This paper has been written by me in the course of my theological studies at European Nazarene College (www.eunc.edu). You may use this text as a part of your work provided that you give credits to its author – Petar Neychev. If you have questions – please, leave a comment or contact me through the Contact Us page.

Often noted for being different and highly debated, the fourth Gospel of the New Testament, the Gospel of John presents to its reader an image and message of Christ, which is not simply different from those of the Synoptic Gospels, but also completes them. So it is with the parable of the Shepherd and His Flock, as the NIV Bible entitles it, found in John 10:1-21. This parable is only found in the Gospel of John, and although this paper will not discuss it at its entirety, I will make an attempt by exegeting the second part of the discourse – Jesus’ explanation of the parable, to make clearer its meaning for today’s readers. Before this, however, I ought to give some attention to the Gospel of John in general, as it will later aid the interpretation and understanding of the passage.

The fourth Gospel’s authorship is a widely discussed historical issue. However, the view which has been proposed and supported by both the text itself and the early church fathers, and namely, that the apostle John, the brother of Jesus initially wrote the Gospel is what this paper will assume. Concerning the original audience of the Gospel of John – as Kruse argues, the strong emphasis on Jesus’ messiahship and the original language of the text – Greek both suggest that the message was intended for a Greek speaking Jewish audience (Kruse 21). The purpose of the Gospel, however, is  an aspect of the book, which strongly impacts the meaning of the passage discussed in this paper.

John 20:30,31 is the Gospel’s own testimony about its purpose. In other words, this is “a clear declaration of the author’s intention in writing the book (Tenney 27).” The three keywords from this passage, which Tenney also points out are signs, believing, and life. Concerning signs, the Gospel of John uses signs to reveal Jesus’ nature. In the discussed passage, none of the seven signs in the Gospel is present. However, the emphasis on believing and having a new life is tremendous in John 10:7-18, which finds itself as a part of the teaching section after the sign of healing the man born blind and before the last sign – raising Lazarus from the dead. Thus, the passage becomes a concluding part of Jesus’ revelation through signs and discourses before the passion narrative begins. In the immediate context, the passage is in fact an explanation from Jesus’ side to the parable he has told but was not understood in the beginning six verses of chapter ten.

Detailed Study of the Text

Perhaps due to its nature, the selected passage of John does not pose any significant textual problems. The vast majority of translations agree on the interpretation of the message. However, again because of its nature, the passage incorporates a significant amount of cultural information, which from today’s standpoint needs to be read with increased attention. In the previous passage – the parable explained in the current one, Jesus uses an image from the the world of agriculture, which is also the everyday life of the majority of the people at the time. As a matter of fact, this historical reference is of significance to the today’s reader only because the imagery is not common today. The reference to the shepherd and the flock does not carry a significant meaning in and of itself.

What today’s reader needs to know concerning the agricultural image is that, as it is still done in villages in Bulgaria, for instance, there will be one shepherd for the sheep of more than one family. This is often a person hired especially for the job, and this does not mean that the person will be as responsible to the flock as the owners of the sheep for their own sheep. This is an important point, as Jesus uses it to contrast this “hired” hand with the care of the owner, who would lay their life for the sheep. Further on, it is necessary to note that the bound created between the flock and the shepherd is more significant than what one would expect. The sheep, as many other domestic animals, as well as pets, do establish trust in the shepherd. It is known that the sheep experience a great trauma in the first days with a new shepherd – a trauma of not recognizing the new voice, which is so strong that the sheep will run away instead of going out to gaze (Kruse 233).

A closer look at the passage calls for pointing out the very first phrase – “I tell you the truth.” This is a phrase which as O’Dail suggests Jesus uses “to indicate a new development in the discourse” (O’Dail 669). The development we witness as readers today makes the following words even more important – Jesus becomes even more straight-forward in his testimony, so that the people may believe.

The introductory phrase is followed by one of the seven “I am” statements in the Gospel, which would have echoed Exodus 3:14 – of God’s very first revelation to humanity in the form of a name, or something that suggests a relationship, a connection. The gate in this passage is the only entrance, as referred to by the agricultural parallel, but this entrance is more than something a person passes through. As the “I am” statement suggests, this is a “gate”, which is relational and deeply connected with the person – the only way in to the safe place, where the sheep or people are protected.

Verse 8 has brought about a discussion in the most critical readers – is Jesus disregarding completely those who were an entrance to God, a help for his revelation from the past – Moses, the prophets? If not, then whom is Jesus referring to? It appears to be in contradiction with the rest of Scripture to say that the first claim is true. Witherington is in agreement with this. He also goes on to say that “it must surely refer to all previous false shepherds, including those who had been leading before and now during Jesus’ day with whom Jesus was in a controversy at present” (Witherington 188). As a support one may also use Scripture’s own account – Jesus claims that his own did not listen to these false shepherds either. And just in the previous miracle the man born blind did not listen and believe the speculations of the Jewish authorities.

To increase the emphasis Jesus repeats in verse nine “I am the gate”. Just that this time the phrase is followed by an even clearer definition of what the discourse is all about. Some consider Jesus’ words here as posing a challenge in understanding the passage, because he shifts from describing himself as the good shepherd (verses 1 through 5) to describing himself even more as the only way to God. One way to approach this challenge is by pointing out some later Jewish practices where the shepherd himself would sleep at the entrance of the pen, and thus, Jesus being the good shepherd would also be the one sleeping at the entrance – being the entrance. Others have attempted to connect this passage with some Old Testament references to doors being the entrance to God’s presence. While these arguments might have some value, I would propose that the word “saved” from verse 9  – σωθησεται in Greek is related to περισσονor from verse 10, or “to the full,” as the NIV translates it. Both words carry a sense of completeness, being made complete, or complete through. Thus, while the adversary comes to steal, kill and destroy – ie. make incomplete, Jesus comes to give life – to bring completion.

This interpretation is of crucial importance for the implication of the passage by suggesting that it addresses both the current situation of humanity – living an incomplete life, and contrasts it with the possible life in Christ – the life of completeness, or humanity led towards a restored image of God. In addition to this, it is necessary to also point out the word “life” from verse 10. As it was said earlier, this is one of the three keywords which describe the purpose of the Gospel of John – so that the readers may believe and have life. Thus, Jesus the Shepherd comes to protect and to bring life, which is a complete life – nothing else is necessary, nothing more could be added.

Jesus continues his explanation in verses 11 through 13 to show by what means he brings life. For this he identifies once again with the good shepherd through another “I am” statement and contrasts the qualities of the one known to the sheep with the one who is a “hired hand”, a detached shepherd. “The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep” echoes verse 11b. Just as the shepherd who is leading his own family sheep so does also Jesus have something to lose if the flock is scattered or  a sheep – a person is snatched by a wolf. This is where the historical imagery becomes distant and impersonal to most of today’s readers, but what Jesus is saying is that he is one who cares for all people because they are his own. We are nobody else’s!

In verse 14 Jesus introduces one more aspect of the shepherd-sheep relationship – knowledge. It has been mentioned in the parable itself – verses 4 and 5 that the sheep will only listen to the shepherd they recognize, the voice they know. Jesus takes this metaphor and extends it in verse 15 to the intimate knowledge that is between him and the Father. This knowledge now applies also to those who are elsewhere in the fourth Gospel called Jesus’ “own” (Bruce 227). In other words, what Jesus is saying is that those who choose to follow him will benefit benefit this personal knowledge of God himself, which Adam’s sin has taken away. This is, a relationship restored, for there is no authentic relationship without intimate knowledge.

Verse 16 comes a bit abruptly in the story, introducing a thought which is not present neither in the parable, nor earlier in Jesus’ explanation. Keener makes quite an extensive discussion concerning this thought, trying to clarify who are the “other sheep.” Considering his conclusions, as well as Kruse’s claim that “the allusion is to the Gentile people, those who are not part of Israel” (Kruse 237) I would suggest that whatever the small details in meaning be, Jesus is obviously talking about missions and what is to come after his resurrection through the preaching of his disciples empowered by the Holy Spirit. What might be stunning as a claim to today’s reader is that it is till Jesus who brings them in. The implications of this for the ministry of believers today are immense. We ought to recognize that in spite of all human efforts spent on a new believer, it is still God who transforms and makes them become one.

To the modern reader the statement of verse 17 may create a confusion – does the Father have a conditional love for His Son? Would the father have not loved Jesus should he have decided to not lay down his life? However, this is surely not the issue at stake for John in writing the Gospel. What verse 17 is trying to communicate is that Jesus lays his life out of obedience to the Father’s will (Kruse 237). Salvation could not have been available today as it is if Jesus would not have laid his life down. The end of the verse is even more powerful. I would like to emphasize Jesus certainty in being resurrected in addition to what commentators say is carried in the meaning of these words. It is in these words that our assurance of resurrection should find itself. If Jesus could resurrect Lazarus, as well as himself, then what would be the barrier before resurrecting us?

The last verse we will look at from this passage is 18, and it continues to emphasize Jesus’ authority over life and death. It is the statement that Jesus lays his life of his own accord, that makes salvation a God-thing. It is in this claim that we see in full Jesus’ authority, which is instituted by the Father himself. It is in Jesus’ voluntary sacrifice that the commandment to love is made complete by example. In addition to all this, I have to point out that in the act of salvation Jesus does not act by himself. It is important to know that besides the Holy Spirit given to believers after the resurrection and ascention, and Jesus’ death and raising, the Father is also fully involved. Thus, it is the whole of the Triune God that is acting in order to bring new life and later restore the created order.

Conclusion

As a conclusion I would like to point out several theological truths that this passage supports. The first is that there is no other way of salvation apart from Jesus. Just as there is only one way for the sheep to enter the pen, so there is only one way to heaven. Secondly, life finds its completion solely in the union with God. In fact, it is the new life in Jesus which is complete. Through this one may understand that fullness of life describes a relationship. It is not an abstract term, but a very real necessity for all of mankind. Nothing can be satisfactory apart from the restored relationship with Christ. And lastly, it is only by God’s grace that we receive salvation and all that comes with it. None but God himself has the authority to take life and give life.

Bibliography

Bruce, F. F. The Gospel of John – Introduction, Exposition and Notes. Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1983

Keener, Craig S. The Gospel of John – A Commentary Vol. 1. Peabody, Massachusetts: Hendrickson Publishers, 2003

Kruse, Colin G. The Gospel According to John – An Introduction and Commentary. Leicester, England: Inter-Varsity Press, 2003

O’Day, Gail. “John,” in The New Interpreter’s Bible. Vol. 9. Nashville: Abingdon, 1995.

Strong, James. Strong’s Hebrew and Greek Dictionaries – Dictionaries of Hebrew and Greek Words. E-Sword,  1890

Tenney, Merrill C. John: The Gospel of Belief – An Analytic Study of the Text. Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1988

The Holy Bible in the following translations: NIV, NASB, Bulgarian 2002 by United Bible Societies, Textus Receptus Greek New Testament from Stephanus 1550 (e-Sword)

Witherington, III, Ben. John’s Wisdom – A Commentary on the Fourth Gospel. Louisville, Kentucky: Westminster John Knox Press, 1995

This paper has been written by me in the course of my theological studies at European Nazarene College (www.eunc.edu). You may use this text as a part of your work provided that you give credits to its author – Petar Neychev. If you have questions – please, leave a comment or contact me through the Contact Us page.

The implications of Jesus’s incarnation, life, death, and resurrection are the ultimate central point in Christianity. One can elaborate on various topics concerning the biblical text, its context, today’s translations, etc. ,etc. but if the question “So what?” is omitted, then Christianity would become a mere scientific and religious exercise – something Christians are obligated to avoid. This is also what Paul is trying to communicate to the first century church in Colossae – Christ has died, you have been saved, live like it! A message no less valid for the church of God today. The New International Version of the Bible entitles the bigger passage of Colossians 3:1-17 “Rules for Holy Living”. However, I would dare to re-caption this as “Living Out the God Who Lives In.” In the following pages I will attempt to discuss the passage of Colossians 3:15-17 and its meaning within God’s call for all people.

The context of these three verses is crucial to understanding them properly. So far in the letter Paul has portrayed Christ’s magnificence and how believers are made alive in it. Verses 15-17 from the third chapter are a part of a passage in which Paul begins to explain what is to be removed from the believers’ lives – Col. 3:5-9, and why – verses 1-4. From verse 10 and on Paul gives a quite literal and detailed guidelines as to how a believer should live, in order to reflect what Christ has made them in his death and resurrection, or at the moment of conversion of the non-believer. This makes the discussed passage a description of the results of one’s faith. This is, one cannot be a believer and not live as shown. This is not optional – it is the only possible way to live.

After writing about the foundational and uniting power of love – of Christ, for Christ, as well as for others around us, and the rest of creation, Paul goes on to explain how the peace of God is to be the driving force of the Christian community. Lincoln comments on that phrase: “They are to let this peace have its sway and take control both at the center of their individual lives and in the one body that their calling had in view” (Lincoln 648). Paul makes clear the calling to peace, but this in the context of being united – a call to being one body. What I find is the most amazing about this passage is the final phrase, often missed for the sake of the bigger concept – be thankful. Considering the difficulty of being in unity with others this command Be thankful! can cause quite some struggle. One is not instantaneously thankful for the people they have to be united with. For Paul, however, the case is that thanksgiving goes hand in hand with answering God’s call, living in Christ and for Christ. The theme of thankfulness in Colossians comes up over and over – before, within, and after the discussed passage. Knowing of the sincerity of the thankfulness Paul is talking about, as well as his call to live “overflowing with thankfulness” from chapter 2:7, I would suggest that this could be seen as an expression of what we would call today integrity, or authenticity – being devoted to God no only in receiving, but also in giving. Not only when it is easy, but also when it is difficult – as is the case with building each other up in unity.

The second keyword in the passage is “word.” After writing on peace, Paul turns to explain that the Gospel itself is to also rule among the believers. As Thompson suggests that “the Colossian believers are to allow the word to continue to guide, direct, and shape them. Paul envisions this taking place in quite specific and concrete ways…” (Thompson 86). These ways are what to today’s believer would perfectly describe a regular worship service – “as you teach and admonish one another with all wisdom, and as you sing…” (Col. 3:16, NIV). Biblically, Paul’s reference can be tracked to his own words from chapter 1:28 – his proclamation and admonition for the sake of people being presented perfect in Christ. What Paul is saying here to the church is that they should continue on teaching, correcting, etc. each other. However, not rigorously, but in all wisdom – as an expression of worship to God,, and what is crucial – for building each other up.

Paul’s third point in this short paragraph serves as a conclusion of the said so far, as well as a transition to what is to come – “And whatever you do, whether in word or deed” (Col. 3:17, NIV). It is not difficult to figure out that the ways one communicates are by speaking and doing things. Thus, what Paul says here actually concerns the whole life of the believer. He also claims that the whole life of the believer is to be lived in the name of Christ. This is only the beginning statement supporting this claim – in the following nine verses every other call Paul does is for the sake of Christ. This sets a proper understanding of why one should do what they are called to do. Christians should serve because they are serving the Lord, they should love because they love the Lord, they should obey because it pleases the Lord…

Paul strongly ties the life of the believer with Christ. In fact, he does it so, that he absolutely ignores any instance of saying or doing something that is not in the name of Christ! And if one thought this is a revolutionary statement, then they should continue reading the last words of the paragraph – “giving thanks to God the Father through him”, meaning through Jesus. Garland, in his conclusion on the passage nicely formulates the message of Paul for today: “Only giving ourselves completely to Christ and allowing his transforming power to fumigate and permeate our thoughts and actions will solve the sin problem in our lives. Because we have been raised with Christ and renewed by Christ, living a life pleasing to him is the fruit of our new nature” (Garland 222).

In conclusion I would like to point out the strong relevancy of Paul’s message for today’s church. As sure as it can be, God’s call is still valid – the church has to be united in Christ, in love. In addition, believers today, even more than in Paul’s days are to submit all their lives unto God. This means that one can only apply Paul’s image in the complete surrender and dedication to God in Christ – especially in the time of communal worship. Paul’s last word, however, remains – in applying all of this, be wholeheartedly thankful!

The Relevancy of the Message of Paul Today

In Personal Aspect

Being taught when you think you know it already is an issue I am still dealing with. In that sense, Paul’s call for teaching each other in all wisdom, and edifying one another challenges me a lot to become more open for accepting correction, as well as criticism. In addition to this, I would say that the attitude of Paul towards God’s peace in this paragraph really impressed me. It helped me have an “a-ha” moment where I realized that the members of one body can only keep together when they are at peace with each other. This makes me think of whether I actually contribute to the body in peace or not? Am I a kind of Christian that edifies, or not? Often the answer for me is negative, but Paul’s testimony is powerful.

In addition to all this I would like to emphasize the application of Paul’s verse 17. It strikes me with the clear concept of holiness, as understood by Wesleyans, but also with its simplicity. I believe that today quite a number of Christians have not even come to the realization of the fact that each and every area of life is to be lived in Christ and for Christ. I guess the relevant question to ask myself is what did I do today that did not lead to Christ? Or what did lead to him?And how shall I allow God to perfect me in doing the latter?

For the Church

I would hesitate to point out only one aspect of Paul’s message as relevant for the Church of God today, but I would emphasize the Word of Christ dwelling richly as we teach and admonish each other… with all wisdom. It often is scary to see how much heresy there is today, simply because the Word does not dwell in the Church as it should. Proclaiming the gospel does not only include a preaching plan, but also a life-time modeling plan. Leaders in the church of Christ are to become what they preach and show it to the people they preach to.

In addition to this, worship in the communal sense of it, I feel like, today is experiencing more low’s than up’s. Worship is created with God at the other side – He alone is the aim. I believe that once this idea is communicated, modeled, and emphasized more, less and less people will experience disguise during the regular Sunday service by simply looking at the people they’ve argued with during the week. Worshiping the same God together, just as prayer, is a unique and powerful unification tool… Unfortunately not optimally used today.

Whatever the approach, however, I would say is predestined unless it is founded on Paul’s words from verse 14 in chapter 3: “put on love.”

Bibliography

Garland, David E., Colossians/Philemon, NIV NT Application Commentaries, Grand Rapids, Zondervan, 1998

The Holy Bible: NIV, NASB, Bulgarian Contemporary Translation

Lincoln, A.T., “The Letter to the Colossians, in New Interpreter’s Bible, Vol. 11, Nashville, Abingdon, 2000, pp.551-669

Thompson, Marianne Meye. Colossians and Philemon. Two Horizons Commentary. Grand Rapids: Erdmans, 2005

This paper has been written by me in the course of my theological studies at European Nazarene College (www.eunc.edu). You may use this text as a part of your work provided that you give credits to its author – Petar Neychev. If you have questions – please, leave a comment or contact me through the Contact Us page.

Sanctification and Christian perfection are the two heavy theology terms that in general lines reflect what Paul is writing about to the Philippian church in chapter 3, verses 10 and 11 of his letter. Well representing Paul’s style, however, this passage does not speak of theology in a commentary style – the same content is there, but it is served to the audience in a much more personal and effective way. A brief discussion on this is what will be presented to the reader in the following lines – what Paul’s message is and why it matters to Christians today.

The short passage on which this paper is focused falls in a significant way in the whole of the letter. Although referred to as a mere “warning against Juzaizers” this passage is a part of the final direct teaching from Paul’s side towards the Philippians, with the exception of a few verses in the beginning of chapter 4. It should not be surprising then that Paul escalates with such a greatness in his argument, with the end being the ultimate purpose for his life. This short passage is so rich of meaning, that it is difficult to select what to discuss and what not, but let us focus mainly on the most important.

The first look at the passage provides us with the observation that within three verses apostle Paul uses twice the root of the verb γινώσκω, which means to know, both times with Jesus Christ being referred to as the subject – in verse 8 and the beginning of verse 10 (another instance can be found in the beginning of the letter – 1:9-11). This would naturally raise the question What does it mean for Paul to know Christ? Moises Silva comments on this question by saying that „Paul appears to define knowing Christ as the believer’s experiencing of Christ’s own death and resurrection“ (Silva 163). He goes on to relate the concept of knowing Christ to the one of being baptized into union with him based on Paul’s writing in Romans 6:3 (Silva 164). Finally, „to know God in the biblical sense is also to be aware of his will and to be willing to obey him“ (Thielman 177).

Having said all this, we can move towards asking the legitimate question What does it take to know Christ? This question first of all leads us to noting the variation in translation of the beginning of verse 10. The modern NIV translates it „I want to know…“, which neglects the connection made so clear in the Greek and represented in NASB – του γνωναι, which means „that I may know“. For Paul it takes considering everything he has had as a profit to him loss for the sake of Christ – ancestral heritage, the covenant-bearing sign of circumcision, training in the Old Testament law… everything he constituted of as a righteous Jew.

This was looking backwards from the passage. Looking forward into the passage, however, brings about three more phrases which are no less complicated. Along with knowing Christ Paul needs to know or experience the power of His resurrection. This δύναμις is first of all what sustains the believers – „the source of power in the lives of believers“ (Hooker 529). Silva reaches the conclusion that Paul actually refers to the spiritual transformation happening with in the believer’s life as they „behold his glory“ (Silva 164). Both interpretations somehow refer to a strong identification with Christ through which this power is experienced.

The importance of clarifying this phrase is revealed when one looks at the next two. Paul adds with an „and“ that the „fellowship of sharing in his sufferings“, as well as „becoming like him in his death“ (Phillipians 3:10, NIV) is also a goal, which subsequently leads to the ultimate aim. Hooker talks about the frist phrase as a requirement for the one before it (Hooker 529), which I do not agree with. The Greek text does not support that with the given sentence structure. Further, the original text does not contain „sharing“. κοινωνία itself carries the meaning of it, but being simply in the fellowship of sufferings is descriptive enough of the level of necessary identification with Christ, as well as of what Christians experience in their life – called to live it in a world which is against them.

Concerning „becoming like him in his death“, I would suggest a relation to v.8b from chapter 2. In the context of this letter, this death does not refer to a physical experience. In the earlier passage of the letter – 2:8 Paul describes what Christ had to become in his death – humble and obedient. I believe this addresses well the notions of disunity among the Philippians. In addition, it makes it clear that without this, the ultimate goal of attaining to the resurrection of Christ is unavailable.

About this ultimate goal commentators have claimed that Paul expresses a specific uncertainty marked by the Greek εἰ πῶς. Knowing that this is clearly Paul’s ultimate goal it is unexpected to hear that he has doubts about it. I agree with Thielman that this uncertainty is more of a prevention for the Philippians from taking God’s mercy for granted, as well as placing God’s role in the process of salvation on a high stand (Thielman 173). Thus it is not to be misinterpreted as a doubt in the attainment of the resurrection from Paul’s side. With this definition of Paul’s ultimate aim, which surely enough lays in the future, our passage concludes, at the same time making a transition to the following one. Not much is necessary to be said as a summary of our brief discussion, but the following sentences can serve as such.

Verses 10 and 11 of chapter three are only a part of Paul’s message on sanctification and Christian perfection. In spite of this, Paul is able to warn his audience that this continuous growth in one’s relationship with Christ cannot take place without a certain price being paid – namely, the price of suffering, as well as dying to oneself for the sake of Christ and others. Paul’s powerful language, however, not only warns the listener of the needed dependency upon God on the way to the final goal, but it also assures them (mind the context of the whole letter, esp. 1:6) of the availability and possibility of getting there. As for the reader today – this passage can only be the highest challenge for humbly and obediently letting oneself to be transformed by the power of Christ distributed through the Spirit in our lives… on daily basis.

Bibliography

Hooker, Morna D., „The Letter to the Philippians,“ in New Interpreter’s Bible, Vol. 11, Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2004.

Silva, Moises. Philippians. Baker Exegetical Commentary on the NT. Grand Rapids: Baker, 2005.

Thielman, Frank. Philippians. NIV Application Commentary. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1995.

The Holy Bible in the following translations: NIV, NASB, Bulgarian 2001, Textus Receptus Greek New Testament from Stephanus 1550 (e-SWORD), Greek New Testament (Majority Text) (e-SWORD)

This paper has been written by me in the course of my theological studies at European Nazarene College (www.eunc.edu). You may use this text as a part of your work provided that you give credits to its author – Petar Neychev. If you have questions – please, leave a comment or contact me through the Contact Us page.

The excerpt of Romans 8:31-39 is a passage in which Paul skillfully addresses concepts crucial to the Christian faith without using the traditional terminology for that. Yet, his words are powerful and with no doubt, when properly interpreted in their context powerfully communicating the apostle’s message. In the following pages I would like to walk with the reader on the hermeneutical road of interpretation of this passage, bringing clarity to its intended meaning, and giving guidance as to how to approach the difficulties scholars face with it today. However, before one takes this step some background information needs to be provided as a safeguard against misinterpretation.

Based on the evidence of the text itself it is firmly accepted that apostle Paul is the author of this letter to the church in Rome. Given the further details in the text it is also agreed upon that Paul “writes Romans while in Corinth during the third missionary journey (Acts 20:2-3). This is probably in A.D. 57, give or take a year” (Moo 17). Commentators argue that this late period of Paul’s ministry is also the reason for the “doctrinal discussion” (Moo 17) in Romans.

The church in Rome itself is different from the other churches Paul has written to. From Scripture we know that Paul is not the one who has organized the church, as he himself states that he has never been there. In fact, the Bible does not tell us in detail how this church has come to be. All there is concerning this is the reference in Acts 2:10 that there were Jews from Rome, who supposedly went back and started the church. However, at the time of Paul’s letter the church consisted mainly of Gentiles, who have just recently become the majority.

Concerning the purpose of writing and the overall theme of the letter commentators throughout the centuries have come up with various conclusions. The purpose of the letter, which is accepted by the author includes but is not restricted to: Paul’s mission, the Roman church itself, the proclamation of the Gospel, and unity in Christ. Thus, the overall theme also becomes hard to distinguish. Probably the most encompassing suggestion would be that of the Gospel with a more distinct emphasis on Christology and God’s righteousness (Moo 21-26).

The final piece of background information which requires special attention is the context of the passage within the letter, as well as in relation to the passages straight before and after it. Although some scholars disagree, the general opinion is that the passage of chapter 8:31-39 is a logical conclusion (supported by the Greek text itself) to the arguments laid out by Paul in chapters 5-8 (Wright 609). The Greek text of verse 31 clearly points out that what is to follow has to do with what has been said so far: “What shall we then say to these things” (Romans 8:31a, KJV)? Concerning the immediate connection with the previous verses – 31 through 39 are a powerful confirmation of the arguments for the Jews’ belonging to God from chapter 7 on, and at the same time a good foundation for the claim that Gentiles also belong to God – chapter 9.

As we have laid out a firm foundation for the proper understanding of the passage, we now turn to the more in-depth discussion.

Exegesis

For good or bad Romans 8:31-39 does not present any extreme cultural challenges to the reader today. Yet, it will be beneficial for the reader to acknowledge two aspects of the passage with special attention.

The first is to be found in verse 32: “He who did not spare His own Son, but delivered Him over for us all” (Romans 8:32a, NASB). This is a clear reference to Abraham’s offering of Isaac in Genesis 22:12,16. The power of this connection becomes obvious when one considers the importance of this event in the Old Testament in its proper interpretation. By using this analogy Paul beautifully connects to the Jewish minority in his audience to proclaim once again that it is not by works but by faith in Christ, His Spirit, and God’s promise that one is declared righteous and thus God’s own. Earlier in his ministry Paul has written to the Galatians that “Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness” (Galatians 3:6). This emphasis of Paul’s words not only connects to the Jews, but also, and I would suggest – especially to the Gentiles. It prepares the ground for Paul’s  further explanation in chapter 9 that Gentiles are also adopted on the very same grounds – God’s promise. Considering all this one can now see how before saying something Paul makes it clear that this something concerns all believers, both Jews and Gentiles. Only then he continues to elaborate more on his point.

The second aspect of the passage which needs further clarification of a historical nature is found at the very end – verse 39. Here Paul, after he has made his point, concludes that nothing is able to separate us from the love of Christ. A clarification is necessary here because of the culturally specific meaning of height and depth. In the ancient world these words were used to “denote the celestial space above and below the horizon” (Arnold 53). This could lead to the misunderstanding that Paul is referring to spiritual beings since then it was understood that they dwell in these places. However, commentators agree that “there is little lexical evidence that these terms have such a denotation” (Arnold 53). The use with which also Moo and others agree is spacial – for the sake of a stronger emphasis. Thus, the message Paul is communicating is simply that nothing, truly nothing can separate us from the love of Christ.

Surprisingly enough, the discussed passage from the message to the Romans does not raise any crucial differences in translation of words. Modern translations agree with the core thought of the Greek text, adding only minor changes for clarity’s sake. The main struggle for scholars, however, is connected to the punctuation of verses 33 and 34. Wright points out that if taken as in the RSV the treatment of verse 34b as a question disrupts the natural flow of Paul’s expression. The NIV and NRSV, however, maintain the suggested flow of the passage thus claiming “that because God is the justifier, and because the Messiah has died, was raised, and now intercedes, there can indeed be no one to lay a charge against God’s elect” (Wright 613). This punctuation suggests the possibility of further trinitarian claim: “Who will separate us from Christ’s love? (Expected answer: No one; the Spirit, after all, has poured out love for God into our hearts)” (Wright 613). Paul, however, continues differently, thus not explicitly in defense of this suggestion.

Concerning the overall flow of the passage I see two main sections. The first one is Paul’s series of rhetorical expressions – verses 31-34, which leads to the theme of God’s love, and the second constitutes of verses 35-39, which emphasize this love’s inseparability from the believers. Although he could have presented his point, which is summarized in the last two verses of the chapter, right away, Paul wants to make sure he has established a good foundation to build on. Throughout both sections he escalates the tension in the reader, and only when he has received the full attention does he present the main point. Moo points out how the technique of “omission of connecting words between sentences” which is more obvious in the Greek text supports this escalation. Lastly, by the use of rhetorics Paul “is not asking his readers for information; he is trying to draw us into the discussion in a way that a flat assertion will not” (Moo 285). Witherington III agrees with Wright that Paul’s opening in verse 31 introduces what is to come as a conclusion of what has been said so far in the first part of the letter (Witherington III 231). Thus, the connection which was mentioned above is established.

Following this, verse 32 is seen as a mini set-up for the list of things which believers face, not as a mere possibility but as a reality (Witherington III 231). One term which requires special attention in this verse is charizomai. The meaning according to Strong’s Greek Dictionary is “to grant as a favor, that is, gratuitously, in kindness” (Strong G5483). The same word is used in Luke 7:21 for Jesus giving sight to the blind, as well as in Galatians 3:18, were Paul talks about Abraham’s inheritance given to him by God by promise, which is on God’s account. Thus, one can notice Paul’s emphasis that it is God who has given Christ, but even more – together with him we are given all things – a connection which the NIV makes more visible.

In verse 33 Paul presents a metaphor of a court room. Wright supports the deep theological importance of this and suggests a connection with the beginning of the letter where “the whole human family faced the judgment of God;… the whole world was in the dock, with no defense to offer against massive charges” (Wright 613). This time, however, Jesus is elevated to be the justifier, the defender, even more – the intercessor for those who are in Him. It needs to be emphasized that the term “justify” in this verse is the one carrying the meaning of “to show or regard as just or innocent” (Strong G1344). This is the term used by Paul on multiple occasions in Romans and other letters to communicate the concept of being declared righteous by God.

The metaphor is followed by the reality in the lives of believers – Christ’s love (Wright 613). This stated in the form of a question introduces a list of hardships, which is known as a type of affliction lists. These lists are used in Paul’s time for various reasons, and one of them is suggested to be Paul’s reason in Romans 8:35 – “demonstrating the triumph of virtue in all circumstances of life and over all adversity” (Fitzgerald 17). This is how far Paul extends his proclamation of Christ’s love! Special attention is to be given to the word “separate”, in Greek chorizo. This verb has been used eighteen times in twelve verses throughout the New Testament (Blue Letter Bible). The use of the term with the meaning of separation is found in Matthew 19:6 and Mark 10:9 as well as several other occasions  referring to the division between a husband and a wife, between what God has put together and made one flesh. Now, for the Jewish minds in the audience this would be a powerful comparison. Paul is talking about being made one with Christ through His love. It is a personal intimate relationship, which bears fruit. Before we turn to see that there is more to the affliction list, let us consider also the use of “love” as it is so crucial to the passage.

The noun for “love”, agape used in this case derives from the verb agapao, the meaning of which in Greek in relationship to persons is “to love dearly” (Blue Letter Bible). This noun occurs multiple times throughout the New Testament in relation but not limited to the Father’s love for humanity (1 John 2:15), the Father’s love for the Son (John 17:24), and Jesus’ love for people (Mark 10:21). Thus, it becomes clear that in this passage, as well as in 1 Corinthians 13, for instance, Paul refers to the unlimited and perfect love of God which is available to all, and from which nothing can separate us. This is not love as in friendship love (phileo as in Matthew 6:5), nor is it a mere physical love (eros), but God’s type of love.

Back to the affliction list, in the same article Fitzgerald explains that “it was axiomatic in the ancient world that adversity is the litmus test of character” (Fitzgerald 17). This is to say that a person’s integrity is measured by the greatness of the hardships overcome. With this in mind we move on to Paul’s quote of Psalm 44:22: “For your sake we are being put to death all day long; We were considered as sheep to be slaughtered” (Romans 8:36, NASB). So far it would seem that Paul is boasting about his own integrity, for he has undergone the listed hardships except the one of “sword” (Wright 614). However, one needs to continue reading in order to see the whole picture. In the very next sentence – verse 37, Paul gives all the credit to “Him who loved us” (Romans 8:37b, NASB). I see this as a powerful tool which Paul uses to combine God’s justifying and overcoming power from the court metaphor with the love of Christ, thus reaching the peak of his arguments exactly before concluding with his main point.

The closure of the passage, verses 38-39, is often interpreted differently by different commentators. However, I would like to emphasize Moo’s interpretation since it creates fewer difficulties than those greatly differing from it. He suggests that the four pairs and “powers” are there to emphasize that nothing can separate believers from the love of Christ (Moo 284). For instance, he suggests that “death” and “life” refer to the “two basic states of human existence” (Moo 284). Dunn, however, proposes that what Paul is talking about through “death” is a hostile power, and “life” – the “life in this age to as one of suffering and not-yet-achieved salvation” (Dunn 507). Paul continues the list by mentioning all spiritual beings, the whole spiritual world – through the pair “angels” and “demons”, as well as the oddly inserted “powers” (Moo 284). Through these, as well as the often misinterpreted as spiritual beings  “things present” and “things to come” Paul is trying to encompass all there is to the life of the believer and say that none of it can separate him or her from the love of Christ. This is also valid for “height” and “depth”, which were explained earlier on. About verse 39, Moo suggests a connection of the last phrase of the chapter with the beginning of the book: “as the chapter began with “no condemnation” (Rom. 8:1), so it ends with the bookends of “no separation” (8:25,39)” (Moo 284). I agree with this, but would add that it is also a good wrap-up of what has been said in the previous verses of the passage, stating the main theme in a distinct way.

Having discussed the passage as a whole and in details, and pointed out some specifics it is now due to turn to some more specific theological implications of the text. As is was stated earlier this passage’s main theme is God’s love which is in Christ Jesus and it’s inseparability from the believer. This is in a nutshell what Paul is communicating to the Romans. Romans 8:31-39 powerfully supports the general theme of the letter – the Gospel, and especially the Gospel as Christological and theocentric. This, however, is only the overall main emphasis. As one goes into details they can discover that Paul is also addressing through his court room metaphor the proper understanding of the believers’ justification. In verses 32-34 he points out that it is declared on the basis of Christ’s death (Greathouse 192), and that “it is God who justifies” (Dunn 510). More specifically through his question and answer in verse 34 Paul expresses that Christ’s justification is all-encompassing. Period.

In this address to the church in Rome Paul does not omit to talk about God’s grace either. As it was shown above, this grace is freely, or as some other translations state it – graciously given to all. One can easily sense the tension here because of the predestination notions of the passage. This section of Romans has been badly misinterpreted as speaking of God choosing only a particular group, and thus all said so far would apply to them only. This, however is due to taking the passage out of the wider context of chapter 7, and especially 9, in which Paul extends his arguments, as mentioned in the beginning. Thus, God’s grace, one can conclude, is freely given to all and all are subject to Christ’s justifying love.

This love, which is in the center of the Gospel Paul proclaims to be, as outlined earlier, the crucial personal connection between humanity and God. This claim stresses the strength and power of the personal relationship with Christ, which is initiated and sustained by His love. Paul’s outstanding conclusion on the strength of Christ’s love, I believe, suggests a constantly open door for the believer’s reconciliation.

Conclusion

Although it is difficult to simply conclude on Paul’s words from Romans 8:31-39, I will make an attempt to summarize the main points, in order to present the reader with an even clearer and more distinct picture.

In his conclusion to chapters 5-8 Paul addresses the believers in Rome with one of his most powerful rhetorical arguments concerning God’s love expressed in Christ. His main concern for this moment seems to be the assurance of this love, portrayed in its strength and closeness to the believer. He states all this in a way which clearly confirms the reality of this love in the life of people – it is not an occasional event but a continuous activity. Paul skillfully succeeds to implement this conclusion also as a preparation for what he is to say in the coming chapters.

Thus, we are given a God-inspired masterpiece of encouragement and assurance of God’s utmost expression of believers belonging to Him.

Bibliography

Arnold, Clinton, ed.  Zondervan Illustrated Bible Backgrounds Commentary.  Vol. 3:  Romans to Philemon.  Grand Rapids:  Zondervan, 2002.

Blue Letter Bible. “Dictionary and Word Search for ‘agapao (Strong’s 25) ‘ ” . Blue Letter Bible. 1996-2002. 5 May 2006.
<http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/ words.pl?word=25&page=1>

Blue Letter Bible. “Dictionary and Word Search for ‘agape (Strong’s 26) ‘ ” . Blue Letter Bible. 1996-2002. 5 May 2006.
<http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/ words.pl?word=26&page=1>

Blue Letter Bible. “Dictionary and Word Search for ‘chorizo (Strong’s 5563) ‘ ” . Blue Letter Bible. 1996-2002. 5 May 2006.
<http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/ words.pl?word=5563&page=1>

Dunn, J.D.G., Romans, vol.1, Word Biblical Commentary, Waco, TX, Word, 1988.

Fitzgerald, J. T., Dictionary of the New Testament Background. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2000, pp. 16-18

Greathouse, William M., “Romans,” in Beacon Bible Commentary, Beacon Hill Press, Kansas City, MO, 1968.

James Strong, S.T.D., LL.D., Strong’s Hebrew and Greek Dictionaries., 1890,  e-Sword.

King James Concordance, e-Sword

Moo, Douglas J., Romans.  NIV Application Commentary.  Grand Rapids:  Zondervan, 2000.

Textus Receptus Greek New Testament from Stephanus 1550, e-Sword

Witherington III, Ben.  Paul’s Letter to the Romans:  A Socio-rhetorical Commentary. Grand Rapids:  Eerdmans, 2004.

Wright, N. T.  “The Letter to the Romans.”  The New Interpreter’s Bible.  Vol. 10. Nashville:  Abingdon, 2002, pp. 393-770.

The Bible in the following translations: NIV, NASB, RSV, KJV, KJV+TVM (e-Sword), NKJV, LITV, GNT, The Bible in Bulgarian by United Bible Societies, 2003