Romans 1:4

Romans 1:4. Who was installed, or, ‘declared,' the Son of God.' The clause is strictly parallel with ‘who was born.'(The word ‘and' as well as the phrase ‘to be ‘are interpolated in the E. V.) The word translated ‘declared' has been much discussed. It first meant, to bound, define, determine, etc. In this case a mistake of the Latin Vulgate has confounded it with the word meaning ‘predestined.' The sense ‘constituted,' in so far as that implies that the Sonship began at the resurrection, is an impossible one. The two allowable meanings are: (1) instated or installed; (2) declared, manifested, etc. They differ in this respect that (1) points to what God did, and (2) to the human recognition or proof of the Sonship of Christ. The former seems to be the more natural sense, but the latter is usually accepted. In neither case is there any suggestion that Christ became the Son of God in consequence of the resurrection, although the human nature of Christ was then exalted, and made partaker of the glory which eternally belonged to the Son, John 17:5, ‘For although Christ was already the Son of God before the creation of the world, and as such was sent (chap. Romans 8:3; Galatians 4:4), nevertheless there was needed a fact, by means of which He should receive, after the humiliation that began with his birth (Philippians 2:7 ff.), instating into the rank and dignity of His divine Sonship; whereby also, as its necessary consequence with a view to the knowledge and conviction of men, He was legitimately established as the Son' (Meyer).

With power. Lit, ‘in power.' This should be connected with ‘declared'; it thus sets forth the in-stating by the resurrection as an exhibition of the divine power. Some, however, prefer to join the phrase with ‘Son of God,' thus contrasting the majesty and power of the risen Son of God with the weakness of His human nature. In any case the whole phrase ‘installed the Son of God with power,' is to be taken together as in contrast with ‘was born' (Romans 1:3).

According to the Spirit of holiness. This is evidently in contrast with ‘according to the flesh,' and must set forth that side of the person of Christ wherein He differs absolutely from those who are only human. This would exclude a reference to the personal Holy Spirit, who is nowhere designated by this phrase, also to the human spirit of Christ as distinct from His body and soul (see on Romans 1:3). God is a Spirit, hence the divine nature of the Incarnate Son of God is Spirit. Of this ‘Spirit' the characteristic quality is ‘holiness.' We reject the view which explains ‘holiness' as ‘sanctification.'

By the resurrection of the dead. Literally, ‘out of resurrection of dead.'' Out of' is here equivalent to ‘by means of,' and not to ‘after' or ‘since,' as some have imagined ‘Resurrection,' though without the article, refers to the historical fact by virtue of which was accomplished the exaltation of the Son of God, who had previously humbled himself to be born. Hence it seems best to insert the article in English. ‘Of the dead' is probably not identical with ‘from the dead' (as in E.V.), but points to the resurrection of Christ as the fact which implies and guarantees the final resurrection of all believers.

Jesus Christ our Lord. ‘Having given this description of the person and dignity of the Son of God, very man and very God, he now identifies this divine person with Jesus Christ, the Lord and Master of Christians, the historical object of their faith, and (see words following) the Appointer of himself to the apostolic office' (Alford). ‘Jesus' is the personal name; ‘Christ' the official name; ‘our Lord,' taking up the word applied to Jehovah in the Septuagint, presents Him as the supreme Lord of the New Dispensation, the personal Master and King of all believers. The full phrase always has a solemn and triumphant tone, and here serves not only to exalt Christ, but to express the high dignity of the apostolic office (Romans 1:1; Romans 1:5), the leading idea in the address.