½ÏÏιον Ï . Îεοῦ , á¼Î»Î»á½° καὶ á¼Î½ÏÏιον . Ascetic amplification, after Proverbs 3:4 ; 2 Corinthians 8:21 .
Instead of ÏάνÏÏν Lachm. has Ïῶν , according to A** D * F G, min. It. Harl. Guelph. Tol. Tert. Lucif. Probably, however, this was connected with that amplification.
Romans 12:20 . á¼á½°Î½ οá½Î½ ] A B P × , min. Copt. Arm. Vulg. Clar. Bas. Dam.: á¼Î»Î»á½° á¼á½°Î½ (so Lachm. and Tisch. 8). D* F G, min. Goth.: á¼Î¬Î½ , which is to be preferred, with Griesb.; the other readings aim at furnishing a connection.
the second, or practical part of the epistle
Verse 1
Romans 12:1 f. General exhortation to sanctification .
οá½Î½ ] drawing an inference, not from the whole dogmatic part of the epistle, beginning with Romans 1:16 (Calvin, Bengel, and many others, including Reiche, Köllner, de Wette, Philippi, Hofmann), as also in Ephesians 4:1 and 1 Thessalonians 4:1 , the οá½Î½ which introduces the practical portion is not to be taken so vaguely, but from Romans 11:35-36 , where the riches of God were described as, and shown to be, imparted apart from merit. This connection is, on account of διὰ Ïῶν οἰκÏίÏμ . Ï . Îεοῦ , more readily suggested and simpler than that with Romans 11:32 (Rückert, Fritzsche, and several others).
διὰ Ïῶν Î¿á¼°ÎºÏ . Ï . Îεοῦ ] by means of the compassion of God , reminding you of it. Just so διά in Rom 15:30 , 1 Corinthians 1:10 , 2 Corinthians 10:1 . The exhortation, pointing to the compassion of God, contains the motive of thankfulness for compliance with it. “Qui misericordia Dei recte movetur, in omnem Dei voluntatem ingreditur,” Bengel.
On οἰκÏιÏμοί , see Tittmann, Synon . p. 68 ff. On the singular , comp. Pind. Pyth . i. 85; Sir 5:6 ; Bar 2:27 ; 1Ma 3:44 . The plural conforms, indeed, to ר×××× , but is conceived according to the Greek plural usage of abstract nouns (see Kühner, II. 1, p. 15 f.; Maetzner, ad Lycurg. p. 144 f.): the compassions, i.e. the stirrings and manifestations of compassion.
ÏαÏαÏÏá¿Ïαι ] selected as the set expression for the presenting of sacrificial animals at the altar; Xen. Anab. vi. 1. 22; Lucian, de sacrif. 13; and see Wetstein and Loesner, p. 262. Paul is glancing at the thank-offering ( διὰ Ï . οἰκÏιÏμ . Ï . Î .), and raises the notion of sacrifice to the highest moral idea of self-surrender to God; comp. Umbreit, p. 343 ff.
Ïá½° ÏÏμαÏα á½Î¼á¿¶Î½ ] not, on account of the figure of sacrifice, instead of á½Î¼á¾¶Ï αá½ÏοÏÏ (so usually; still also Philippi), as if Ïῶμα might denote the entire person, consisting of body and soul (but comp. on Romans 6:12 ). On the contrary, the apostle means quite strictly: your bodies, reserving the sanctification of the Î½Î¿á¿¦Ï for Romans 12:2 , so that the two verses together contain the sanctification of the whole man distributed into its parts, that of the outer man (set forth as the offering of a sacrifice), and that of the inner (as a renewing transformation). Fritzsche also takes the correct view; comp. Hofmann. Other peculiar references of Ï . ÏÏμ . á½Î¼ . (Köllner: “the sensuous nature of man, which draws him to sin;” Olshausen: “in order to extend the idea of Christian sanctification down even to the lowest potency of human nature”) are not indicated by the text. The following Ï . λογικ . λαÏÏ . is not opposed to our view; for, in truth, bodily self-sacrifice is also an ethical act, 1 Corinthians 6:20 . Comp. on the subject-matter, Romans 6:13 ; Romans 6:19 .
Î¸Ï Ïίαν ζῶÏαν ] as a sacrifice which lives . For the moral self-offering of the body is the antitypical ÏλήÏÏÏÎ¹Ï of the ritual sacrificial-service, in which the sacrifice dies; whereas that ethical sacrifice is no doubt also connected with dying, as to sin namely, in the sense of Romans 6:2 , Romans 7:4 ff., Colossians 2:20 ; Colossians 3:5 , Galatians 2:19 , but it is precisely out of this death that the being alive here meant proceeds, which has vanquished death (Galatians 2:20 , et al .). Such a sacrifice is also, in the eminent sense of antitypical fulfilment, á¼Î³Î¯Î± (as pure and belonging to God in an ethical relation) and Îá½ÎΡÎΣΤÎÏ Î¤á¿· ÎÎá¿· (comp. Ephesians 5:2 ). That Τ . ÎÎá¿· is not, with Estius, Bengel, and Koppe, to be connected with Î ÎΡÎΣΤ ., is shown by its very position, as well as by the superfluous character of a Τ . ÎÎá¿· with Î ÎΡÎΣΤ .
Passages from Porphyry, Hierocles, Philo, Josephus, and the Rabbins, in which likewise moral devotion to God is set forth as self-sacrifice, see in Wetstein and Koppe. On the asyndeton , as strengthening the force of the predicative notion, in á¼Î³ ., εá½Î¬Ï . Ï . Î ., comp. Nägelsbach, z. Ilias , p. 50, Exodus 3:0 .
Ïὴν λογ . λαÏÏ . á½Î¼ .] accusative of epexegesis , an appositional definition, and that, indeed, not to the mere Î¸Ï Ïίαν (to the notion of which the wider notion of ÎÎΤΡÎÎÎÎ does not correspond), but to the whole Î ÎΡÎΣΤá¿Î£ÎÎ Î . Τ . Î . , containing, respecting this whole act of presenting offering, the judgment, what it ought to be; see Winer, p. 496 [E. T. 669]; Kühner, II. 1, p. 243 f. Luther aptly remarks: “the which is your reasonable service.” Comp. Lobeck, Paralip . p. 519; Nägelsbach, z. Il . iii. 51; Buttmann, neut. Gr . p. 134.
λαÏÏεία ] service of worship , as in John 16:2 . See on that passage. Comp. Romans 9:4 . λογικÏÏ , rational (1 Peter 2:2 ; Plato, Locr . p. 99 E, 102 E; Polyb. xxv. 9. 2), is not in contrast to ζῶα á¼Î»Î¿Î³Î± (Theodoret, Grotius, Koppe, and many others), which at most would only be to be assumed if ÎÎΤΡÎÎÎ were equivalent to ÎΥΣÎÎ , but generally to the ceremonial character of the Jewish and heathen worship, designating the ÎÎΤΡÎÎÎ here meant as a spiritual service, fulfilling itself in moral rational activity , of which nature the opus operatum of the Jewish and heathen cultus was not. The Test. XII. Patr. p. 547 calls the sacrifice of the angels λογικὴν κ . á¼Î½Î±Î¯Î¼Î±ÎºÏον ÏÏοÏÏοÏάν . On the idea, comp. John 4:24 ; Romans 1:9 ; Philippians 3:3 ; 1 Peter 2:5 ; Athenag. Leg . 13. Melanchthon: “ Cultus mentis , in quo mens fide aut coram intuetur Deum, et vere sentit timorem et laetitiam in Deo.” The opposite is the character of mechanical action, the á¼Î»Î¿Î³Î¿Ï ÏÏιβὴ καὶ á¼Î¼ÏειÏία (Plat. Gorg . p. 501 A).
Verse 2
Romans 12:2 . Infinitives (see the critical notes): ÏÏ ÏÏημαÏίζεÏθαι , to become like-shaped , and μεÏαμοÏÏοῦÏθαι , to become transformed . The two verbs stand in contrast only through the prepositions , without any difference of sense in the stem-words. Comp. the interchange of μοÏÏή and ÏÏá¿Î¼Î± in Philippians 2:7 , also the Greek usage of ÏÏημαÏίζειν and μοÏÏοῦν , which denote any kind of conformation according to the context (Plut. Mor . p. 719 B: Ïὸ μεμοÏÏÏμÎνον καὶ á¼ÏÏημαÏιÏμÎνον , Eur. Iph. T . 292: μοÏÏá¿Ï ÏÏήμαÏα ). Here of moral conformation, without requiring us to distinguish μοÏÏή and ÏÏá¿Î¼Î± as inner and outer (Bengel, Philippi), or as appearance to others and one’s own state in itself (Hofmann), On the interchange of the infinitive of the aorist ( ÏαÏαÏÏá¿Ïαι ) and present , comp. on Romans 6:12 .
Ïá¿· αἰῶνι ÏοÏÏῳ ] to the present age , running on to the Parousia , ×¢×Ö¹×Ö¸× ×Ö·×Ö¼Ö¶× (see on Matthew 12:32 ), the character (ethical mould) of which is that of immorality (Ephesians 2:2 ; Gal 1:4 ; 2 Corinthians 4:4 , et al .). ÏÏ ÏÏημαÏίζεÏθαι is also found in rhetoricians with the dative (as also 1 Peter 1:14 ), instead of with ÏÏÏÏ or Îµá¼°Ï .
Ïá¿ á¼Î½Î±ÎºÎ±Î¹Î½ . Ï . νοÏÏ ] whereby the μεÏαμοÏÏ . is to be effected: through the renewal of the thinking power ( ÎÎá¿¦Ï here, according to its practical side, the reason in its moral quality and activity; see on Romans 7:23 ; Ephesians 4:23 ). It needs this renewal in order to become the sphere of operation for the divine truth of salvation, when it, under the ascendency of á¼Î¼Î±ÏÏία in the ÏάÏξ , has become darkened, weak, unfree, and transformed into the á¼Î´ÏÎºÎ¹Î¼Î¿Ï Î½Î¿á¿¦Ï (Romans 1:28 ), the Î½Î¿á¿¦Ï Ïá¿Ï ÏαÏκÏÏ (Colossians 2:18 ). Comp. on Romans 7:23 . And this renewal, which the regenerate man also needs on account of the conflict of flesh and spirit which exists in him (Romans 8:4 ff.; Galatians 5:16 ff.) through daily penitence (Colossians 3:10 ; 2 Corinthians 7:10 ; 1 Thessalonians 5:22-23 ), is effected by means of the life-element of faith (Philippians 3:9 ff.), transforming the inner man (Ephesians 3:16-17 ; 2 Corinthians 5:17 ), under the influence of the Holy Spirit , Ephesians 4:23-24 ; Titus 3:5 . This influence restores the harmony in which the ÎÎá¿¦Ï ought to stand with the divine Î ÎÎῦÎÎ ; not, however, annulling the moral freedom of the believer, but, on the contrary, presupposing it; hence the exhortation: to be transformed ( passive ). As to the á¼ÎÎ in á¼ÎÎÎÎÎÎ ., see on Colossians 3:10 .
Îá¼¸Ï Î¤á¿¸ ÎÎÎÎÎ .] belongs not merely to á¼ÎÎÎÎÎÎΩΣÎÏ Î¤ . ÎÎá¿¸Ï á½Î . as its direction (Hofmann), but (comp. Philippians 1:10 and on Romans 1:20 ) specifies the aim of the ÎÎΤÎÎÎΡΦ . Τ . á¼ÎÎÎ . Τ . Î . á½Îá¿¶Î . To the man who is not transformed by the renewal of his intellect this proving which is no merely theoretical business of reflection, but is the critical practice of the whole inner life forms no part of the activity of conscience. Comp. Ephesians 5:10 . The sense: to be able to prove (Rückert, Köllner), is as arbitrarily introduced as in Romans 2:18 . He who is transformed by that renewal not merely can do , but which Paul has here in view as the immediate object of the μεÏαμοÏÏοῦÏθαι κ . Ï . λ . actually does the ÎÎÎÎÎÎÎÎÎÎ , and has thereby the foundation for a further moral development; he does it by means of the judgment of his conscience, stirred and illuminated by the Spirit (2 Corinthians 1:12 ). On ΤῸ ÎÎÎÎÎÎ ÎÎÎῦ , what is willed by God , comp. Matthew 6:10 ; Ephesians 5:17 ; Ephesians 6:6 ; Colossians 1:9 ; 1 Thessalonians 4:3 .
Ïὸ á¼Î³Î±Î¸á½¸Î½ κ . εá½Î¬Ï . κ . ÏÎλ .] is, by the Peschito, the Vulgate, Chrysostom, and most of the older interpreters, also by Rückert and Reiche, united adjectivally with Ïὸ θÎλ . But as εá½Î¬Ï . would thus be unsuitable to this, we must rather (with Erasmus, Castalio, and others, including Tholuck, Flatt, Köllner, de Wette, Fritzsche, Reithmayr, Philippi, van Hengel, Hofmann) approve the substantival rendering (as apposition to ΤῸ ÎÎÎ . Τ . ÎÎÎῦ ): that which is good and well-pleasing ( to God ) and perfect . The repetition of the article was the less necessary, as the three adjectives used substantivally exhaust one notion (that of moral good), and that climactically. Comp. Winer, p. 121 [E. T. 159]; Dissen, ad Dem. de cor . p. 373 f.; Kühner, II. 1, p. 528.
Verse 3
Romans 12:3 . The exhortation now passes on to single duties , amongst which that of humility and modesty , generally (Romans 12:3-5 ), and in respect of the individual ÏαÏίÏμαÏα in particular (Romans 12:6-8 ), is the first the first, too, compliance with which was indispensable to a prosperous life of the church. And Paul must have known how very necessary this same injunction was in the Roman community.
Î³Î¬Ï ] for . The special requirement which he is now to make serves in fact by way of confirmation to the general exhortation of Romans 12:2 . As to λÎÎ³Ï in the sense of enjoining , see on Romans 2:22 .
διὰ Ïá¿Ï ÏÎ¬Ï . Ïá¿Ï δοθ . μοι ] Paul does not command διʼ á¼Î±Ï Ïοῦ , but by means of, i.e. in virtue of the divine grace bestowed on him . It is thus that he characterizes and how at once truly and humbly! (1 Corinthians 15:10 ) his apostleship . Comp. Romans 15:15 ; 1 Corinthians 3:10 ; Ephesians 3:7-8 . This ÏάÏÎ¹Ï was given to him ( μοι ), not in common with Christians generally ( á½Î¼á¿Î½ , Romans 12:6 ).
ÏανÏá½¶ ⦠á½Î¼á¿Ï ] to every one in your community; none among you is to be exempt from this exhortation; not: to every one who thinks himself to be something among you (Koppe, Baumgarten-Crusius).
μὴ á½ÏεÏÏÏον . κ . Ï . λ .] not loftily-minded ought the Christian to be, going beyond the standard-rule of that disposition which is conformable to duty ( ÏαÏʼ ὠδεῠÏÏ .); but his disposition should be such as to have wise discretion (1 Peter 4:7 ) for its aim (comp. Hom. Il . xxiii. 305: Îµá¼°Ï á¼Î³Î±Î¸á½° ÏÏονÎÏν , Eur. Phoen . 1135: Îµá¼°Ï Î¼Î¬Ïην ÏÏονεá¿Î½ ). Paronomasia . Comp. Plat. Legg . x. p. 906 B: ÏÏÏÏοÏÏνη μεÏá½° ÏÏονήÏεÏÏ , Eur. Heracl . 388: Ïῶν ÏÏονήμαÏÏν ⦠Ïῶν á¼Î³Î±Î½ á½ÏεÏÏÏÏνÏν ; and see Wetstein.
á¼ÎºÎ¬ÏÏῳ á½¡Ï ] á¼ÎºÎ¬ÏÏῳ depends on á¼Î¼ÎÏιÏε (comp. 1Co 3:5 ; 1 Corinthians 7:17 , and on Romans 11:31 ), not on λÎÎ³Ï (Estius, Köllner) which view makes the already said ÏανÏá½¶ ⦠á½Î¼á¿Î½ to be once more repeated, and, on the other hand, deprives á¼Î¼ÎÏιÏε of its essential definition. á½©Ï designates the scale according to which each one ought ÏÏονεá¿Î½ Îµá¼°Ï Ïὸ ÏÏÏÏονεá¿Î½ , and this scale is different in persons differently furnished with gifts, so that for one the boundary, beyond which his ÏÏονεá¿Î½ ceases to be Îµá¼°Ï Ïὸ ÏÏÏÏονεá¿Î½ , is otherwise drawn than it is for another. The regulative standard, however, Paul expressly calls the measure of faith , which God has assigned. This is the subjective condition (the objective is the divine ÏάÏÎ¹Ï ) of that which every one can and ought to do in the Christian life of the church. According, namely, as faith in the case of individual Christians is more or less living, practical, energetic, efficacious in this or that direction, whether contemplative, or manifesting itself in the outer life, in eloquence and action, etc., they have withal to measure their appointed position and task in the church. He, therefore, who covets a higher or another standpoint and sphere of activity in the community, and is not contented with that which corresponds to the measure of faith bestowed on him, evinces a wilful self-exaltation, which is without measure and not of God not that spirit wherein the Christian μεÏÏιοÏÏοÏÏνη consists, the ÏÏονεá¿Î½ Îµá¼°Ï Ïὸ ÏÏÏÏονεá¿Î½ , á¼ÎºÎ¬ÏÏῳ á½¡Ï Îº . Ï . λ . The ÏίÏÏÎ¹Ï is therefore to be taken throughout in no other sense than the ordinary one: faith in Christ , of which the essence indeed is alike in all, but the individually different degrees of strength (comp. 1 Corinthians 13:2 ), and peculiarities of character in other respects (Romans 12:4 ff.), constitute for individuals the μÎÏÏον ÏίÏÏεÏÏ in quantitative and qualitative relation. Comp. Ephesians 4:7 . This likewise holds in opposition to Hofmann, who with violence separates μÎÏÏ . ÏίÏÏεÏÏ from á¼Î¼ÎÏιÏε , and takes it as an accusative of apposition, like Ïὴν λογικ . λαÏÏείαν á½Î¼á¿¶Î½ , Romans 12:1 ; holding ÏίÏÏεÏÏ to be the genitive of quality, which distinguishes the measure within which the thinking of the Christian is confined, from that which the natural man sets up for himself. Comp., in opposition to this strange separation, 2 Corinthians 10:13 , and in opposition to this artificial explanation of the genitive, 2 Corinthians 10:13 ; Ephesians 4:7 ; Ephesians 3:16 ; Plat. Theaet . p. 161 E: μÎÏÏῳ ⦠Ïá¿Ï Ïá½Ïοῦ ÏοÏÎ¯Î±Ï . Soph. El . 229: μÎÏÏον κακÏÏηÏÎ¿Ï . Eur. Ion , 354: á¼¥Î²Î·Ï Î¼ÎÏÏον . Pind. Isthm . i. 87: κεÏδÎÏν μ .
Verses 4-5
Romans 12:4-5 ff. Motive for compliance with the previous exhortation.
For the prevalence of the parallel between a human body and a corpus sociale (1 Corinthians 12:0 .) also among the ancients, see Grotius and Wetstein.
Ïá½° δὲ μÎλη ÏάνÏα κ . Ï . λ .] i.e. but the members, all of them, have different activity; thus, e.g. , the eyes another than the ears, the feet another than the mouth. Wrongly van Hengel takes the expression, as though οὠÏάνÏα were the reading, so that only some namely, those we possess in pairs would be meant, not all .
οἱ Ïολλοί ] the many , i.e. the multiplicity of Christians taken together, in opposition to the unity of the body which they compose. Comp. Romans 5:15 .
á¼Î½ ΧÏιÏÏá¿· ] The common element in which the union consists; out of Christ we should not be á¼Î½ Ïῶμα , but this we are in Him , in the fellowship of faith and life with Christ. He is the Head (Ephesians 1:22-23 ; Ephesians 4:15 ; Colossians 1:18 ; Colossians 2:19 ), a relation which is understood of itself by the consciousness of faith, but is not denoted by á¼Î½ ΧÏιÏÏá¿· (as if this meant on Christ ), as Koppe, Rosenmüller, and older interpreters hold.
Ïὸ δὲ καθʼ Îµá¼·Ï ] but in what concerns the individual relation . In good Greek it would be Ïὸ δὲ καθʼ á¼Î½Î± (see on Mark 14:19 , and Bernhardy, p. 329; Kühner, II. 1, p. 414); but καθʼ Îµá¼·Ï , in which καÏά has quite lost its regimen, is a very frequent solecism in the later Greek writers (Mark, l.c. ; John 8:9 ; 3Ma 5:34 ). See Lucian, Soloec . 9, and Graev. in loc. ; Thom. Mag. p. 483; Wetstein on Mark, l.c. ; Winer, p. 234 [E. T. 312]. Τὸ καθʼ Îµá¼·Ï is groundlessly condemned by Fritzsche as “commentitia formula.” If καθʼ Îµá¼·Ï and ὠκαθʼ Îµá¼·Ï were in use (and this was the case), it follows that Ïὸ καθʼ Îµá¼·Ï might be just as well said as Ïὸ καθʼ á¼Î½Î± (comp. Ïὸ καθʼ á¼Î±Ï ÏÏν and the like, Matthiae, § 283; Kühner, II. 1, p. 272). See also Buttmann, neut . Gr. p. 26 f.
Verses 6-8
Romans 12:6-8 . In the poseession, however, of different gifts . This á¼ÏονÏÎµÏ Î´á½² ÏαÏίÏμαÏα κ . Ï . λ . corresponds to Ïá½° δὲ μÎλη ÏάνÏα οὠÏὴν αá½Ïὴν á¼Ïει ÏÏᾶξιν , Romans 12:4 .
As regards the construction , the view adopted by Reiche, de Wette, and Lachmann makes á¼ÏονÏÎµÏ a participial definition of á¼Ïμεν , Romans 12:5 ; accordingly, εἴÏε ÏÏοÏηÏείαν and εἴÏε διακονίαν depend on á¼ÏονÏÎµÏ as a specifying apposition to ÏαÏίÏμαÏα ; whilst the limiting definitions καÏá½° Ïὴν á¼Î½Î±Î» . Ï . ÏίÏÏ ., á¼Î½ Ïῠδιακ ., á¼Î½ ÏῠδιδαÏκ ., á¼Î½ Ïá¿ ÏαÏακλ . κ . Ï . λ . are parallel to the καÏá½° Ïὴν ÏάÏιν δοθ . ἡμá¿Î½ , and with εἴÏε ὠδιδάÏκÏν the discourse varies, without however becoming directly hortatory. Comp. also Rückert. But usually καÏá½° Ïὴν á¼Î½Î±Î» . Ï . ÏιÏÏ ., á¼Î½ Ïῠδιακ . κ . Ï . λ ., are regarded as elliptical hortatory sentences , whilst á¼ÏονÏÎµÏ is by some likewise attached to the foregoing (Theodoret, Erasmus, Luther, Castalio, Calvin, Estius, and others, including Flatt, Tholuck, Reithmayr), and with others á¼ÏονÏÎµÏ begins a new sentence (so Olshausen, Fritzsche, Baumgarten-Crusius, Philippi, van Hengel, Hofmann, following Beza). The usual construction is the only correct one (in which, most suitably to the progressive δΠ, a new sentence commences with á¼ÏονÏÎµÏ ), because, under the mode followed by Reiche and de Wette, the alleged limitations á¼Î½ Ïῠδιακ ., á¼Î½ ÏῠδιδαÏκ ., and á¼Î½ Ïá¿ ÏαÏακλ . either express nothing, or must be taken arbitrarily in a variety of meaning different from that of the words with which they stand; and because á¼Î½ á¼ÏλÏÏηÏι , á¼Î½ ÏÏÎ¿Ï Î´á¿ , and á¼Î½ ἱλαÏÏÏηÏι , Romans 12:8 , are obviously of a hortatory character, and therefore the previous expressions with á¼Î½ may not be taken otherwise. By way of filling up the concise maxims thrown out elliptically, and only as it were in outline, it is sufficient after καÏá½° Ïὴν á¼Î½Î±Î»Î¿Î³ . Ï . ÏίÏÏ . to supply: ÏÏοÏηÏεÏÏμεν , after á¼Î½ Ïῠδιακονίᾳ : ὦμεν , after á¼Î½ ÏῠδιδαÏκαλίᾳ ; á¼ÏÏÏ , the same after á¼Î½ Ïá¿ ÏαÏακλήÏει ; and lastly, after the three following particulars, á¼Î½ á¼ÏλÏÏηÏι κ . Ï . λ ., the imperatives of the corresponding verbs ( μεÏαδιδÏÏÏ Îº . Ï . λ .). Comp. the similar mode of expression in 1 Peter 4:10-11 .
ÏαÏίÏμαÏα ] denotes the different peculiar aptitudes for the furtherance of Christian life in the church and of its external welfare, imparted by God’s grace through the principle of the Holy Spirit working in the Christian communion (hence ÏÎ½ÎµÏ Î¼Î±Ïικά , 1 Corinthians 12:1 ), On their great variety, amidst the specific unity of their origin from the efficacy of this Spirit, see esp. 1 Corinthians 12:4 ff.
Paul here mentions by way of example (for more, see 1 Corinthians 12:0 ), in the first instance, four of such ÏαÏίÏμαÏα , namely: (1) ÏÏοÏηÏεία , the gift of theopneustic discourse , which presupposes á¼ÏÎ¿ÎºÎ¬Î»Ï ÏÎ¹Ï , and the form of which, appearing in different ways (hence also in the plural in 1 Corinthians 13:8 ; 1 Thessalonians 5:20 ), was not ecstatic, like the speaking with tongues, but was an activity of the Î½Î¿á¿¦Ï enlightened and filled with the consecration of the Spirit’s power, disclosing hidden things, and profoundly seizing, chastening, elevating, carrying away men’s hearts, held in peculiar esteem by the apostle (1 Corinthians 14:1 ). Comp. on 1 Corinthians 12:10 . Further, (2) διακονία : the gift of administration of the external affairs of the church , particularly the care of the poor, the sick, and strangers; comp. 1 Corinthians 12:28 , where the functions of the diaconia are termed á¼Î½ÏιλήÏÎµÎ¹Ï . Acts 6:1 ff.; Philippians 1:1 ; 1 Timothy 3:8 ; 1 Timothy 3:12 ; 1 Peter 4:11 ; Romans 16:1 . The service of the diaconate in the church, which grew out of that of the seven men of Acts 6:0 , is really of apostolic origin: Clem. Cor . 1:42, 44; Ritschl, altkath. Kirche , p. 359; Jul. Müller, dogmat. Abh . p. 560 ff. (3) The διδαÏκαλία , the gift of instruction in the usual form of teaching directed to the understanding ( á¼Î¾ Î¿á¼°ÎºÎµÎ¯Î±Ï Î´Î¹Î±Î½Î¿Î¯Î±Ï , Chrysostom, ad 1 Corinthians 12:28 ), see on Acts 13:1 ; Ephesians 4:11 ; 1 Corinthians 14:26 . It was not yet limited to a particular office; see Ritschl, p. 350 f. (4) ÏαÏάκληÏÎ¹Ï , the gift of hortatory and encouraging address operating on the heart and will , the possessor of which probably connected his discourses, in the assemblies after the custom of the synagogue (see on Acts 13:15 ), with a portion of Scripture read before the people. Comp. Acts 4:36 ; Acts 11:23-24 ; Justin, Apol . I. c. 67.
καÏá½° Ïὴν á¼Î½Î±Î» . Ï . ÏίÏÏ .] Conformably to the proportion of their faith the prophets have to use their prophetic gift, i.e. (comp. Romans 12:3 ): they are not to depart from the proportional measure which their faith has, neither wishing to exceed it nor falling short of it, but are to guide themselves by it, and are therefore so to announce and interpret the received á¼ÏÎ¿ÎºÎ¬Î»Ï ÏÎ¹Ï , as the peculiar position in respect of faith bestowed on them, according to the strength, clearness, fervour, and other qualities of that faith, suggests so that the character and mode of their speaking is conformed to the rules and limits, which are implied in the proportion of their individual degree of faith. In the contrary case they fall, in respect of contents and of form, into a mode of prophetic utterance, either excessive and overstrained, or on the other hand insufficient and defective (not corresponding to the level of their faith). The same revelation may in fact according to the difference in the proportion of faith with which it, objectively given, subjectively connects itself be very differently expressed and delivered. á¼Î½Î±Î»Î¿Î³Î¯Î± , proportio , very current (also as a mathematical expression) in the classics (comp. esp. on καÏá½° Ï . á¼Î½Î±Î»Î¿Î³ . Plato, Polit . p. 257 B, Locr . p. 95 B; Dem. 262. 5), is here in substance not different from μÎÏÏον , Romans 12:3 ; comp. Plato, Tim . p. 69 B: á¼Î½Î¬Î»Î¿Î³Î± καὶ ξÏμμεÏÏα . Hofmann groundlessly denies this (in consequence of his incorrect view of μÎÏÏον ÏίÏÏεÏÏ , Romans 12:3 ), yet likewise arrives at the sense, that prophetic utterance must keep equal pace with the life of faith. Paul might, in fact, have written ÏÏ Î¼Î¼ÎÏÏÏÏ Ïá¿ ÏίÏÏει , and would have thereby substantially expressed the same thing as καÏá½° Ï . á¼Î½Î±Î» . Ï . ÏίÏÏ . or á¼Î½Î±Î»ÏγÏÏ Ï . Ï . The old dogmatic interpretation (still unknown, however, to the Greek Fathers, who rightly take Ï . ÏίÏÏεÏÏ subjectively, of the fides qua creditur) of the regula fidei ( ÏίÏÏÎ¹Ï in the objective sense, fides quae creditur), i.e. of the conformitas doctrinae in scripturis (see esp. Colovius), departs arbitrarily from the thought contained in Romans 12:3 , and from the immediate context ( καÏá½° Ï . ÏÎ¬Ï . Ï . δοθ . ἡμá¿Î½ ), and cannot in itself be justified by linguistic usage (see on Romans 1:5 ). It reappears, however, substantially in Flatt, Klee, Glöckler, Köllner, Philippi (“to remain subject to the norma et regula fidei Christianae”), Umbreit, Bisping, although they do not, like many of the older commentators, take prophecy to refer to the explanation of Scripture .
á¼Î½ Ïῠδιακονίᾳ ] If it be the case that we have diaconia (as ÏαÏίÏμα ), let us be in our diaconia . The emphasis lies on á¼Î½ . He who has the gift of the diaconia should not desire to have a position in the life of the church outside of the sphere of service which is assigned to him by this endowment, but should be active within that sphere . That by διακονία is not intended any ecclesiastical office generally (Chrysostom, Luther, Reithmayr, Hofmann), is shown by the charismatic elements of the entire context. On εἶναι á¼Î½ , versari in , comp. 1 Timothy 4:15 ; Plato, Prot . p. 317 C, Phaed . p. 59 A; Demosth. 301. 6, et al .; Krüger, ad Dion. Hist . p. 269, 70.
εἴÏε ὠδιδάÏκÏν ] Symmetrically, Paul should have continued with εἴÏε διδαÏκαλίαν ( sc . á¼ÏονÏÎµÏ ), as A. actually reads. Instead of this, however, he proceeds in such a way as now to introduce the different possessors of gifts in the third person , and therefore no longer dependent on the we implied in á¼ÏονÏÎµÏ . The change of conception and construction may accordingly be thus exhibited: “While, however, we have different gifts, we should, be it prophecy that we have, make use of it according to the proportion of our faith, be it diaconia that we have, labour within the diaconia, be it that it is the teacher , (he should) be active within the sphere of teaching, etc.” After ὠδιδάÏκÏν , simply á¼ÏÏί is to be supplied: if it , viz. one charismatically gifted, is the teacher . The apostle, in the urgent fulness of ideas which are yet to be only concisely expressed, has lost sight of the grammatical connection; comp. Buttmann, neut. Gr . p. 331. Hofmann’s expedient, that here εἴÏε ⦠εἴÏε are subordinated to the preceding á¼Î½ Ïῠδιακονίᾳ , and ὠδιδάÏκÏν and á½ ÏαÏακαλῶν are to be taken as a parenthetical apposition to the subject of the verb to be supplied (“ be it that he, the teacher, handles teaching ,” etc.), is an artificial scheme forced upon him by his incorrect view of διακονία , and at variance with the co-ordinated relation of the first two cases of εἴÏε .
Verse 8
Romans 12:8 . ὠμεÏÎ±Î´Î¹Î´Î¿á½ºÏ Îº . Ï . λ .] The detailed exposition with εἴÏε ceases as the discourse flows onward more vehemently, but the series of those charismatically endowed is continued , yet in such a way that now there are no longer mentioned such as possess a ÏάÏιÏμα for a definite function in the church, but such as possess it generally for the activity of public usefulness in the social Christian life . Hence, because with á¼Î½ á¼ÏλÏÏηÏι κ . Ï . λ . the continuance of the exhortations is indicated, we are to place before ὠμεÏÎ±Î´Î¹Î´Î¿á½ºÏ not a full stop, but a comma, or, better, a colon. The reference of these last three points to definite ministerial functions (such as that ὠμεÏαδιδ . is the diaconus who distributes the gifts of love; á½ ÏÏοÏÏÏάμ . the president of the community , bishop or presbyter; á½ á¼Î»Îµá¿¶Î½ he who takes charge of the sick ) is refuted, first, by the fact that the assumed references of μεÏαδιδ . (according to Acts 4:35 , we should at least expect διαδιδοÏÏ ) are quite incapable of proof, and indeed improbable in themselves; secondly, by the consideration that such an analysis of the diaconal gift would be out of due place, after mention had been already made of the διακονία as a whole; and thirdly, by the consideration that the position of the ÏÏοÏÏÏÎ¬Î¼ÎµÎ½Î¿Ï , as the presbyter , between two diaconal functions, and almost at the end of the series, would he unsuitable. But if we should wish to explain ÏÏοÏÏÏάμ . as guardian of the strangers (my first edition; Borger), there is an utter want of proof both for this particular feature of the diaconia and for its designation by ÏÏοÏÏÏάμ . (for the ÏÏοÏÏάÏÎ·Ï at Athens, the patron of the metoeci , was something quite different; Hermann, Staatsalterth . § 115. 4).
ὠμεÏαδιδοÏÏ ] he who imparts , who exercises the charisma of charitableness by imparting of his means to the poor. Ephesians 4:28 ; Luke 3:11 . To understand the imparting of spiritual good (Baumgarten-Crusius), or this along with the other (Hofmann), receives no support from the context, especially seeing that the spiritual imparting has already been previously disposed of in its distinctive forms.
á¼Î½ á¼ÏλÏÏ .] in simplicity , therefore without any selfishness, without boasting, secondary designs, etc., but in plain sincerity of disposition. Comp. 2Co 8:2 ; 2 Corinthians 9:11 ; 2 Corinthians 9:13 , and the classical collocations of á¼ÏÎ»Î¿á¿¦Ï ÎºÎ±á½¶ á¼Î»Î·Î¸Î®Ï , á¼Ïλ . κ . γενναá¿Î¿Ï κ . Ï . λ . On the subject-matter, comp. Matthew 6:2 ff.
á½ ÏÏοÏÏÏÎ¬Î¼ÎµÎ½Î¿Ï ] the president , he who exercises the ÏάÏιÏμα of presiding over others as leader, of directing affairs and the like (comp. ÏÏοÎÏÏαÏθαι Ïῶν ÏÏαγμάÏÏν , Herodian, vii. 10. 16), consequently one who through spiritual endowment is á¼¡Î³ÎµÎ¼Î¿Î½Î¹Îºá½¸Ï ÎºÎ±á½¶ á¼ÏÏικÏÏ (Plato, Prot . p. 352 B). This ÏάÏιÏμα ÏÏοÏÏαÏικÏν had to be possessed by the presbyter or á¼ÏίÏκοÏÎ¿Ï for behoof of his work (comp. 1 Corinthians 12:28 ); but we are not to understand it as applying to him exclusively, or to explain it specially of the office of presbyter, as Rothe and Philippi again do, in spite of the general nature of the context, while Hofmann likewise thinks that the presbyter is meant, not as respects his office , but as respects his activity . What is meant is the category of charismatic endowment, under which the work destined for the presbyter falls to be included .
á¼Î½ ÏÏÎ¿Ï Î´á¿ ] with zeal; it is the earnest, strenuous attention to the fulfilment of duty, the opposite of ÏÎ±Ï Î»ÏÏÎ·Ï .
á½ á¼Î»Îµá¿¶Î½ ] he who is merciful towards the suffering and unfortunate, to whom it is his ÏάÏιÏμα to administer comfort, counsel, help.
á¼Î½ ἱλαÏÏÏ .] with cheerful, friendly demeanour, 2 Corinthians 9:7 , the opposite of a reluctant and sullen carriage. Comp. Xen. Mem . ii. 7. 12 : ἱλαÏαὶ δὲ á¼Î½Ïá½¶ ÏÎºÏ Î¸ÏÏÏῶν .
Observe, further, that á¼Î½ á¼ÏλÏÏ ., á¼Î½ ÏÏÎ¿Ï Î´á¿ , and á¼Î½ ἱλαÏÏÏ . do not denote, like the preceding definitions with á¼Î½ , the sphere of service within which the activity is to exert itself, but the quality , with which those who are gifted are to do their work; and all these three qualities characterize, in like manner, the nature of true ÏÏÏÏονεá¿Î½ , Romans 12:3 .
Verse 9
Romans 12:9 . Ἡ á¼Î³Î¬Ïη á¼Î½Ï ÏÏÎºÏ .] sc . á¼ÏÏÏ . The supplying of the imperative (comp. Romans 12:7 ), which is rare in the classical writers (Bernhardy, p. 331; Kühner, II. 1, p. 37), cannot occasion any scruple in this so briefly sketching hortatory address. á¼Î½Ï ÏÏκÏιÏÎ¿Ï is not found in classical Greek, but it occurs in Wis 5:19 ; Wis 18:16 , 2 Corinthians 6:6 , 1Ti 1:5 , 2 Timothy 1:5 , Jam 3:12 , 1 Peter 1:22 . Antoninus, viii. 5, has the adverb, like Clem. Cor. II. 12.
The absolute ἡ á¼Î³Î¬Ïη is always love towards others (see esp. 1 Corinthians 13:0 ), of which ÏιλαδελÏία is the special form having reference to Christian fellowship, Romans 12:10 . As love must be, so must be also faith, its root, 1 Timothy 1:5 ; 2 Timothy 1:5 .
The following participles and adjectives may be taken either together as preparing for the εá½Î»Î¿Î³Îµá¿Ïε ÏÎ¿á½ºÏ Î´Î¹Ïκ . in Romans 12:14 , and as dependent on this (Lachm. ed. min .); or , as corresponding to the personal subject of ἡ á¼Î³Î¬Ïη á¼Î½Ï ÏÏÎºÏ . (so Fritzsche), see on 2 Corinthians 1:7 ; or , finally, by the supplying of á¼ÏÏÎ as mere precepts, so that after á¼Î½Ï ÏÏÎºÏ . there should be placed a full stop, and another after διÏκονÏÎµÏ in Romans 12:13 . So usually; also by Lachmann, ed. maj ., and Tischendorf. The latter view alone, after ἡ á¼Î³Î¬Ïη á¼Î½Ï ÏÏÎºÏ . has been supplemented by the imperative of the substantive verb, is the natural one, and correspondent in its concise mode of expression to the whole character stamped on the passage; the two former modes of connection exhibit a formal interdependence on the part of elements that are heterogeneous in substance.
á¼ÏοÏÏÏ Î³Î¿á¿¦Î½ÏÎµÏ ] abhorring . The strengthening significance of the compound, already noted by Chrysostom, Theodoret, Oecumenius, and Theophylact, has been groundlessly denied by Fritzsche; it is quite appropriate in passages like Herod, ii. 47, vi. 129; Soph. Oed. C . 186, 691; Eur. Ion . 488; Parthen. Erot . 8.
Ïὸ ÏονηÏÏν and Ïá¿· á¼Î³Î±Î¸á¿· are to be taken generally of moral evil and good; abhorrence of the one and adherence to the other form the fundamental moral character of unfeigned love. The evil and good which are found in the object of love (Hofmann) are included, but not specially meant. Comp. 1 Corinthians 13:6 .
Verses 9-21
Romans 12:9-21 . Exhortations for all without distinction , headed by love!
Verse 10
Romans 12:10 . ΤῠÏÎ¹Î»Î±Î´ÎµÎ»Ï ] In respect of (in point of) brotherly love (love towards fellow-Christians, 1 Thessalonians 4:9 ; Hebrews 13:1 ; 1 Peter 1:22 ; 2 Peter 1:7 ). On its relation to á¼Î³Î¬Ïη , comp. generally Galatians 6:10 .
ÏιλÏÏÏοÏγοι ] fondly affectionate; an expression purposely chosen, because Christians are brothers and sisters , as the word is also in classical Greek the usual one for family affection . Comp. also Cicero, ad Att . xv. 17.
Ïá¿ Ïιμῠ] in the point of moral respect and high estimation .
ÏÏοηγοÏμενοι ] not: excelling (Chrysostom, Morus, Köllner), nor yet: anticipating (Vulgate, Theophylact, Luther, Castalio, Wolf, Flatt), but, in correspondence with the signification of the word: going before , as guides , namely, with the conduct that incites others to follow. Without the support of usage Erasmus, Grotius, Heumann, Koppe, and Hofmann take ÏÏοηγεá¿Ïθαι as equivalent to ἡγεá¿Ïθαι á½ÏεÏÎÏονÏÎ±Ï (Philippians 2:3 ), se ipso potiores ducere alios , which would be denoted by ἡγεá¿Ïθαι ÏÏὸ á¼Î±Ï Ïῶν á¼Î»Î» . (Philippians 2:3 ). In Greek it does not elsewhere occur with the accusative , but only with the dative (Xen. Cyr . ii. 1. 1; Arist. Plut . 1195; Polyb. xii. 5. 10) or genitive of the person (Xen. Hipp . 4. 5; Herodian, vi. 8. 6.; Polyb. xii. 13. 11); with the accusative only, as in Xen. Anab . vi. 5. 10, ÏÏοηγ . á½Î´Ïν .
Verse 11
Romans 12:11 . ΤῠÏÏÎ¿Ï Î´á¿ ] in respect of zeal , namely, for the interests of the Christian life in whatever relation.
Ïá¿· Ïν . ζÎονÏÎµÏ ] seething, boiling in spirit , the opposite of á½ÎºÎ½Î·Ïοὶ Ïá¿ ÏÏÎ¿Ï Î´á¿ ; hence Ïá¿· ÏνεÏμ . is not to be understood of the Holy Spirit (Oecumenius and many others, including Holsten, Weiss), but of the human spirit. Comp. Acts 18:25 . That this fervent excitement of the activity of thought, feeling, and will for Christian aims is stirred up by the Holy Spirit, is obvious of itself, but is not of itself expressed by Ïá¿· ÏνεÏμαÏι . ÎÎÏ of the mental aestuare is also frequent in the classics; Plato, Rep . iv. p. 440 C, Phaedr . p. 251 B; Soph. Oed. C . 435; Eur. Hec . 1055; and Pflugk in loc . See also Jacobs, ad Anthol . IX. p. 203; Dorville, ad Charit . p. 233.
Ïá¿· καιÏá¿· Î´Î¿Ï Î» .] consigns without, in view of the whole laying out of the discourse as dependent on ἡ á¼Î³Î¬Ïη á¼Î½Ï ÏÏÎºÏ ., Romans 12:9 , requiring a connective δΠ(against van Hengel) the fervour of spirit to the limits of Christian prudence, which, amidst its most lively activity, yet in conformity with true love, accommodates itself to the circumstances of the time , with moral discretion does not aim at placing itself in independence of them or oppose them with headlong stubbornness, but submits to them with a wise self-denial (1 Corinthians 13:4-8 ). Comp. on the ÎÎΥΠ. Τῷ ÎÎÎΡῷ ( tempori servire , Cicero, ad Div . ix. 17, Tuscul . iii. 27. 66) and synonymous expressions ( καιÏá¿· λαÏÏεÏειν , Ïοá¿Ï ÎºÎ±Î¹Ï . á¼ÎºÎ¿Î»Î¿Ï θεá¿Î½ ), which are used in a good or bad sense according to the context, Wetstein and Fritzsche in loc.; Jacobs, ad Anthol . X. p. 261. On the thing itself, see Cic. ad Div . iv. 6 : “ad novos casus temporum novorum consiliorum rationes accommodare.”
Verse 12
Romans 12:12 . In virtue of hope (of the future δÏξα , Romans 5:2 ) joyful . The dative denotes the motive (Kühner, II. i. p. 380).
Ïῠθλ . á½Ïομ .] in the presence of tribulation holding out , remaining constant in it. On the dative, comp. Kühner, l.c . p. 385. Paul might have written Ïὴν θλá¿Ïιν á½Ïομ . (1 Corinthians 13:7 ; 2 Timothy 2:19 ; Hebrews 10:32 , et al ., and according to the classical use); he writes, however, in the line of formal symmetry with the other expressions, the dative and then the absolute á½ÏομÎν . (Matthew 10:22 ; 2 Timothy 2:12 ; James 5:11 ; 1 Peter 2:20 ).
Ï . ÏÏοÏÎµÏ Ïá¿ ÏÏοÏκ .] perseveringly applying to prayer , Colossians 4:2 ; Acts 1:14 .
Verse 13
Romans 12:13 . Having fellowship in the necessities of the saints (comp. Romans 15:27 ), i.e. so conducting yourselves that the necessities of your fellow-Christians may be also your own , seeking therefore just so to satisfy them. Comp. on Philippians 4:14 . The transitive sense: communicating (still held by Rückert and Fritzsche, following many of the older interpreters), finds nowhere, at least in the N. T., any confirmation (not even in Galatians 6:6 ). The ἠγιοι , are the Christians in general, not specially those of Jerusalem (Hofmann), who are indicated in Romans 15:25 , but not here, by the context .
Ïὴν Ïιλοξ .] studying hospitality . Comp. Heb 13:3 ; 1 Peter 4:9 . A virtue highly important at that time, especially in the case of travelling, perhaps banished and persecuted, Christian brethren. Comp. also 1 Timothy 5:10 ; Titus 1:8 . That those in need of shelter should not merely be received, but also sought out , belongs, under certain circumstances, to the fulfilment of this duty, but is not expressed by διÏκονÏÎµÏ (as Origen and Bengel hold). Comp. Romans 9:30 ; á¼Î¡ÎΤá¿Î ÎÎÎÎÎÎÎ , Plato, Theaet . p. 176 B; Ïὸ á¼Î³Î±Î¸á½¸Î½ διÏκειν and the like, Sir 27:8 , et al .; á¼Î´Î¹ÎºÎ¯Î±Î½ διÏκειν , Plat. Rep . p. 545 B.
Verse 14
Romans 12:14 . Î¤Î¿á½ºÏ Î´Î¹Ïκ . á½Î¼ .] who persecute you (in any respect whatever). The saying of Christ, Matthew 5:44 , was perhaps known to the apostle and here came to his recollection, without his having read however, as Reiche here again assumes (comp. on Romans 2:19 ), the Gospels.
Verse 15
Romans 12:15 . ΧαίÏειν ] i.e. ÏαίÏειν á½Î¼á¾¶Ï δεῠ, infinitive , as a briefly interjected expression of the necessary behaviour desired. See on Philippians 3:16 . On the subject-matter, comp. Sir 7:34 . Rightly Chrysostom brings into prominence the fact that κλαίειν κ . Ï . λ ., Î³ÎµÎ½Î½Î±Î¯Î±Ï ÏÏÏδÏα δεá¿Ïαι ÏÏ Ïá¿Ï , á½¥ÏÏε Ïá¿· εá½Î´Î¿ÎºÎ¹Î¼Î¿á¿¦Î½Ïι μὴ μÏνον μὴ Ïθονεá¿Î½ , á¼Î»Î»á½° καὶ ÏÏ Î½Î®Î´ÎµÏθαι .
Verse 16
Romans 12:16 . These participles are also to be understood imperatively by supplying á¼ÏεÏθε (comp. on Romans 12:9 ), and not to be joined to Romans 12:15 , nor yet to μὴ γίνεÏθε ÏÏÏν . ÏαÏʼ á¼Î±Ï Ï .
Ïὸ αá½Ïὸ Îµá¼°Ï á¼Î»Î» . ÏÏονοῦνÏÎµÏ ] characterizes the loving harmony , when each, in respect to his neighbour ( Îµá¼°Ï , not á¼Î½ as in Romans 15:5 ), has one and the same thought and endeavour. Comp. generally Romans 15:5 ; Philippians 2:2 ; Philippians 4:2 ; 2 Corinthians 13:11 . According to Fritzsche, Ïὸ αá½ÏÏ refers to what follows , so that modesty is meant as that towards which their mind should be mutually directed. But thus this clause of the discourse would not be independent , which is contrary to the analogy of the rest.
μὴ Ïá½° á½Ïηλὰ ÏÏονοῦνÏÎµÏ ] not aiming at high things , a warning against ambitious self-seeking. Comp. Romans 11:20 ; 1 Timothy 6:7 .
Ïοá¿Ï ÏαÏεινοá¿Ï ] is neuter (Fritzsche, Reiche, Köllner, Glöckler, de Wette, Baumgarten-Crusius, Borger, Reithmayr, Philippi, Maier, Bisping, following Beza and Calvin): being drawn onward by the lowly; i.e. instead of following the impulse to high things, rather yielding to that which is humble, to the claims and tasks which are presented to you by the humbler relations of life, entering into this impulse towards the lower strata and spheres of life, which lays claim to you, and following it. The ÏαÏεινά ought to have for the Christian a force of attraction, in virtue of which he yields himself to fellowship with them ( ÏÏ Î½ ), and allows himself to be guided by them in the determination of his conduct. Thus the Christian holds intercourse, sympathetically and effectively, in the lower circles, with the poor, sick, persecuted, etc.; thus Paul felt himself compelled to enter into humble situations, to work as a handicraftsman, to suffer need and nakedness, to be weak with the weak, etc. With less probability, on account of the contrast of Ïá½° á½Ïηλά , others have taken Ïοá¿Ï ÏαÏειν . as masculine , some of them understanding ÏαÏεινÏÏ of inferior rank , some of humble disposition , some blending both meanings with very different definitions of the sense of the whole, e.g. Chrys.: Îµá¼°Ï Ïá½´Ï á¼ÎºÎµÎ¯Î½Ïν εá½ÏÎλειαν καÏάβηθι , ÏÏ Î¼ÏεÏιÏÎÏÎ¿Ï , μὴ á¼ÏÎ»á¿¶Ï Ïá¿· ÏÏονήμαÏι ÏÏ Î½ÏαÏεινοῦ , á¼Î»Î»á½° καὶ βοήθει καὶ Ïεá¿Ïα á½ÏÎÎ³Î¿Ï Îº . Ï . λ .; similarly Erasmus, Luther, Estius, and others; Grotius (comp. Ewald): “modestissimorum exempla sectantes;” Rückert (comp. van Hengel): “let it please you to remain in fellowship with the lowly;” Olshausen: Christianity enjoins intercourse with publicans and sinners in order to gain them for the kingdom of Christ; Hofmann: “to be drawn into the host of those who occupy an inferior station and desire nothing else, and, as their equals, disappearing amongst them, to move with them along the way in which they go.”
ÏÏ Î½Î±Ïαγ .] has not in itself, nor has it here, the bad sense: to be led astray along with , which it acquires in Galatians 2:13 , 2 Peter 3:17 , through the context .
ÏÏÏνιμοι ÏαÏʼ á¼Î±Ï Ï .] wise according to your own judgment . Comp. Proverbs 3:7 ; Bernhardy, p. 256 f. One must not fall into that conceited self-sufficiency of moral perception , whereby brotherly respect for the perception of others would be excluded. Similar, but not equivalent, is á¼Î½ á¼Î±Ï Ï ., Romans 11:25 .
Verses 17-19
Romans 12:17-19 . The participles to be supplemented here as in Romans 12:16 are not to be connected with μὴ γίνεÏθε ÏÏÏν . ÏαÏʼ á¼Î±Ï Ï .
μηδενί ] be he Christian or non-Christian. Opposite: ÏάνÏÏν á¼Î½Î¸ÏÏÏÏν . The maxim itself taught also by Greek sages, how opposed it was to the á¼Î´Î¹ÎºÎµá¿Î½ Ïá¿· á¼Î´Î¹ÎºÎ¿á¿¦Î½Ïι of common Hellenism (Hermann, ad Soph. Philoct . 679; Jacobs, ad Delect. Epigr . p. 144; Stallbaum, ad Plat. Crit . p. 49 B, ad Phileb . p. 49 D) and to Pharisaism (see on Matthew 5:43 )!
ÏÏονοοÏμενοι ] reminiscence from the LXX., Proverbs 3:4 . For this very reason, but especially because otherwise an entirely unsuitable limitation of the absolute moral notion of καλά would result, á¼Î½ÏÏιον κ . Ï . λ . is not to be joined to καλά (Ewald, Hofmann); it belongs to ÏÏονοοÏμ . Comp. 2 Corinthians 8:21 ; Polycarp, ad Phil . 6. Before the eyes of all men so that it lies before the judgment of all taking care for what is good (morality and decency in behaviour). Verbs of caring are used both with the genitive (1 Timothy 5:8 ) and with the accusative (Bernhardy, p. 176), which in the classics also is very frequently found with ÏÏονοεá¿Ïθαι . Rightly Theophylact remarks on á¼Î½ÏÏ . ÏάνÏÏν á¼Î½Î¸Ï . that Paul does not thereby exhort us to live ÏÏá½¸Ï ÎºÎµÎ½Î¿Î´Î¿Î¾Î¯Î±Î½ , but ἵνα μὴ ÏαÏÎÏÏμεν καθʼ ἡμῶν á¼ÏοÏÎ¼á½°Ï Ïοá¿Ï Î²Î¿Ï Î»Î¿Î¼ÎÎ½Î¿Î¹Ï , he recommends that which is á¼ÏκανδάλιÏÏον κ . á¼ÏÏÏÏκοÏον .
εἰ Î´Ï Î½Î±Ïὸν , Ïὸ á¼Î¾ á½Î¼á¿¶Î½ μεÏá½° κ . Ï . λ .] to be so punctuated. For if the two were to be joined together (“as much as it is possible for you,” Glöckler), the injunction would lose all moral character. Still less are we to suppose that εἰ Î´Ï Î½Î±ÏÏν belongs to the preceding (Erasmus, Cajetanus, Bengel), which indeed admits of no condition. Grotius’ view is the correct one: “omnium amici este, si fieri potest; si non potest utrimque, certe ex vestra parte amici este,” so that εἰ Î´Ï Î½Î±ÏÏν allows the case of objective impossibility to avail (how often had Paul himself experienced this!); Ïὸ á¼Î¾ ὠμε Í Î½ (adverbially: as to what concerns your part , that which proceeds from you; see generally on Romans 1:15 , and Ellendt, Lex. Soph . II. p. 225) annuls any limitation in a subjective respect, and does not contain a subjective limitation (Reiche), since we for our part are supposed to be always and in any case peaceably disposed, so that only the opposite disposition and mode of behaviour of the enemy can frustrate our subjective peaceableness.
á¼Î³Î±ÏηÏοί ] urgent and persuasive. Comp. 1Co 10:14 ; 1 Corinthians 15:58 ; Philippians 2:1 ; Philippians 4:1 .
á¼Î»Î»á½° δÏÏε κ . Ï . λ .] The construction changes, giving place to a stronger (independent) designation of duty. See Winer, p. 535 [E. T. 720]. Comp. here especially Viger. ed. Herm. p. 469. Give place to wrath ( καÏʼ á¼Î¾Î¿Ïήν , that of God ), i.e. forestall it not by personal revenge, but let it have its course and its sway . The morality of this precept is based on the holiness of God; hence, so far as wrath and love are the two poles of holiness, it does not exclude the blessing of our adversaries (Romans 12:14 ) and intercession for them. The view, according to which Ïá¿ á½Ïγῠis referred to the divine wrath (comp. Romans 5:9 ; 1 Thessalonians 2:16 ) as the absolute ἡ ÏάÏÎ¹Ï is the divine favour and grace (comp. Romans 5:9 ; 1 Thessalonians 1:10 ; 1 Thessalonians 2:16 ) is rightly preferred by most interpreters from the time of Chrysostom down to van Hengel, Hofmann, Delitzsch; for, on the one hand, it corresponds entirely to the profane (Gataker, ad Anton , p. 104; Wetstein in loc .) and Pauline (Ephesians 4:27 ) use of ÏÏÏον (or ΧÎΡÎÎ ) ÎÎÎÎÎÎÎ which primarily denotes to make place for any one (Luke 14:9 ), then to give any one full play, time and opportunity for activity (Eph. l.c. , comp. Sir 13:21 ; Sir 19:17 ; Sir 38:12 ; Sir 16:14 ; Philo in Loesner, p. 263); and on the other hand it is most appropriate to the following scriptural proof. Non-compliance with the precept occasions the á½Î¡ÎÎÎÎΣÎÎÎ ÎÎá¿ á¼ÎÎΡΤÎÎÎÎÎ , Ephesians 4:26 . Comp. on the thought 1 Peter 2:23 ; 1Sa 24:13 ; 1 Samuel 24:16 . Others interpret it of one’s own wrath , which is not to be allowed to break forth . So de Dieu, Bos, Semler, Cramer, and Reiche: “Wrath produces terrible effects in the moment of its ebullition; give it time, and it passes away.” The Latin use of irae spatium dare agrees indeed with this interpretation, but not the Greek use of ÏÏÏον διδÏναι not even in the well-known expression in Plutarch ( de ira cohib . p. 462) that we should not even in sport διδÏναι ÏÏÏον to anger, i.e. give it full play , allow it free course. Since this “ giving way to wrath ” (justly repudiated by Plutarch as highly dangerous) cannot be enjoined by Paul, he must have meant by Ï . á½Ïγῠthe divine wrath. For the interpretation given by others of the wrath of an enemy , which one is to give place to , to go out of the way of (Schoettgen, Morus, Amnion), must be rejected, since this, although it may be linguistically justified (Luke 14:9 ; Judges 20:36 ), and may be compared with Soph. Ant . 718 (see Schneidewin in loc .) and with the Homeric εἴκειν Î¸Ï Î¼á¿· , yet would yield a precept, which would be only a rule of prudence and not a command of Christian morals. This applies also in opposition to Ewald: to allow the wrath of the other to expend itself , which, as opposed to personal revenge, has no positive moral character (it is otherwise with Matthew 5:39 ); not to mention that the injury, the personal avenging of which is forbidden, by no means necessarily supposes a wrathful offender.
γÎÎ³Ï . Î³Î¬Ï ] Deuteronomy 32:35 , freely as regards the sense, from the Hebrew ( to me belongs revenge and requital ), but with use of the words of the LXX., which depart from the original ( á¼Î½ ἡμÎÏá¾³ á¼ÎºÎ´Î¹ÎºÎ®ÏεÏÏ á¼Î½ÏαÏοδÏÏÏ ), and with the addition of ÎÎÎÎÎ ÎÎΡÎÎÏ . The form of this citation, quite similar to that here used, which is found in Hebrews 10:30 , cannot be accidental, especially as the characteristic á¼ÎῺ á¼ÎΤÎÎ ÎÎ . recurs also in the paraphrase of Onkelos ( ×Ö·×Ö²× Ö¸× ×ֲש×Ö·×Ö¼Öµ× ). But there are no traces elsewhere to make us assume that Paul made use of Onkelos; and just as little has the view any support elsewhere, that the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews followed the citation of Paul (Bleek, Delitzsch). Hence the only hypothesis which we can form without arbitrariness is, that the form of the saying as it is found in Paul and in Hebrews 10:30 had at that time acquired currency in the manner of a formula of warning which had become proverbial, and had influenced the rendering in the paraphrase of Onkelos. The ÎÎÎÎÎ ÎÎΡÎÎÏ Paul has simply added, as was frequently done (comp. Romans 14:11 ) with divine utterances; in Hebrews 10:30 these words are not genuine.
Verse 20
Romans 12:20 . Without οá½Î½ (see the critical notes), but thus the more in conformity with the mode of expression throughout the whole chapter, which proceeds for the most part without connectives, there now follows what the Christian seeing that he is not to avenge himself, but to let God’s wrath have its way has rather to do in respect of his enemy.
The whole verse is borrowed from Proverbs 25:21-22 , which words Paul adopts as his own, closely from the LXX.
ÏÏμιζε ] feed him, give him to eat. See on 1 Corinthians 13:1 ; Grimm on Wis 16:20 . The expression is affectionate. Comp. 2 Samuel 13:5 ; Bengel: “manu tua.” Sir 7:32
á¼Î½Î¸ÏÎ±ÎºÎ±Ï ÏÏ Ïá½¸Ï ÏÏÏεÏÏ . á¼Ïá½¶ Ïὴν ÎºÎµÏ . αá½Ïοῦ ] figurative expression of the thought: painful shame and remorse wilt thou prepare for him . So, in substance, Origen, Augustine, Jerome, Ambrosiaster, Pelagius, Erasmus, Luther, Wolf, Bengel, and others, including Tholuck, Baumgarten-Crusius, Rückert, Reiche, Köllner, de Wette, Olshausen, Fritzsche, Philippi, Reithmayr, Bisping, Borger, van Hengel, Hofmann; comp. Linder in the Stud. u. Krit . 1862, p. 568 f. Glowing coals are to the Oriental a figure for pain that penetrates and cleaves to one , and in particular, according to the context, for the pain of remorse , as here, where magnanimous beneficence heaps up the coals of fire. Comp. on the subject-matter, 1 Samuel 24:17 ff. See the Arabic parallels in Gesenius in Rosenmüller’s Repert . I. p. 140, and generally Tholuck in loc. ; Gesenius, Thesaur . I. p. 280. Another view was already prevalent in the time of Jerome, and is adopted by Chrysostom, Theodoret, Oecumenius, Theophylact, Photius, Beza, Camerarius, Estius, Grotius, Wetstein, and others, including Koppe, Böhme, Hengstenberg ( Authent. d. Pentat . II. p. 406 f.), namely, that the sense is: Thou wilt bring upon him severe divine punishment . Certainly at 4 Esr. 16:54 the burning of fiery coals on the head is an image of painful divine punishment; but there this view is just as certainly suggested by the context , as here (see esp. Romans 12:21 ) and in Prov. l.c. , the context is opposed to it. For the condition nisi resipiscat would have, in the first place, to be quite arbitrarily supplied; and how could Paul have conceived and expressed so unchristian a motive for beneficence towards enemies! The saving clauses of expositors regarding this point are fanciful and quite unsatisfactory.
Verse 21
Romans 12:21 . Comprehensive summary of Romans 12:19-20 . “ Be not overcome (carried away to revenge and retaliation) by evil (which is committed against thee), but overcome by the good (which thou showest to thine enemy) the evil ” bringing about the result that the enemy, put to shame by thy noble spirit, ceases to act malignantly against thee and becomes thy friend. “Vincit malos pertinax bonitas,” Seneca, de benef . vii. 31. Comp. de ira , ii. 32; Valer. Max. iv. 2, 4. On the other hand, Soph. El . 308 f.: á¼Î½ Ïοá¿Ï κακοá¿Ï | Πολλήʼ ÏÏʼ á¼Î½Î¬Î³ÎºÎ· κá¼ÏιÏηδεÏειν κακά . We may add the appropriate remark of Erasmus on the style of expression throughout the chapter: “ Comparibus membris et incisis, similiter cadentibus ac desinentibus sic totus sermo modulatus est, ut nulla cantio possit esse jucundior .”