Romans 10:17

There was no logical necessity obliging the apostle to return to the two ideas contained in this verse, and already expressed in Romans 10:14. But he takes them up again in passing, as confirmed by the words of Isaiah just quoted, and to give occasion more clearly to the objection about to follow in Romans 10:18. ῎Αρα : so then (precisely as I was saying).

The meaning of ἀκοή, hearing, is not modified in passing from Romans 10:16 to Romans 10:17. It is still the hearing of what is preached as from God; only Paul here distinguishes between the two ideas of hearing and preaching (the word of God), which were blended in the first of these two terms, Romans 10:16, in the passage of Isaiah (in consequence of the complement ἡμῶν, of us [our], prophets and apostles). It is unnecessary, therefore, to apply the expression word of God, as Meyer would, to the command by which God sends the preachers. This meaning has not the slightest support in the words of Isaiah, and it is contrary to the use of the term ῥῆμα, word, in Romans 10:8-9, where it denotes the work of salvation as preached. It must be the same here. ᾿Εκ, of: faith is born of hearing; διά, by: hearing is wrought by the word preached.

The complement of God in the T. R. denotes the author of the word, while the complement of Christ in the Alex. and Greco-Lat. reading would express its subject. The first reading agrees better with the context.

The question is therefore relatively to the unbelief of the Jews: Has this double condition been fulfilled toward them? If not, here would be a circumstance fitted to exculpate them, and to throw back on God the blame of their unbelief and rejection. The apostle does not fail, before closing, to raise this question.