Romans 1:20

For the invisible things of him from--or "since"

the creation of the world are clearly seen--the mind brightly beholding what the eye cannot discern.

being understood by the things that are made--Thus, the outward creation is not the parent but the interpreter of our faith in God. That faith has its primary sources within our own breast (Rom 1:19); but it becomes an intelligible and articulate conviction only through what we observe around us ("by the things which are made," Rom 1:20). And thus are the inner and the outer revelation of God the complement of each other, making up between them one universal and immovable conviction that God is. (With this striking apostolic statement agree the latest conclusions of the most profound speculative students of Theism).

even his eternal power and Godhead--both that there is an Eternal Power, and that this is not a mere blind force, or pantheistic "spirit of nature," but the power of a living Godhead.

so that they are without excuse--all their degeneracy being a voluntary departure from truth thus brightly revealed to the unsophisticated spirit.

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Rom 1:20. Ἀόρατα καθορᾶται, the invisible things are seen) An incomparable oxymoron[13] (a happy union of things opposite, as here invisible, yet seen). The invisible things of God, if ever at any time, would certainly have become visible at the creation; but even then they began to be seen, not otherwise, save by the understanding.—ἀπὸ κτίσεως, from the creation) Ἀπὸ here denotes either a proof, as ἀπὸ, in Mat 24:32, so that the understanding [comp. Rom 1:20, “understood”] of the fathers [respecting God, as He, whose being and attributes are proved] from the creation of the world, may refute the apostasy of the Gentiles; or rather, ἀπό denotes time, so that it corresponds to the Hebrew preposition î, and means, ever since the foundation of the world, and beyond it, reckoning backward; and thus the ἀΐδιος, eternal, presently after, agrees with it. In the former mode of interpretation, ἈΠῸ is connected with ΚΑΘΟΡᾶΤΑΙ, are seen from; in the second mode, with ἀόρατα, unseen ever since.—ΠΟΙΉΜΑΣΙ) [the things made], the works that have been produced by κτίσιν, creation. There are works; therefore there is a creation; therefore there is a Creator.—νοούμενα) Those alone, who use their understanding, νῷ, καθορῶσι, look closely into a subject.—καθορᾶται, are seen) for the works [which proceed from the invisible attributes of God] are discerned. The antithesis is, ἘΣΚΟΤΊΣΘΗ [Rom 1:21], was darkened.—ἥτε—καὶ) These words stand in apposition with ἀόρατα.—ἀΐδιος κ.τ.λ., eternal, etc.) The highest attribute of God, worthy of God—perfection in being and acting; in one word ΘΕΙΌΤΗς, which signifies divinity [not “Godhead,” as Engl. Vers.], as θεότης, Godhead.—ΔΎΝΑΜΙς, power) of all the attributes of God, this is the one, which was first revealed. His works, in a peculiar manner correspond to His several attributes [Isa 40:26]—εἰς τὸ) Paul not only speaks of some result ensuing, but directly takes away all excuse; and this clause, εἰς το,—is equivalent to a proposition, in relation to [to be handled more fully in] the following verses. Construe it with φανερόν ἐστιν [Rom 1:19. The fact of their knowing God, is manifest in, or among them].—ἀναπολογήτους, without excuse). So also in regard to the Jews, ch. Rom 2:1.

[13] See App. for the meaning of this figure.

Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1860) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Rom_1:20 f. Τὰ γὰρ ἀόρατα.… θειότης] Giving a reason for, and explaining, the previous ὁ Θεὸς γὰρ αὐτοῖς ἐφανέρωσε.

τὰ ἀόρατα αὐτοῦ] His invisible things, the manifold invisible attributes, that constitute His nature. Paul himself explains it afterwards by ἡ ἀΐδιος αὐτοῦ δύναμις καὶ θειότης; therefore it is not actiones Dei invisibiles (Fritzsche; comp Theodoret).

νοούμενα καθορᾶται] through the works are seen becoming discerned; νοούμενα defines the manner in which the καθορᾶται takes place, otherwise than through the senses (the νοεῖν, ἀλλʼ οὐκ ὄμμασι θεωρεῖν, Plat. Rep. p. 529 B), in so far as it is effected by means of mental discernment, by the agency of intelligent perception. The καθορᾶται forms with ἀόρατα a striking oxymoron, in which the compound selected for that purpose, but not elsewhere occurring in the N. T., heightens still further the idea conveyed by the simple form. Comp Xen. Cyr. iii. 3, 31.: εἰ γὰρ.… ἡμᾶς οἱ πολέμιοι θεάσονται.… πάλιν καθορῶντες ἡμῶν τὸ πλῆθος. Pind. Pyth. ix. 45.: οἶσθα.… εὖ καθορᾷς. On the oxymoron itself, comp Aristotle, de mundo, 6, p. 399, 21. Bekk: ἀθεώρητος ἀπʼ αὐτῶν τῶν ἔρων θεωρεῖται (ὁ θεός).

τοῖς ποιήμασι] embraces all that God as Creator has produced, but does not at the same time include His governing in the world of history, as Schneckenburger thinks, Beitr. p. 102 f.; for מַעַשֱׂה, with which ποίημα corresponds (LXX. Ecc_3:11; Ecc_7:13, al[449]), is the formal expression for Gods works of creation; as also Paul himself, in Eph_2:10, describes the renewing of man as analogous to creation. It is only of the works of creation that the Apostle could assert what he here says, especially as he adds ἀπὸ κτίσεως κόσμου. Since, moreover, ΤΟῖς ΠΟΙΉΜΑΣΙ, by means of the works, contains the instrumental definition appended to νοούμενα καθορᾶται,[450] ἀπὸ κτίσ. κόσμου cannot be taken in a causal sense (see Winer, p. 348 [E. T. 463]), as the medium cognoscendi (so Luther and many others, including Calovius, Pearson, Homberg, Wolf, Heumann, Morus and Reithmayr), but only in the sense of temporal beginning: since the creation of the world they are so perceived.

ἥ τε ἀΐδιος αὐτοῦ δύν. κ. θειότης] A more precise definition of the previous ΤᾺ ἈΌΡΑΤΑ ΑὐΤΟῦ. ἈΐΔΙΟς, everlasting, belongs to both substantives; but καί annexes the general term, the category, of which the ΔΎΝΑΜΙς is a species. See Fritzsche a[451] Matth. p. 786. Its relation to the preceding ΤΈ consists in its completing the climax and cumulation, for which ΤΈ prepares the way. Hartung, Partikell. I. p. 98. Hofmann is unsupported by linguistic usage in inferring from the position of τέ, that ἈΐΔΙΟς is not meant to apply also to ΘΕΙΌΤΗς. It is just that position that makes ἈΐΔΙΟς the common property of both members (see especially Hartung, l.c[452] p. 116 f.), so that, in order to analyse the form of the conception, we may again supply ἡ ἀΐδιος αὐτοῦ after ΚΑῚ (Stallbaum, a[453] Plat. Crit. p. 43 B.; Schaefer, Poet. gnom. p. 73; Schoemann, a[454] Is. p. 325 f.; also Winer, p. 520 [E. T. 727]). The ΘΕΙΌΤΗς is the totality of that which God is as a Being possessed of divine attributes, as ΘΕῖΟΝ, the collective sum of the divine realities.[455] This comprehensive sense must by no means be limited. The eternal powerthis aspect of His θειότης which comes into prominence at first and before all othersand the divinity of God in its collective aspect, are rationally perceived and discerned by means of His works. Arbitrary is the view of Reiche, who holds that Paul means especially wisdom and goodness, which latter Schneckenburger conceives to be intended; and also that of Hofmann (comparing Act_17:29; 2Pe_1:4), that the spiritual nature of the divine being is denoted. We may add that Rückert holds the strange view, that θειότης, which could not properly be predicated of God, is only used here by Paul for want of another expression. It might be and was necessarily said of God, as being the only adequate comprehensive expression for the conception that was to be denoted thereby. For analogous references to the physico-theological knowledge of God, see Wetstein, and Spiess, Logos spermaticos, 1871, p. 212. The suggestion of Philo as the Apostles source (Schneckenburger) is out of the question. Observe further how completely, in our passage, the transcendental relation of God to the worldthe negation of all identity of the twolies at the foundation of the Apostles view. It does not exclude the immanence of God in the world, but it excludes all pantheism. See the passages from the O. T. discussed in Umbreit.

εἰς τὸ εἶναι αὐτοὺς ἀναπολ.] has its logically correct reference to the immediately preceding ΤᾺ ΓᾺΡ ἈΌΡΑΤΑ.… ΘΕΙΌΤΗς, and therefore the parenthesis, in which Griesbach and others have placed τὰ γὰρ ἀόρ.… θειότης, must be expunged. The ΕἸς cannot be said of the result, as Luther, and many others, including Reiche, Köllner, de Wette, Rückert, Fritzsche, Reithmayr, Philippi, Ewald, following the Vulgate (ita ut sint inexcusabiles), have understood it; for the view, which takes it of the purpose, is not only required by the prevailing usage of εἰς with the infinitive[456] (see on 2Co_8:6), but is also more appropriate to the connection, because the καθορᾶται is conceived as a result effected through Gods revelation of Himself (Rom_1:19), and consequently the idea of the divine purpose in εἰς τὸ εἶναι κ.τ.λ[457] is not to be arbitrarily dismissed. Comp Erasmus (ne quid haberent etc.), Melancthon (propter quas causas Deus etc.), Beza, Calvin (in hoc ut), Bengel and others. But Chrysostom, even in his time, expressly opposes this view (comp also Oecumenius), and at a later period it became a subject of contention between the Lutherans and the Reformed, See Calovius. The view, which interprets it of the result, hesitates to admit the conception of a divine decree, under which Paul places the inexcusableness of men; and yet not only may this stand to the perception of God from His works which has existed since the beginning in the relation of result, but, in accordance with the thoroughly Scriptural idea of destiny (comp e.g. Rom_5:20), it must stand to it in the relation of that decree. In this connection, which inserts the results in the divine counsel, the inexcusableness of man appears as telically given with the self-manifestation of God. Rom_1:21, as in general even Rom_1:18, contains the perverse conduct of men manifesting itself in the course of human history, on account of which God, who foresaw it, has in His natural self-manifestation made their inexcusableness His aim. Inexcusable they are intended to be; and that indeed on account of the fact, that, although they had known God (namely from that natural revelation), they have not glorified Him as God.

διότι] as in Rom_1:19, only to be separated by a comma from what precedes: inexcusable on this account, because.

γνόντες] not: cum agnoscere potuissent (Flatt, Nielsen; also as early as Oecumenius); nor yet: although they knew God, so that it would be contemporaneous with οὐχ.… ἐδόξασαν. So Philippi and van Hengel; also Delitzsch, bibl. Psychol, p. 346. They had attained the knowledge from the revelation of nature (for to this, according to Rom_1:19-20, we must refer it, and not, with Rückert, to the history in Genesis of the original revelation), but only actu directo, so far as that same self-manifestation of God had presented itself objectively to their cognition; the actus reflexus remained absent (comp Delitzsch, p. 347), and with them who keep down the truth ἘΝ ἈΔΙΚΊᾼ, Rom_1:18, the issue was not to the praise of God, etc.; so that ΓΝΌΝΤΕς is thus previous to the οὐχ.… ἐδόξασαν. Paul sets forth the historical emergence of that for which they were inexcusable. They had known God, and yet it happened that they did not praise Him, etc.

οὐχ ὡς Θεὸν ἐδόξασαν ἢ ηὐχαρ.] It would have been becoming for them to have rendered to God as such, agreeably to His known nature, praise and thanks; but they did neither the one nor the other. Regarding Ὡς in the sense: according to the measure of His divine quality, comp on Joh_1:14. The praising and thanksgiving exhaust the notion of the adoration, which they should have offered to God.

ἀλλʼ ἐματ. ἐν τοῖς διαλ. αὐτῶν] but they were frustrated in their thoughts (comp 1Co_3:20), so that the conceptions, ideas, and reflections, which they formed for themselves regarding the Deity, were wholly devoid of any intrinsic value corresponding with the truth. Comp Eph_4:17. The ΜΑΤΑΙΌΤΗς is a specific attribute of heathenism. Jer_2:5; 2Ki_17:5; Psa_94:11. Comp also Act_14:15; Jdt_6:4.

ΚΑῚ ἘΣΚΟΤΊΣΘΗ Κ.Τ.Λ[466]] forms a climax to the foregoing. Comp Eph_4:18; Eph_1:18. Their heart that had been rendered by the ἐματαιώθησαν unintelligent, incapable of discerning the true and right, became dark, completely deprived of the light of the divine ἀλήθεια that had come to them by the revelation of nature. καρδία, like לֵב, denotes the whole internal seat of life, the power which embraces all the activity of reason and will within the personal consciousness. Comp on Eph_1:18; Delitzsch, p. 250. To take ἈΣΎΝΕΤΟς here in a proleptic sense (see on Mat_12:13) is quite inappropriate, because it destroys the climax. Comp moreover on ἈΣΎΝΕΤΟς, Wis_11:15; as also on the entire delineation of Gentile immorality, Rom_1:20 ff.; Wisdom 13-15. This passage as a whole, and in its details, presents unmistakeable reminiscences of this section of the book of Wisdom. See Nitzsch in the Deutsch. Zeitschr. 1850, p. 387; Bleek in the Stud. u. Krit. 1853, p. 340 f. Without reason Tholuck argues against this view.

[449] l. and others; and other passages; and other editions.

[450] Not merely to νοούμενα (Hofmann), which is closely bound up with καθορᾶται as showing the manner of it, so that both together are defined instrumentally by τοῖς ποιήμασι. On νοεῖν, as denoting the intellectual animadvertere in seeing (Hom. Il. λ. 599, in the inverse position: τὸν δὲ ἰδὼν ἐνοήσε), comp. Nägelsb. z. Ilias, p. 416, ed. 3; Duncan, ed. Rost, p. 787.

[451] d refers to the note of the commentator or editor named on the particular passage.

[452] .c. loco citato or laudato.

[453] d refers to the note of the commentator or editor named on the particular passage.

[454] d refers to the note of the commentator or editor named on the particular passage.

[455] On the difference between this word and θεότης (Col_2:9), which denotes Deitas, Godhead, the being God, see Elsner, Obss. p. 6, and Fritzsche in loc. Van Hengel has erroneously called in question the distinction. In Wis_18:9, namely, ὁ τῆς θειότητος νόμος is not the law of the Godhead, but the law whose nature and character is divinity,of a divine kind; and in Lucian, de Calumn. 17, ἡ Ἡφαιστίωνος θειότης is the divinity of Hephaestion, his divine quality. In Plutarch θειότης very frequently occurs. Appropriately rendered in Vulgate by divinitas.

[456] Εἰς, with an infinitive having the article, is not used in a single passage, of the Epistle to the Romans in particular, in any other than a telic sense. See Rom_1:11, Rom_3:26, Rom_4:11; Rom_4:16; Rom_4:18, Rom_6:12, Rom_7:4-5, Rom_8:29, Rom_11:11, Rom_12:2-3, Rom_15:8; Rom_15:13; Rom_15:16. Far too hastily de Wette terms this interpretation in our passage senseless, and Baumgarten-Crusius agrees with him. Tholuck calls it grammatical terrorism. Hofmann recognises the telic view as the true one in all cases where εἰς is used with the infinitive.

[457] .τ.λ. καὶ τὰ λοιπά.

[466] .τ.λ. καὶ τὰ λοιπά.

Meyer — Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament — English translation by Peter Christie, edited by Frederick Crombie (T&T Clark, 1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Rom_1:20

This verse is a confirmation and amplification of the preceding, inasmuch as it proves that God does manifest himself to men, shows how this manifestation is made, and draws the inference that men are, in virtue of this revelation, inexcusable for their impiety. The argument is, God has manifested the knowledge of himself to men, for the invisible things of him, that is, his eternal power and Godhead, are, since the creation, clear!y seen, being understood by his works; they are therefore without excuse. The invisible things of him. By the invisible things of God, Theodoret says we are to understand creation, providence, and the divine judgments; Theophylact understands them to refer to his goodness, wisdom, power, and majesty. Between these interpretations the moderns are divided. The great majority prefer the latter, which is obviously the better suited to the context, because the works of God are expressed afterwards by ποιήματα and because the invisible things are those which are manifested by his works, and are explained by the terms power and Godhead. The subsequent clause, ἥ τε ἀΐ́διος αὐτοῦ δύναμις καὶ θειότης, is in apposition with and an explanation of the former one. The particle τέ followed by καί, serves then, as Tholuck remarks, to the partition of ἀόρατα into the two ideas δύναμις and θειότης, and not to annex a distinct idea, as though the meaning were, and also his power and Godhead. The power of God is more immediately manifested in his works; but not his power alone, but his divine excellence in general, which is expressed by θειότης, from θεῖος. Θεότης, from Θεός, on the other hand, expresses the being, rather than the excellence of God. The latter is Godhead; the former, divinity, a collective term for all the divine perfections.

This divine revelation has been made ἀπὸ κτίσεως κόσμου, from the creation of the world, not by the creation; for κτίσις here is the act of creation, and not the thing created; and the means by which the revelation is made, is expressed immediately by the words τοῖς ποιήνασι, which would then be redundant. The ποιήματα τοῦ Θεοῦ, in this connection, are the things made by God, rather than the things done by him. The apostle says the ἀόρατα καθορᾶται the unseen things are seen, because they are perceived by the mind; νοούμενα being understood by means of the things made. So that they are inexcusable. These words are, by Griesbach, Knapp, and others, made to depend on the last clause of Rom_1:19; and then the interpretation of Beza and the elder Calvinists would be the most natural. God has revealed the knowledge of himself to men, in order that they might be without excuse. But this, to say the least, is unnecessary. The connection with καθορᾶται is perfectly natural. The perfections of God, being understood by his works, are seen, so that men are without excuse. Paul does not here teach that it is the design of God, in revealing himself to men, to render their opposition inexcusable, but rather, since this revelation has been made, they have in fact no apology for their ignorance and neglect of God. Though the revelation of God in his works is sufficient to render men inexcusable, it does not follow that it is sufficient to lead men, blinded by sin, to a saving knowledge of himself. As Paul says of the law, that it was weak through the flesh, that is, insufficient on account of our corruption, so it may be said of the light of nature, that, although sufficient in itself as a revelation, it is not sufficient, considering the indisposition and inattention of men to divine things. Sit haec distinctio, says Calvin, demonstratio Dei, qua gloriam suam in creaturis perspicuam facit, esse, quantum ad lucem suam, satis evidentem; quantum ad nostram caecitatem, non adeo sufficere. Caeterum non ita caeci sumus, ut ignorantiam possimus praetexere, quin perversitatis arguamur.

Charles Hodge — Commentary on Romans (1835), First Corinthians (1857), and Ephesians (1856) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Thou seest not God, and yet thou acknowledgest him as God by his works, Cicero.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

Verse 20. The invisible things of him] His invisible perfections are manifested by his visible works, and may be apprehended by what he has made; their immensity showing his omnipotence, their vast variety and contrivance, his omniscience; and their adaptation to the most beneficent purposes, his infinite goodness and philanthropy.

His eternal power] αιδιος αυτου δυναμις, That all-powerful energy that ever was, and ever will exist; so that, ever since there was a creation to be surveyed, there have been intelligent beings to make that survey.

And Godhead] θειοτης, His acting as God in the government and support of the universe. His works prove his being; the government and support of these works prove it equally. Creation and providence form a twofold demonstration of God,

1st. in the perfections of his nature; and,

2dly. in the exercise of those perfections.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

20. Since his invisible things, etc. God is in himself invisible; but as his majesty shines forth in his works and in his creatures everywhere, men ought in these to acknowledge him, for they clearly set forth their Maker: and for this reason the Apostle in his Epistle to the Hebrews says, that this world is a mirror, or the representation of invisible things. He does not mention all the particulars which may be thought to belong to God; but he states, that we can arrive at the knowledge of his eternal power and divinity; for he who is the framer of all things, must necessarily be without beginning and from himself. When we arrive at this point, the divinity becomes known to us, which cannot exist except accompanied with all the attributes of a God, since they are all included under that idea.

So that they are inexcusable. It hence clearly appears what the consequence is of having this evidence — that men cannot allege any thing before God’s tribunal for the purpose of showing that they are not justly condemned. Yet let this difference be remembered, that the manifestation of God, by which he makes his glory known in his creation, is, with regard to the light itself, sufficiently clear; but that on account of our blindness, it is not found to be sufficient. We are not however so blind, that we can plead our ignorance as an excuse for our perverseness. We conceive that there is a Deity; and then we conclude, that whoever he may be, he ought to be worshipped: but our reason here fails, because it cannot ascertain who or what sort of being God is. Hence the Apostle in Hebrews 11:3, ascribes to faith the light by which man can gain real knowledge from the work of creation, and not without reason; for we are prevented by our blindness, so that we reach not to the end in view; we yet see so far, that we cannot pretend any excuse. Both these things are strikingly set forth by Paul in Acts 14:16-17, when he says, that the Lord in past times left the nations in their ignorance, and yet that he left them not without witness (amarturon,) since he gave them rain and fertility from heaven. But this knowledge of God, which avails only to take away excuse, differs greatly from that which brings salvation, which Christ mentions in John 17:3, and in which we are to glory, as Jeremiah teaches us, Jeremiah 9:24

John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.

(20) For, though there were parts of God’s being into which the eye could not penetrate, still they were easily to be inferred from the character of His visible creation, which bore throughout the stamp of Omnipotence and Divinity.

The invisible things of him.—His invisible attributes, afterwards explained as “His eternal power and Godhead.”

Are clearly seen . . . by the things that are made.—There is something of a play upon words here. “The unseen is seen—discerned by the eye of the mind—being inferred or perceived by the help of that which is made,” i.e., as we should say, by the phenomena of external nature.

Even His eternal power and Godhead.—A summary expression for those attributes which, apart from revelation, were embodied in the idea of God. Of these “power” is the most obvious. St. Paul does not go into the questions that have been raised in recent times as to the other qualities which are to be inferred as existing in the Author of nature; but he sums them up under a name that might be used as well by a Pagan philosopher as by a Christian—the attributes included in the one term “Godhead.” Divinity would be, perhaps, a more correct translation of the expression. What is meant is “divine nature,” rather than “divine personality.”

So that they are without excuse.—They could not plead ignorance.

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

20. from the creation of the world] i.e. “since the world was created.” The Gr. scarcely allows the interpretation “from the framework, or constitution, of the world.”—He means that ever since there was a universe to observe, and man to observe it, the being and will of a Divine Artificer have been discernible.

are clearly seen] The Gr. verb hardly gives the emphatic “clearly,” though it distinctly states that they “are under observation,” “in view.”

eternal] The Gr. word here (aïdios) is only found besides in N. T. in Judges 6. By derivation and usage it is connected with the Greek equivalent for “ever” or “always.” The point of the word here is that creation condemns the guilty vagaries of Idolatry by witnessing to a God everlastingly One and the Same.

Godhead] Lit. Divinity; character or capacity worthy of God.

so that they are without excuse] Better perhaps, (comparing similar constructions in this Epistle) so that they may, or might, be without excuse; to remove all cause of inevitable ignorance, and to throw the whole blame of declension from primeval truth on the perverted Will.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

For the invisible things of him,.... Not the angels, the invisible inhabitants of heaven: nor the unseen glories of another world; nor the decrees of God; nor the persons in the Godhead; but the perfections of God, or his "properties", as the Arabic version reads it; and which are explained by "his eternal power and Godhead": these,

from the creation of the world are clearly seen; this is no new discovery, but what men have had, and might, by the light of nature, have enjoyed ever since the world was created; these

being understood, in an intellectual way, by the discursive faculty of the understanding,

by the things that are made; the various works of creation; all which proclaim the being, unity, and perfections of God their Creator,

so that they are without excuse; the very Heathens, who have only the light of nature, and are destitute of a revelation, have no colour or pretext for their idolatrous practices, and vicious lives; nor have they, nor will they have anything to object to God's righteous judgment against them, or why they should not be condemned.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

Ver. 20. Are clearly seen] Pervidentur. As in a mirror, or as on a theatre. Ut solem in aquis, sic Deum in operibus contemplamur. God (saith one) is best seen in his works, as the sun in the west. {a}

{a} Saeculum est speculum, quo Deum intueamur.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

For the invisible things of him - The expression “his invisible things” refers to those things which cannot be perceived by the senses. It does not imply that there are any things pertaining to the divine character which may be seen by the eye; but that there are things which may be known of him, though not discoverable by the eye. We judge of the objects around us by the senses, the sight, the touch, the ear, etc. Paul affirms, that though we cannot judge thus of God, yet there is a way by which we may come to the knowledge of him. What he means by the invisible things of God he specifies at the close of the verse, “his eternal power and Godhead.” The affirmation extends only to that; and the argument implies that that was enough to leave them without any excuse for their sins.

From the creation of the world - The word “creation” may either mean the “act” of creating, or more commonly it means “the thing created,” the world, the universe. In this sense it is commonly used in the New Testament; compare Mar 10:6; Mar 13:19; Mar 16:5; Rom 1:25; 2Co 5:17; Gal 6:15; Col 1:15, Col 1:23; Heb 4:13; Heb 9:11; 1Pe 2:13; 2Pe 3:4; Rev 3:14. The word “from” may mean “since,” or it may denote “by means of.” And the expression here may denote that, as an historical fact, God “has been” “known” since the act of creation; or it may denote that he is known “by means of” the material universe which he has formed. The latter is doubtless the true meaning. For,

This is the common meaning of the word “creation;” and, This accords with the design of the argument.

It is not to state an historical fact, but to show that they had the means of knowing their duty within their reach, and were without excuse. Those means were in the wisdom, power, and glory of the universe, by which they were surrounded.

Are clearly seen - Are made manifest; or may be perceived. The word used here does not occur elsewhere in the New Testament.

Being understood - His perfections may be investigated, and comprehended by means of his works. They are the evidences submitted to our intellects, by which we may arrive at the true knowledge of God.

Things that are made - By his works; compare Heb 11:3. This means, not by the original “act” of creation, but by the continual operations of God in his Providence, by his doings, ποιήμασιν poiēmasin, by what he is continually producing and accomplishing in the displays of his power and goodness in the heavens and the earth. What they were capable of understanding, he immediately adds, and shows that he did not intend to affirm that everything could be known of God by his works; but so much as to free them from excuse for their sins.

His eternal power - Here are two things implied.

(1)That the universe contains an exhibition of his power, or a display of that attribute which we call “omnipotence;” and,

That this power has existed from eternity, and of course implies an eternal existence in God.

It does not mean that this power has been exerted or put forth from eternity, for the very idea of creation supposes that it had not, but that there is proof, in the works of creation, of power which must have existed from eternity, or have belonged to an eternal being. The proof of this was clear, even to the pagan, with their imperfect views of creation and of astronomy; compare Psa 19:1-14. The majesty and grandeur of the heavens would strike their eye, and be full demonstration that they were the work of an infinitely great and glorious God. But to us, under the full blaze of modern science, with our knowledge of the magnitude, and distances, and revolutions of the heavenly bodies, the proof of this power is much more grand and impressive. We may apply the remark of the apostle to the present state of the science, and his language will cover all the ground, and the proof to human view is continually rising of the amazing power of God, by every new discovery in science, and especially in astronomy. Those who wish to see this object presented in a most impressive view, may find it done in Chalmer’s Astronomical Discourses, and in Dick’s Christian Philosopher. Equally clear is the proof that this power must have been eternal. If it had not always existed, it could in no way have been produced. But it is not to be supposed that it was always exerted, any more than it is that God now puts forth all the power that he can, or than that we constantly put forth all the power which we possess. God’s power was called forth at the creation. He showed his omnipotence; and gave, by that one great act, eternal demonstration that he was almighty; and we may survey the proof of that, as clearly as if we had seen the operation of his hand there. The proof is not weakened because we do not see the process of creation constantly going on. It is rather augmented by the fact that he sustains all things, and controls continually the vast masses of matter in the material worlds.

Godhead - His deity; divinity; divine nature, or essence. The word is not used elsewhere in the New Testament. Its meaning cannot therefore be fixed by any parallel passages. It proves the truth that the supremacy, or supreme divinity of God, was exhibited in the works of creation, or that he was exalted above all creatures and things. It would not be proper, however, to press this word as implying that all that we know of God by revelation was known to the pagan; but that so much was known as to show his supremacy; his right to their homage; and of course the folly and wickedness of idolatry. This is all that the argument of the apostle demands, and, of course, on this principle the expression is to be interpreted.

So that they are without excuse - God has given them so clear evidence of his existence and claims, that they have no excuse for their idolatry, and for hindering the truth by their iniquity. It is implied here that in order that people should be responsible, they should have the means of knowledge; and that he does not judge them when their ignorance is involuntary, and the means of knowing the truth have not been communicated. But where people have these means within their reach, and will not avail themselves of them, all excuse is taken away. This was the case with the Gentile world. They had the means of knowing so much of God, as to show the folly of worshipping dumb idols; compare Isa 44:8-10. They had also traditions respecting his perfections; and they could not plead for their crimes and folly that they had no means of knowing him. If this was true of the pagan world then, how much more is it true of the world now?

And especially how true and fearful is this, respecting that great multitude in Christian lands who have the Bible, and who never read it; who are within the reach of the sanctuary, and never enter it; who are admonished by friends, and by the providences of God, and who regard it not; and who look upon the heavens, and even yet see no proof of the eternal power and Godhead of him who made them all! Nay, there are those who are apprized of the discoveries of modern astronomy, and who yet do not seem to reflect that all these glories are proof of the existence of an eternal God; and who live in ignorance of religion as really as the pagan, and in crimes as decided and malignant as disgraced the darkest ages of the world. For such there is no excuse, or shadow of excuse, to be offered in the day of doom. And there is no fact more melancholy in our history, and no one thing that more proves the stupidity of people, than this sad forgetfulness of Him that made the heavens, even amid all the wonders and glories that have come fresh from the hand of God, and that everywhere speak his praise.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

===============================

[BIBLIOGRAPHY]

St. John Chrysostom, hom. ii. p. 20. Greek: tes panton armonias salpiggos, lamproteron booses.

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

Because it might be further objected in behalf of the Gentiles, that the notions of God imprinted in their nature are so weak, that they may be well excused; therefore the apostle adds, that the certainty of them is further confirmed by the book of the creatures, which was written before them in capital letters, so that he that runs may read.

The invisible things of him: the apostle tells us afterwards himself what he means by the invisible things of God, viz. his being and his attributes, particularly his eternity and almighty power; to which we might add, his wisdom, goodness, &c. These, though invisible in themselves, yet are discernible by his works, and that ever since the creation of the world. By what they see created, they may easily collect or understand, that there is an eternal and almighty Creator; they may argue from the effects to the cause.

So that they are without excuse: some render it, that they may be without excuse; but it is better rendered in our translation: the meaning is not, that God gave them that knowledge for this end and purpose, that they might be inexcusable, for they might catch even at that for an excuse; but the plain sense is this, that God hath given all men such means of knowledge as sufficeth to leave them without excuse, there can be no pretence of ignorance.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

20. Invisible things—God’s attributes, unseen by bodily eyes, are revealed to the understanding by things that are made. That is, from evidences of design and power seen in natural constructions the reason of man is able and is bound to infer God. From the time of the creation of the world, including the primitive ages, until now, those standing evidences of God have left man without excuse for not recognising his eternal power and Godhead. The syllable head in Godhead is the same as hood in manhood, so that the word signifies divinity.

The plain meaning of the apostle is, that the argument from external design (so conclusively stated by Paley) is so clear that men are excuseless from not knowing nature’s God. This is more noteworthy, as some at the present day, even claiming to be Christian philosophers, slight the design evidence as of no value, and rest the whole proof of God’s existence upon an intuitive and direct perception of God himself. That there are intuitions by which God is recognised we need not deny; but holy Scripture largely bases the assurance of the Divine existence upon the proofs derived from “the things that are made.”

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

For the invisible things of him from (i.e. since, apo) the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Divinity (yeiothv , not yeothv); so that they are without excuse. The concluding clause is rendered in the Revised Version, "that they may be without excuse;" and it is true that eiv to ainai autou does not express the fact that they now are so, but the subjective result of the manifestation, if disregarded. "Paulus directe excusationem adimit, non solum de eventu aliquo loquitur" (Bengel). It is, however, a question of importance, which has been much discussed, whether (as the rendering of the Revised Version might be taken to imply) the idea of Divine purpose, and not result only, is involved in eiv to einai . The difference between the two conceptions is apparent from the Vulgate, ira at sint inexcusabiles, compared with Calvin"s in hoc ut. The bearing of the distinction on the doctrine of predestination is obvious, and it was consequently a subject of contention between the Lutherans and Calvinists. Meyer among moderns contends strongly that "the view which takes it of the purpose is required by the prevailing use of eiv with the infinitive," referring in this Epistle to Rom_1:11 Rom_3:26 Rom_4:11, Rom_4:16, 18 6:12 7:4, 5 8:29 11:11 12:2, 3 15:8, 13, 16. A comparison, however, of these passages does not seem to bear out his contention, it being apparently dependent on the context in each case, rather than the phrase eiv to , whether the idea of purpose comes in. Chrysostom among the ancients expressly opposed this view, saying, Kaitoige ou dia touto tauta epoihsen, o Yeo touto exebh. Ou gaav aposterhsh didaskalian tosauthn eiv meson prouyhken all ina auto. So that they should be may be suggested as an adequate rendering, so as to avoid the idea of God"s manifestation of himself to men hating been from the first delusive, having condemnation, and not enlightenment, for its purpose.

These two verses, 19 and 20, carry out the thought of thyeian katecontwn in ver. 18, their purport being to show that the asebeia and adikia of men have been in spite of knowledge, and therefore involve them all in sin. For sin implies knowledge of good and evil; it is not imputed to the brute beasts, who but follow their natural instincts, having no perception of God or a Divine law. Now, to man, even without any special revelation, God manifests himself in two ways outwardly in nature, and inwardly in conscience. In these verses the outward manifestation is spoken of, the other being more especially noted in Rom_2:14, etc. But here, too, an inward manifestation is implied by the word nooumena , as before by en autoiv . To the animals below us the phenomena of nature may be but a spectacle before their eyes, making no appeal to a mind within. But to man they have a language they awake wonder, awe, admiration, a sense of infinite mysterious power, and, to the receptive of such impressions, of ideal beauty indefinable. To the psalmists of old they spoke irresistibly of God; of one infinite and eternal Being, above and beyond all; and their consciences, owning the supremacy of good in the moral sphere, concurred with their sense of the evidences of beneficence in nature, so as to convince them also of the righteousness of God. All men (the apostle would say) were originally endowed with a like capacity of knowing God; and their failure in this regard, shown in the various forms of idolatry prevalent throughout the world, he views as the first stage in the development of human sin. The next stage is general moral degradation, regarded as the judicial consequence of the dishonour done to God. It is, indeed, a necessary consequence; for low and unworthy conceptions of Deity bring with them moral deterioration; when man"s Divine ideal becomes degraded, with it he becomes degraded too. Witness, for instance, the debauches and cruelties that so commonly accompanied idolatrous worship. Lastly, the final stage of this moral degradation is represented in an unveiled picture of the utter wickedness, and even unnatural vice, at that time prevalent and condoned in the heart of the boasted civilization of the heathen world. Such is the drift of the remainder of this first chapter. The argument suggests the following thoughts.

(1) There is no mention here of Adam s transgression as the origin of human sin. The reason is that the apostle is arguing from a philosophical rather than a theological point of view, having Gentile as well as Jewish thinkers in his view as readers. His appeal in this chapter is not to the Old Testament at all, but to facts by all acknowledged. He is offering the world a philosophy of human history to account for the present perplexing state of things for the undoubted discord between conscience and performance, between ideal and practice, his purpose being to show universal guilt on the part of man. But his position here is quite consistent with what he says elsewhere (as in Ro 5) of Adam"s original transgression. For his whole argument in this chapter involves the doctrine of the fall of man, who is conceived to have been originally endowed with Divine instincts, and to have forfeited his prerogative through sin; and this is the essential meaning of the picture given us in Ge 3 of the original transgression.

(2) The entire drift of the chapter is against the view of the condemnation of mankind being due simply to the sin of the progenitor being imputed to the race. For all men are represented as guilty, in that all have sinned against light which they might have followed. This view does not, indeed, preclude that of an inherited infection of nature predisposing all to sin; nay, it rather necessitates it; for why should the sin have been so universal but for such predisposing cause? Still, the distinction between the two views is important in regard to our conception of the Divine justice.

(3) It may, however, be said that the distinction is without a real difference in this regard; for that, if the inherited infection is such that sin becomes inevitable (as seems to be implied by its alleged universality), it may appear as inconsistent with the Divine justice to condemn men for it, as it would be to impute to them their progenitor"s transgression. In reply to this difficulty, it may be said that Scripture nowhere says that men are finally condemned for it. On the contrary, the gospel reveals to us the atonement, preordained from the first, for the avoidance of such final condemnation; and this retrospective as well as prospective in its effects, (Rom_3:25, Rom_3:26) and as far-reaching as was the original transgression. (Rom_4:12, etc.) And our apostle (Rom_2:7, Rom_2:14, Rom_2:15, Rom_2:16) expressly asserts the salvation of all who, according to their light, have done what they could. The fact is, that in the argument before us (as in other passages of similar purport) it is only the principle, or the ground, of man"s possible justification before God that is under review. The intention is to show that this cannot be man"s own "works or deservings," as of debt, but is another which the gospel reveals. Be it observed, lastly, that a clear view of this position is important, not only for our apprehension of the truth of things and of the meaning of the gospel, but also for our right moral tone of mind and attitude before God. For not to be convinced of sin is to belie the true ideal of our conscience, and implies acquiescence in a moral standard below that of the Divine righteousness to which we are able to aspire.

The revelation of God in nature.

To come into contact with the fearless writing of the Apostle Paul is like inhaling a breath of mountain air. He was not alarmed at the presence of any inquirer, though ancient as a Jew, learned as a Greek, or imperious as a Roman. He held up the gospel as a lamp whose rays, shining in all directions, search every system, refusing to allow error to pass for truth, vice for righteousness, or imperfection for completeness. He implied that what the Law did for the Jews, convincing them of sin, was effected for the Gentiles by the glories of creation, taking away all excuse for ungodly immorality, and thus shutting all up equally to the sense of the need of such a righteousness, through faith unto salvation as the gospel of Christ proclaims.

I A PARADOX INVISIBLE THINGS CLEARLY SEEN. The possibility of such a seeming contradiction is allowed, when we distinguish between the outer vision of the body and the inner perception of the mind. Properly speaking, it is only the mind that ever sees. The mind arranges and digests what is carried to it by the optic nerve. Like a chemist, the brain has its laboratory, into which the senses convey the colours, sounds, impressions, facts, and figures of the world around us; and there in private it analyzes, synthetizes, manipulates, the products till they seem invested with new attributes. Think of our abstract conceptions, such as those of beauty, of time, of character; these have no sensible existence they are qualities superadded by the mind which gazes. They may arise necessarily upon certain objects being presented to our view; they affect us powerfully, and, though unseen by the bodily eyes, become clear to the eyes of the soul.

II THE PARADOX APPLIED TO THEOLOGY.

1. The works of nature manifest a mighty Power. This world, so wonderfully framed, exhibiting such unity in diversity, furnishes to the attentive mind abundant traces of a Force which has been at work other than ourselves. The declarations of past investigators, such as Buddha, Plato, Cicero, are amply confirmed by scientists to-day, who confess themselves in the presence of a glorious, awful Force, whose laws are to be ascertained and obeyed. The attempt is made to resolve demonstrably all phenomena into manifestations of the one indivisible force. Such thinkers we may claim as buttressing the declaration of the text that the invisible power of God is clearly seen, being understood through his works. Those regularities they call "laws" are his habits; those numerous analogies indicate the one mind influencing similarly all realms. Note especially that epic of natural theology, the Book of Job.

2. This Power discerned to be everlasting. There is the proper word in the text to denote "endless duration that which is always existent. The Power which originated the universe is needed to sustain it. Evolution is perpetual creation, whereby "things that are seen were not made of things that do appear." Man has from of old contrasted his brief life with the everlasting mountains, the perpetual hills. Astronomy is making us familiar with the countless millenniums of God"s lifetime, and geology reveals the measureless ages through which his power has been working. The doctrine of the conservation of force, which Tyndall calls "the gift of science to the nineteenth century," echoes the same truth, that though the animals die, and even the hills crumble and decay, yet the Power which made them continues; they assume other shapes and do other work. Herbert Spencer writes of the "infinite and eternal energy whence all things proceed and by which they are sustained.

3. Such power reveals Divinity. The "Divinity" of the Revised Version is preferable, since here the apostle is speaking, not of the incommunicable essence of God, as in Col_2:9, but of his nature as distinguished from our mortal humanity. The works of God show that he can originate life; man can only propagate it. And reflection proves that this power of God acts in favour of righteousness and in punishment of wickedness. He stands forth as the Holy One. We do not forget the dark problems of life nor the abysses of creation, but we must beware lest we underrate the clearness with which he has written his autograph on the laws of nature, and on his chief product man. Froude says, "This is the one lesson of history the moral law is written on the tablets of eternity... Justice and truth alone endure and live. Injustice and falsehood may be long-lived, but doomsday comes at last to them.

III THE INEVITABLE CONCLUSION, THAT, MEN"S IRRELIGIOUS, SINFUL PRACTICES BEING INEXCUSABLE, THEY NEED JUST SUCH A GOSPEL AS CHRISTIANITY PROCLAIMS. Such a revelation ought to have prevented all ungodliness. A chief sin is to ignore God, as the greatest civil crime is treason against the ruler of the state. Not to worship and thank him is fiat rebellion at court. How clearly the apostle implies that darkened views of the Creator, degrading his attributes, lead men first to base ingratitude, and then to indulge, unchecked and unashamed, the worst fleshly desires! And these flames of ungodly passion, no longer subdued by the rains of heavenly pity, leap up into a fierce conflagration, by which the doomed are destroyed. Yet he who formed the world and placed man upon it, has remembered man"s frailty has provided an Advocate for the defenceless criminal, a city of refuge for the despairing murderer. It cannot be an escape through our own merits, or justification by works; but by a transcendent exhibition of Divine power in its noblest garb of love, stooping to bear our sins, and to make his righteousness ours, through our contrite, humble, joyful acceptance of his mercy and help. S.R.A.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

For those things of him which are invisible, are seen - By the eye of the mind. Being understood - They are seen by them, and them only, who use their understanding

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

The apostle here proceeds in acquainting us with that knowledge of God which the Heathens had by the light of nature, which was in their hearts, and augmented and increased by what of God they saw in the book of the creatures; namely, in the works of creation and providence: The invisible things of God from the creation of the world are clearly seen, &c. The sense, I conceive, is this, That the wise and wonderful frame of the world, which cannot reasonably be ascribed to any other cause but God, is a sensible demonstration to all mankind, of an eternal and powerful Being, that was the author and contriver of it. The strokes of the Creator’s hand are engraven in all parts of the universe; the heavens, the earth, and the capacious sea, with all things contained in them, are evident testimonies of the excellency of their original cause: And therefore such of the Heathens of old as shut their eyes, and such of the Atheists at this day as wink hard, and will not see the footsteps of a Deity in the works of creation and providence, are, and will be, everlastingly left without excuse.

Learn hence, 1. That much of the being and essential perfections of God may be known by the light of nature, if attended to; and much more may be understood by the book of the creatures, if attentively looked into. The invisible things of God are clearly seen from the creation; that is, the creation of the world is a plain demonstration to men of the being and power of God.

Learn, 2. That all such persons will be left forever without excuse before God, who either extinguish the light of nature, and smother the natural notices which they have of God, or do not improve them by a due consideration of the works of God. Without opening the eye of reasons, the book of creation is of no more use to us than to the brute beasts: They see the creatures as well as we, but many of us consider the creatures, and see God in the creation no more then they: And this will leave us without excuse.

Learn, 3. How endearing are our obligations to almighty God, for the favour and benefit of divine revelation; that, together with the light of nature, we have the superadded light of scripture; the law to convince us of our sin, the gospel to discover a Saviour. The Heathens had only those natural apostles, of sun, moon, and stars, to guide them to the wisdom of the Father, the incarnate Son of God, and his inspired apostles and ministers to lead us into all truth, and his Holy Spirit to excite and quicken us in our obedience to him.

Therefore, eternally magnified be Omnipotent Love, for the light of scripture, for the benefit of divine revelation. For though there be a natural theology, there is not a natural Christology; there is a natural divinity, but not a natural gospel, a knowledge of God by the light of nature, but no knowledge of Jesus the Mediator, without the light of scripture.

All thanks, eternal thanks be to God for his unspeakable gift! Lord, how will all such as contemn it be left without excuse!

William Burkitt's Expository Notes on the New Testament (1700–1703) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

20. “For the invisible things of Him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being known by the things which are made, both His eternal power and divinity, so that they are left without excuse.” God-head in E. V. is wrong, the Greek being theiotees, which means divinity, instead of theotees, which means God-head; the words being so much alike, transcribers and translators mistook the one for the other. The truth of the matter is, while God is revealed to all the heathens by the light of nature, conscience and the universally present Holy Spirit, it is a matter of fact that the different Persons of the Trinity are not thus revealed. Hence, though the heathens can know God and be saved without the revealed Word, in the absence of the latter, they never would be able to recognize three Persons of the Trinity. You see Paul positively affirms the gracious possibility of universal salvation, otherwise they would not all be left “without excuse.” Hence you see from this positive statement that no one in the judgment day can give an apology for his disqualification to meet the Lord and enter heaven. The untutored savage in his primeval wilds sees God in the clouds and hears him in the winds:

“Whose soul proud science never taught to stray, Far as the solar walk, the milky way.”

Captain John Smith, a cultured Episcopalian, during his captivity with the Indians, after the old chief had adopted him as his son and successor, was left in charge of him and his old wife and little grandson, while all the balance went off to war. During a terrible wintry storm, when a great sleet everywhere covered the deep snow, the loud roar of whose breaking beneath the feet entirely disqualified him to get in gunshot of the wild animals on which they were all dependent for their daily food, day after day the young Englishman returns at nightfall from a laborious all-day walk over the ice fields, crushing beneath his feet and letting him down into the deep snow, weary and forlorn, faint with hunger and fatigue. Every evening the venerable chief lying flat on his back on his bear-skin, prostrate with rheumatism, delivers his adopted son a profitable exhortation on the patience and humiliation requisite to qualify a soul at life’s end to ascend above the snow clouds, and dwell in the glorified presence of the Great Spirit forever. Finally John concludes that they are all going to starve to death in a pile. Consequently, with much regret in his own heart to leave those people to die alone, he set out apparently as usual on a hunting excursion, but with his mind made up to escape and make his way back to Jamestown. While thus trudging along, seeing a herd of buffaloes at a great distance, taking position in concealment, he prays God to send them within gun-shot, as he had had nothing to eat for a week but some broth made from the bones of a wild-cat, which the vultures had picked, and they had recovered from beneath the snow. Sure enough, his prayer is answered and the herd comes roaring along near by. He fires away and downs a fat heifer. Running, he cuts out some meat and satisfies his awful hunger by eating it blood-raw. Then supplying himself with some of the food to eat on his journey, his heart turns back with incorrigible sympathy for those poor people he had left to die. Consequently, loading himself with the meat, he wends his way back to the wigwam, arriving at nightfall, and saluted by the venerable chief, lying on his back, “O, my son, I knew you would bring it today. Oeneah (the name of his God) told me so.” Smith wanted to hand him some of it raw to eat at once. “O, no, my son, I am not in a hurry.” “Well,” says Smith, “I will broil you some on the coals.” “O, no, I prefer it stewed. While it is cooking I want you to sit down that I may talk to you about the great spirit, Oeneah, who always takes good care of his children.” Smith felt himself a missionary among them, and had been teaching them the Christian religion the best he could from the Bible. Now he finds, to his surprise, that the old Indian, who had spent his life in savagedom, knew much more about the Lord, and his salvation, than he did. I mention this to demonstrate a case of a heathen who was intelligently saved, walking with God and bearing the fruits of the Spirit. A multitude of Scriptures intelligently corroborates this great truth, that all the people in the world can be saved if they will, having nothing to do but walk in the light which God gives them, as in that case, in the glorious ultimatum, the “blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth them from all sin” (1Jn 1:7). This is true of all the people in the world, whether heathen, Moslem, Papist or Protestant (Joh 1:9 and Tit 2:11). Then why send the heathens the gospel if they can be saved without it?

(a) Because God has commanded us to go and preach the gospel to every creature. We must obey or fall under condemnation.

(b) Because the more light they have, the greater the probability that they will walk in it and be saved. For the same reason we keep on preaching to people in gospel lands, not because they can not be saved without it, but because they will not. In all cases it is a question of will and probability rather than privilege and possibility.

William B. Godbey, Commentary on the New Testament (1896–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

For the invisible things of him since the creation of the world are clearly seen, being perceived through the things that are made, even his everlasting power and divinity; that they may be without excuse [and God reveals his wrath against them, because that which is known of God, i. e., the general truths as to his nature and attributes, is manifested unto them; for God himself so manifested it, causing his invisible attributes, even his power, divinity, etc., to be constantly and clearly revealed in the providential working of nature from the hour of creation's beginning, until now, that they may be without excuse for sin, and so justly punishable]:

J. W. McGarvey (with Philip Y. Pendleton), Commentaries on the New Testament (The Fourfold Gospel, 1914; Acts; and the epistles) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

20. The invisible things of God. God's attributes. Are clearly seen. Are manifested by his works. Nature speaks of nature's God. His eternal power and divinity. The attributes are especially shown in his works. The earth and the heavenly bodies are effects which must be due to eternal power and divinity. So that they are without excuse. No excuse is left for worshiping helpless idols.

B. W. Johnson's The People's New Testament with Notes (1889–1891) — public domain. Electronic text from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) ThML edition.

For his invisible qualities ... have been clearly seen

Paul speaks of people understanding God's invisible qualities as if people have seen those qualities. This can be translated in active form. AT: "For people have clearly understood God's invisible qualities, namely his eternal power and divine nature" (See: Metaphor and Active or Passive)

divine nature

"all the qualities and characteristics of God" or "the things about God that make him God"

world

This refers to the heavens and the earth, as well as everything in them.

in the things that have been made

This can be translated in active form. AT: "because of the things that God has made" or "because people have seen the things that God has made" (See: Active or Passive)

they are without excuse

"these people can never say that they did not know"

became foolish in their thoughts

You can translate this in an active form. AT: "began to think foolish things" (See: Active or Passive)

their senseless hearts were darkened

Here "darkness" is a metaphor that represents the people's lack of understanding. Here "hearts" is a metonym for a person's mind or inner being. AT: "they became unable to understand what God wanted them to know" (See: Metaphor and Metonymy)

translationWords

create

world

eternity

power

divine

glory

fool

heart

darkness

unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.

20. τὰ γὰρ ἀόρατα … θειότης are best treated as parenthetic—explanatory of ἐφανέρωσεν—the revelation of GOD through nature and human nature is true as far as it goes, but it is confined to His power both in nature and in morals, and His character as Divine Ruler and Lawgiver. Cf. generally Luk 18:18 f.

τὰ ἀόρατα αὐτοῦ |[72] τὸ γν. τ. θ.; cf. Act 14:15 f., Act 17:22 f. The argument from the natural order was the first argument addressed to Gentiles, as the argument from the O.T. order was the first argument addressed to Jews. The invisible things of GOD, His spiritual and moral attributes, are brought within the range of man’s mental vision through a conception gained by reflection upon the things He has made. There is a play on the double meaning of ὁρᾶν as applied to sensual and mental vision, the transition to the second being marked by νοούμενα; cf. Col 1:15 f.; Heb 11:27.

[72] | parallel to

ἀπὸ κτίσεως κόσμου, temporal: ever since there was a world to be the object of sense and thought, and minds to feel and think. Not, as Giff., = ἀπὸ τοῦ ἐκτισμένου κόσμου; this would require articles and be tautologous; cf. Mar 10:6; Mar 13:19; 2Pe 3:4.

τοῖς ποιήμασιν, dat. of means. καθορᾶται = are brought within the range of vision.

νοούμενα, being conceived or framed into conceptions, made objects of thought; cf. Isa 44:18; qu. Joh 12:40: and n. Heb 11:3, esp. the connexion of πίστει and νοοῦμεν.

ἥ τε ἀΐδιος α. δύναμις καὶ θειότης explain τὰ ἀόρατα. The primary conceptions of the Maker, formed by reflection upon things, are power and divinity. The fundamental assumption implied is that there must be a Maker—things could not make themselves, and man obviously did not make them. This assumption might well be taken by S. Paul as universally agreed. From that he sees man’s reflection passing to the conception of power, and lasting or spiritual power; the conception of divinity is a further step, logically if not chronologically, first involving hardly more than antithesis to man and nature, but growing more complex with continued reflection; it involves qualitative conceptions of the Maker, not merely quantitative conceptions of His Power. The very abstract term θειότης (only here in N.T.; cf. Act 17:29 and Wis 18:9) is used because the conceptions of GOD’s nature vary so widely with time and place. The term covers every conception of a Being, antecedent and superior to creation, which man has formed or can form.

ἀΐδιος. Only here and Jud 1:6 in N.T.; Sept. only Wis 7:26; frequent in class. Gk for lasting, eternal; e.g. Plato, Timaeus, 40 B, ζῶα θεῖα ὄντα καὶ ἀΐδια.

δύναμις. Esp. used of GOD’S power in creation, old and new. Cf. above, Rom 1:4.

εἰς τὸ may either express ‘purpose’ (Rom 8:29) or simple result (Rom 12:3): here generally taken of ‘purpose,’ in which case it must be connected with ἐφανέρωσεν above. But there is force in Burton’s argument for ‘result’ (M. T. § 411). cf. Moulton, p. 219. N. A.V. and R.V. invert text and margin.

ἀναπολογήτους, Rom 2:1 only. They have no defence as against GOD.

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge University Press, 1896; 21 vols, various authors incl. Carr, Maclear, Plummer, Farrar, Lumby, Moule, M. R. James, Simcox) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

20.] For (justifying the clause preceding) His invisible attributes (hence the plur. applying to δύναμις and θειότης which follow), ἀπὸ κτίσεως κόσμ., from the time of the creation, when the manifestation was made by God: not = ἐκ κτίσεως κ. ‘by the creation of the world;’ which would be tautological, τοῖς ποιήμασι νοούμενα following, besides that κτίσις κόσμου cannot = ἡ κτίσις, in the sense of ‘the creation,’ i.e. ‘the creatures.’ Umbreit has here a long and important note on O. T. prophecy in general, which will be found well worth study.

τοῖς ποιήμ. νοούμ.] being understood (apprehended by the mind, see reff.) by means of His works (of creation and sustenance,—not here of moral government), καθορᾶται, are perceived; not, ‘are plainly seen,’—this is not the sense of κατά in καθοράω, but rather that of looking down on, taking a survey of, and so apprehending or perceiving.

ἥ τε ἀΐδ. αὐτ. δύν.] His eternal Power. To this the evidence of Creation is plainest of all: Eternal, and Almighty, have always been recognized epithets of the Creator.

κ. θειότης] and Divinity (not Godhead, which would be θεότης). The fact that the Creator is divine;—is of a different nature from ourselves, and accompanied by distinct attributes, and those of the highest order,—which we call divine.

εἰς τὸ εἶναι αὐτ. ἀναπολ.] εἰς τό with an inf. never properly indicates only the result, ‘so that;’ but is often used where the result, and the intention, are bound together in the process of thought. This is done by a very natural habit in speaking and writing, of transferring one’s self to the position of the argument, and regarding that which contributed to a result, as worked purposely for that result. And however true it is, that in the doings of the Allwise, all results are purposed,—to give the sense ‘in order that they might be inexcusable,’ would be manifestly contrary to the whole spirit of the argument, which is bringing out, not at present God’s sovereignty in dealing with man, but man’s inexcusableness in holding back the truth by unrighteousness. εἰς τό, then, in this case, is most nearly expressed by wherefore, or so that. See Winer, edn. 6, § 44. 6. οὐ διὰ τοῦτο ταῦτα πεποίηκεν ὁ θεός, εἰ καὶ τοῦτο ἐξέβη. οὐ γὰρ ἵνα αὐτοὺς ἀπολογίας ἀποστερήσῃ, διδασκαλίαν τοσαύτην εἰς μέσον προύθηκεν, ἀλλʼ ἵνα αὐτὸν ἐπιγνῶσιν· ἀγνωμονήσαντες δὲ πάσης ἑαυτοὺς ἀπεστέρησαν ἀπολογίας. Chrys. Hom. iv. p. 450.

Henry Alford, The Greek Testament (1849–1861) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

20. ἀπὸ κτίσεως κόσμου. Gif. is inclined to translate this ‘from the created universe,’ ‘creation’ (in the sense of ‘things created’) being regarded as the source of knowledge: he alleges Vulg. a creatura mundi. But it is not clear that Vulg. was intended to have this sense; and the parallel phrases ἀπʼ ἀρχῆς κόσμου (Mat 24:21), ἀπὸ καταβολῆς κόσμου (Mat 25:34; Luk 11:50; Rev 13:8; Rev 17:8), ἀπʼ ἀρχῆς κτίσεως (Mar 10:6; Mar 13:19; 2Pe 3:4), seem to show that the force of the prep. is rather temporal, ‘since the creation of the universe’ (ἀφʼ οὗ χρόνου ὁ ὁρατὸς ἐκτίσθη κόσμος Euthym.-Zig.). The idea of knowledge being derived from the fabric of the created world is in any case contained in the context.

κτίσεως: see Lft. Col. p. 214. κτίσις has three senses: (i) the act of creating (as here); (ii) the result of that act, whether (alpha) the aggregate of created things (Wisd. 5:18; 16:24; Col 1:15 and probably Rom 8:19 ff.); or (beta) a creature, a single created thing (Heb 4:13, and perhaps Rom 8:39, q. v.).

καθορᾶται: commonly explained to mean ‘are clearly seen’ (κατά with intensive force, as in καταμανθάνειν, κατανοεῖν); so Fri. Grm.-Thay.. Gif. &c. It may however relate rather to the direction of sight, ‘are surveyed,’ ‘contemplated’ (‘are under observation’ Moule). Both senses are represented in the two places in which the word occurs in LXX: (i) in Job 10:4 ἢ ὥσπερ βροτὸς ὁρᾷ καθορᾷσ; (ii) in Num 24:2 Βαλαὰμ … καθορᾷ τὸν Ἰσραὴλ ἐστρατοπεδευκότα κατὰ φυλάς.

ἀΐδιος: ἀϊδιότης is a Divine attribute in Wisd. 2:23 (v. l., see below); cf. also Wisd. 7:26 φωτὸς ἀϊδίου, Jud 1:6.

The argument from the nature of the created world to the character of its Author is as old as the Psalter, Job and Isaiah: Psa 19:1; Psa 94:9; Psa 143:5; Isa 42:5; Isa 45:18; Job 12:9; Job 26:14; Job 36:24 ff.; Wisd. 2:23; 13:1, 5, &c. It is common to Greek thought as well as Jewish: Arist. De Mundo 6 ἀθεώρητος ἀπʼ αὐτῶν τῶν ἔργων θεωρεῖται [ὁ Θεός] (Lid.). This argument is very fully set forth by Philo, De Praem. et Poen. 7 (Mang. ii. 415). After describing the order and beauty of Nature he goes on: ‘Admiring and being struck with amazement at these things, they arrived at a conception consistent with what they had seen, that all these beauties so admirable in their arrangement have not come into being spontaneously (οὐκ ἀπαυτοματισθέντα γέγονεν), but are the work of some Maker, the Creator of the world, and that there must needs be a Providence (πρόνοιαν); because it is a law of nature that the Creative Power (τὸ πεποιηκός) must take care of that which has come into being. But these admirable men superior as they are to all others, as I said, advanced from below upwards as if by a kind of celestial ladder guessing at the Creator from His works by probable inference (οἷα διά τινος οὐρανίου κλίμακος ἀπὸ τῶν ἔργων εἰκότι λογισμῷ στοχασάμενοι τὸν δημιουργόν).

θειότης: θεότης = Divine Personality, θειότης = Divine nature and properties: δύναμις is a single attribute, θειότης is a summary term for those other attributes which constitute Divinity: the word appears in Biblical Gk. first in Wisd. 18:9 τὸν τῆς θειότητος νόμον ἐν ὁμονοίᾳ διέθεντο.

Didymus (Trin. ii. 11; Migne, P. G. xxxix. 664) accuses the heretics of reading θεότης here, and it is found in one MS., P.

It is certainly somewhat strange that so general a term as θειότης should be combined with a term denoting a particular attribute like δύναμις. To meet this difficulty the attempt has been made to narrow down θειότης to the signification of δόξα, the divine glory or splendour. It is suggested that this word was not used because it seemed inadequate to describe the uniqueness of the Divine Nature (Rogge, Die Anschauungen d. Ap. Paulus von d. religiös-sittl. Charakt. d. Heidentums, Leipzig, 1888, p. 10 f.)

εἰς τὸ εἶναι: εἰς τό denotes here not direct and primary purpose but indirect, secondary or conditional purpose. God did not design that man should sin; but He did design that if they sinned they should be without excuse: on His part all was done to give them a sufficient knowledge of Himself. Burton however (Moods and Tenses, § 411) takes εἰς τό here as expressing not purpose but result, because of the causal clause which follows. ‘This clause could be forced to an expression of purpose only by supposing an ellipsis of some such expression as καὶ οὕτως εἰσίν, and seems therefore to require that εἰς τὸ εἶναι be interpreted as expressing result.’ There is force in this reasoning, though the use of εἰς τό for mere result is not we believe generally recognized.

International Critical Commentary — older volumes (1896–1929), various authors — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

The invisible things of Him. The attributes which constitute God 's nature, afterward defined as "His eternal power and divinity." From the creation [απο] . From the time of. Rev., since.

Are clearly seen [καθοραται] . We have here an oxymoron, literally a pointedly foolish saying; a saying which is impressive or witty through sheer contradiction or paradox. Invisible things are clearly visible. See on Act 5:41. Illustrations are sometimes furnished by single words, as glukupikrov bittersweet; qrasudeilov a bold coward. In English compare Shakespeare :

"Dove - feathered raven, fiend angelical; Beautiful tyrant, wolfish - ravening lamb."

Spenser :

"Glad of such luck, the luckless lucky maid."

Godhead [θειοτης] . Rev., better, divinity. Godhead expresses deity [θεοτης] . qeiothv is godhood, not godhead. It signifies the sum - total of the divine attributes.

So that they are [εις το ειναι] . The A. V. expresses result; but the sense is rather purpose. The revelation of God 's power and divinity is given, so that, if, after being enlightened, they fall into sin, they may be without defense.

Without excuse [αναπολογητους] . See on answer, 1Pe 3:15. Only here and ch. 2 1.

Marvin R. Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament (1887–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

Vv. 20. He did so by His works in nature. By the term τὰ ἀόρατα, the invisible things, the apostle designates the essence of God, and the manifold attributes which distinguish it. He sums them up afterwards in these two: eternal power and dwinity. Power is that which immediately arrests man, when the spectacle of nature presents itself to his view. In virtue of the principle of causality innate in his understanding, he forth with sees in this immense effect the revelation of a great cause; and the Almighty is revealed to him. But this power appears to his heart clothed with certain moral characteristics, and in particular, wisdom and goodness. He recognizes in the works of this power, in the infinite series of means and ends which are revealed in them, the undeniable traces of benevolence and intelligence; and in virtue of the principle of finality, or the notion of end, not less essentially inherent in his mind, he invests the supreme cause with the moral attributes which constitute what Paul here calls divinity, θειότης, the sum total of qualities in virtue of which the creative power can have organized such a world.

The epithet ἀΐδιος, eternal (from ἀεί, always), is joined by some with both substantives; but power alone needed to be so defined, in order to contrast it with that host of second causes which are observed in nature. The latter are the result of anterior causes. But the first cause, on which this whole series of causes and effects depends, is eternal, that is to say, self-causing. The adjective is therefore to be joined only with the first of the two substantives; the second required no such qualification. These invisible things, belonging to the essence of God, have been made visible, since by the creation of the universe they have been externally manifested. Τοῖς ποιήμασι is the dative of instrument: by the works of God in nature; ἀπό, since, indicates that the time of creation was the point of departure for this revelation which lasts still. The complex phrase νοούμενα καθορᾶται, are spiritually contemplated, contains two intimately connected ideas: on the one hand, a viewing with the outward sense; on the other, an act of intellectual perception, whereby that which presents itself to the eye becomes at the same time a revelation to our consciousness. The animal sees as man does; but it lacks the νοῦς, understanding (whence the verb νοεῖν, νοούμενα), whereby man ascends from the contemplation of the work to that of the worker. These two simultaneous sights, the one sensible, the other rational, constitute in man a single act, admirably characterized by the expression spiritual contemplation, used by the apostle.

We have here a proof of Paul’s breadth of mind and heart. He does not disparage, as the Jews did, and as Christian science has sometimes done, the value of what has been called natural theology. And it is certainly not without reason that Baur (Paulus, II. p. 260) has regarded this passage as laying the first basis of the apostle’s universalism. This same idea of a universal revelation appears again in Paul’s discourses at Lystra and Athens (Act 14:17; Act 17:27-28); so also in 1Co 1:21, and in our own Epistle Rom 3:29: “Is God not also the God of the Gentiles?” a question which finds its full explanation in the idea of a primordial revelation addressed to all men.

The last words of the verse point out the aim of this universal revelation: that they may be without excuse. The words are startling: Could God have revealed Himself to the Gentiles only to have a reason for the condemnation with which He visits them? This idea has seemed so revolting, that it has been thought necessary to soften the sense of the phrase εἰς τὸ...and to translate so that (Osterv.), or: “they are therefore inexcusable” (Oltram.). It is one great merit of Meyer’s commentaries that he has vigorously withstood this method of explanation, which arbitrarily weakens the meaning of certain prepositions and particles used by Paul. Had he wished to say so that, he had at command the regular expression ὥστε/ εἶναι. And the truth, if his thought is rightly understood, has nothing so very repulsive about it: in order that, he means, if after having been thus enlightened, they should fall into error as to God’s existence and character, they may be without excuse. The first aim of the Creator was to make Himself known to His creature. But if, through his own fault, man came to turn away from this light, he should not be able to accuse God of the darkness into which he had plunged himself. One might translate somewhat coarsely: that in case of going astray, they might not be able to plead ignorance as a pretext. In these circumstances there is nothing to prevent the in order that from preserving its natural meaning.

Frédéric Louis Godet — Commentaries on Luke, John, Romans, and 1 Corinthians — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1870s–1890s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.