Romans 4:25

who was delivered up for our trespasses, and was raised for our justification . [Now, Moses, when he recorded the fact that Abraham was accounted righteous for his faith, did not do so for the sole purpose of giving Abraham the honor due him, but he also recorded the fact for our sakes also, unto whom a like righteousness shall be reckoned because we believe on God the Father that raised Jesus our Lord from the dead, even Jesus who was delivered up to die for our sins, and raised from the dead for our justification. This paragraph shows that our belief is very similar to that of Abraham. If Abraham believed that God could accomplish seemingly impossible things concerning his son Isaac, so we likewise believe that God accomplished, and will accomplish, seemingly impossible things through Jesus, who, according to the flesh, was also a son of Abraham. In both cases it is no mere abstract belief in God, but a concrete belief as to certain facts accomplished and to be accomplished by God. In Rom_4:25 Paul presents the twofold nature of Christ's propitiatory work, for he was both sacrifice and priest. He offered himself and was delivered up as a sacrifice for our sins, and he was raised from the dead and ascended to heaven that he might, as High Priest, present his blood before the face of God in a heavenly sanctuary for our justification, thus completing his high-priestly duties or offices-- Heb_9:11-28 ]

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.

25. διά with acc. is primarily retrospective, = ‘because of’: but inasmuch as the idea or motive precedes the execution, διά may be retrospective with reference to the idea, but prospective with reference to the execution. Which it is in any particular case must be determined by the context.

Here διὰ τὰ παραπτ. may be retrospective, = ‘because of our trespasses’ (which made the death of Christ necessary); or it may be prospective, as Gif. ‘because of our trespasses,’ i.e. ‘in order to atone for them.’

In any case διὰ τὴν δικαίωσιν is prospective, ‘with a view to our justification,’ ‘because of our justification’ conceived as a motive, i. e. to bring it about. See Dr. Gifford`s two excellent notes pp. 108, 109.

The manifold ways in which the Resurrection of Christ is connected with justification will appear from the exposition below. It is at once the great source of the Christian’s faith, the assurance of the special character of the object of that faith, the proof that the Sacrifice which is the ground of justification is an accepted sacrifice, and the stimulus to that moral relation of the Christian to Christ in which the victory which Christ has won becomes his own victory. See also the notes on ch. 6:5-8.

The Place of the Resurrection of Christ in the teaching of St. Paul

The Resurrection of Christ fills an immense place in the teaching of St. Paul, and the fact that it does so accounts for the emphasis and care with which he states the evidence for it (1Co 15:1-11). (i) The Resurrection is the most conclusive proof of the Divinity of Christ (Act 17:31; Rom 1:4; 1Co 15:14, 1Co 15:15).

(ii) As proving the Divinity of Christ the Resurrection is also the most decisive proof of the atoning value of His Death. But for the Resurrection, there would have been nothing to show—at least no clear and convincing sign to show—that He who died upon the Cross was more than man. But if the Victim of the Cross had been man and nothing more, there would have been no sufficient reason for attaching to His Death any peculiar efficacy; the faith of Christians would be ‘vain,’ they would be ‘yet in their sins’ (1Co 15:17).

(iii) In yet another way the Resurrection proved the efficacy of the Death of Christ. Without the Resurrection the Sacrifice of Calvary would have been incomplete. The Resurrection placed upon that Sacrifice the stamp of God’s approval; it showed that the Sacrifice was accepted, and that the cloud of Divine Wrath—the ὀργή so long suspended and threatening to break (Rom 3:25, Rom 3:26)—had passed away. This is the thought which lies at the bottom of Rom 6:7-10.

(iv) The Resurrection of Christ is the strongest guarantee for the resurrection of the Christian (1Co 15:20-23; 2Co 4:14; Rom 8:11; Col 1:18).

(v) But that resurrection has two sides or aspects: it is not only physical, a future rising again to physical life, but it is also moral and spiritual, a present rising from the death of sin to the life of righteousness. In virtue of his union with Christ, the close and intimate relation of his spirit with Christ’s, the Christian is called upon to repeat in himself the redeeming acts of Christ. And this moral and spiritual sense is the only sense in which he can repeat them. We shall have this doctrine fully expounded in ch. 6:1-11.

A recent monograph on the subject of this note (E. Schäder, Die Bedeutung des lebendigen Christus für die Rechtfertigung nach Paulus, Gütersloh, 1893) has worked out in much careful detail the third of the above heads. Herr Schäder (who since writing his treatise has become Professor at Königsberg) insists strongly on the personal character of the redemption wrought by Christ; that which redeems is not merely the act of Christ’s Death but His Person (ἐν ᾧ ἓχομεν τὴν ἀπολύτρωσιν Eph 1:7; Col 1:14). It is as a Person that He takes the place of the sinner and endures the Wrath of God in his stead (Gal 3:13; 2Co 5:21). The Resurrection is proof that this ‘Wrath’ is at an end. And therefore in certain salient passages (Rom 4:25; Rom 6:9, Rom 6:10; Rom 8:34) the Resurrection is even put before the Death of Christ as the cause of justification. The treatise is well deserving of study.

It may be right also to mention, without wholly endorsing, Dr. Hort’s significant aphorism: ‘Reconciliation or Atonement is one aspect of redemption, and redemption one aspect of resurrection, and resurrection one aspect of life’ (Hulsean Lectures, p. 210). This can more readily be accepted if ‘one aspect’ in each case is not taken to exclude the validity of other aspects. At the same time such a saying is useful as a warning, which is especially needed where the attempt is being made towards more exact definitions, that all definitions of great doctrines have a relative rather than an absolute value. They are partial symbols of ideas which the human mind cannot grasp in their entirety. If we could see as God sees we should doubtless find them running up into large and broad laws of His working. We desire to make this reserve in regard to our own attempts to define. Without it exact exegesis may well seem to lead to a revived Scholasticism.

K Cod. Mosquensis

L Cod. Angelicus

P Cod. Porphyrianus

&c. always qualify the word which precedes, not that which follows:

Euthym.-Zig. Euthymius Zigabenus.

אԠCod. Sinaiticus

A Cod. Alexandrinus

C Cod. Ephraemi Rescriptus

D Cod. Claromontanus

E Cod. Sangermanensis

F Cod. Augiensis

G Cod. Boernerianus

Vulg. Vulgate.

Boh. Bohairic.

Arm. Armenian.

Aeth. Ethiopic.

Orig.-lat. Latin Version of Origen

B Cod. Vaticanus

WH. Westcott and Hort.

RV. Revised Version.

al. alii, alibi.

Tisch. Tischendorf.

Gif. Gifford.

Orig. Origen.

Chrys. Chrysostom.

Phot. Photius.

Lips. Lipsius.

אԠCod. Sinaiticus, corrector c

שׂאԠCod. Sinaiticus, corrector ca

Lft. Lightfoot.

* Besides what is said above, see Introduction § 8. It is a satisfaction to find that the view here taken is substantially that of Dr. Hort, Judaistic Christianity, p. 148, ‘it seems more natural to suppose that a misuse or misunderstanding of St. Paul’s teaching on the part of others gave rise to St. James’s carefully guarded language.’

* There is a slight awkwardness in making our break in the middle of a verse and of a sentence. St. Paul glides after his manner into a new subject, suggested to him by the verse which he quotes in proof of what has gone before.

Trench, Trench on Synonyms.

Mey. Meyer.

Fri. Fritzsche (C. F. A.).

Va. Vaughan.

Pesh. Peshitto.

Harcl. Harclean.

Epiph. Epiphanius.

Ambrstr. Ambrosiaster.

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

Rom_4:25

Who was delivered for our offenses, and raised again for our justification. This verse is a comprehensive statement of the gospel. Christ was delivered unto death for our offenses, i.e., on account of them, and for their expiation; see Isa_53:5, Isa_53:6; Heb_9:28; 1Pe_2:21. This delivering of Christ is ascribed to God, Rom_8:32; Gal_1:4 and elsewhere; and to himself, Tit_2:14; Gal_2:20. It was by the divine purpose and counsel he suffered for the expiation of sin; and he gave himself willingly to death. He was led like a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he opened not his mouth. Christ is said to have been delivered unto death, διὰ τὰ παραπτώματα ἡμῶν, and to have been raised, διὰ τὴν δικαίωσιν ἡμῶν; that is, he was delivered in order that our sins might be expiated, and he was raised in order that we might be justified. His death and his resurrection were alike necessary; his death, as a satisfaction to divine justice. He bore our sins in his own body on the tree. That is, he bore the punishment of our sins. Significant ergo Paulus, says Calvin, satisfactionem pro peccatis nostris in cruce fuisse peractam. Nam ut Christus nos in gratiam Patris restitueret reatum nostrum ab ipso aboleri oportuit; quod fieri non poterat, nisi poenam, cui solvendae pares non eramus, nostro nomine lueret. His resurrection was no less necessary, first, as a proof that his death had been accepted as an expiation for our sins. Had he not risen, it would have been evident that he was not what he claimed to be. We should be yet in our sins, 1Co_15:17, and therefore still under condemnation. Our ransom, in that case, instead of being publicly accepted, had been rejected. And secondly, in order to secure the continued application of the merits of his sacrifice, he rose from the dead, and ascended on high, there to appear before God for us. He stands at the right hand of God, ever to make intercession for his people, thereby securing for them the benefits of his redemption. With a dead Savior, a Savior over whom death had triumphed and held captive, our justification had been for ever impossible. As it was necessary that the high priest, under the old economy, should not only slay the victim at the altar, but carry the blood into the most holy place, and sprinkle it upon the mercy-seat; so it was necessary not only that our great High Priest should suffer in the outer court, but that he should pass into heaven, to present his righteousness before God for our justification. Both, therefore, as the evidence of the acceptance of his satisfaction on our behalf, and as a necessary step to secure the application of the merits of his sacrifice, the resurrection of Christ was absolutely essential, even for our justification. Its relation to inward spiritual life and eternal blessedness is not here brought into view; for Paul is not here speaking of our sanctification. That δικαίωσις means justification, and not the act of makind holy, need hardly be remarked. That follows of necessity, not only from the signification of the word, but from the whole scope of this part of the epistle. It is only by those who make justification identical with regeneration, that this is called into question. Pervertunt autem, says Calovius, sententiam Apostoli Papistae, cum id eum velle contendunt, mortem Christi exemplar fuisse mortis peccatorum, resurrectionem autem exemplar renovationis et regenerationis internae per quam in novitate vitae ambulamus, quia hic non agitur vel de morte peccatorum, vel de renovatione et novitate vitae; de quibus, cap. vi., demum agere incipit Apostolus; sed de non imputatione vel remissione peccatorum, et imputatione justitiae vel justificatione. Olshausen agrees substantially with the Romish interpretation of this passage, as he gives dikai&wsij an impossible sense, viz. (die den neuen Menschen schaffende Thätigkeit,) the regenerating activity of God. It will be observed, that the theology of Olshausen, and of the mystical school to which he belongs, has far greater affinity for the Romish than for the Protestant system.

Doctrine

1. Faith is an operative assent to the divine testimony, not the reception of truth as something which can be proved by our own arguments, Rom_4:18, Rom_4:20.

2. When faith is genuine it is founded on correct apprehensions of the divine character, and has a controlling influence over the heart and life, Rom_4:20, Rom_4:21.

3. The method of salvation has never been changed; Abraham was not only saved by faith, but the object of his faith was the same as the object of ours, Rom_4:24, Rom_4:17.

4. The resurrection of Christ, as an historical fact, established by the most satisfactory evidence (see 1 Corinthians 15), authenticates the whole gospel. As surely as Christ has risen, so surely shall believers be saved, Rom_4:25.

Remarks

1. The true way to have our faith strengthened is not to consider the difficulties in the way of the thing promised, but the character and resources of God, who has made the promise, Rom_4:19.

2. It is as possible for faith to be strong when the thing promised is most improbable, as when it is probable. Abrahams faith should serve as an example and admonition to us. He believed that a Savior would be born from his family, when his having a son was an apparent impossibility. We are only called upon to believe that the Savior has been born, has suffered, and risen again from the dead facts established on the strongest historical, miraculous, and spiritual evidence, Rom_4:20, Rom_4:24, Rom_4:25.

3. Unbelief is a very great sin, as it implies a doubt of the veracity and power of God, Rom_4:20, Rom_4:21.

4. All that is written in the Scriptures is for our instruction. What is promised, commanded, or threatened (unless of a strictly personal nature although addressed originally to individuals), belongs to them only as representatives of classes of men, and is designed for all of similar character, and in similar circumstances Rom_4:23.

5. The two great truths of the gospel are, that Christ died as a sacrifice for our sins, and that he rose again for our justification. Whosoever, from the heart, believes these truths, shall be saved, Rom_4:25; Rom_10:9.

6. The denial of the propitiatory death of Christ, or of his resurrection from the dead, is a denial of the gospel. It is a refusing to be saved according to the method which God has appointed, Rom_4:25.

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

To pay the ransom for our sins.

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

Who was delivered for--"on account of."

our offences--that is, in order to expiate them by His blood.

and raised again for--"on account of," that is, in order to.

our justification--As His resurrection was the divine assurance that He had "put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself," and the crowning of His whole work, our justification is fitly connected with that glorious act.

Note, (1) The doctrine of justification by works, as it generates self-exaltation, is contrary to the first principles of all true religion (Rom 4:2; and see on Rom 3:21-26, Note 1). (2) The way of a sinner's justification has been the same in all time, and the testimony of the Old Testament on this subject is one with that of the New (Rom 4:3, &c., and see on Rom 3:27-31, Note 1). (3) Faith and works, in the matter of justification, are opposite and irreconcilable, even as grace and debt (Rom 4:4-5; and see on Rom 11:6). If God "justifies the ungodly," works cannot be, in any sense or to any degree, the ground of justification. For the same reason, the first requisite, in order to justification, must be (under the conviction that we are "ungodly") to despair of it by works; and the next, to "believe in Him that justifieth the ungodly"--that hath a justifying righteousness to bestow, and is ready to bestow it upon those who deserve none, and to embrace it accordingly. (4) The sacraments of the Church were never intended, and are not adapted, to confer grace, or the blessings of salvation, upon men. Their proper use is to set a divine seal upon a state already existing, and so, they presuppose, and do not create it (Rom 4:8-12). As circumcision merely "sealed" Abraham's already existing acceptance with God, so with the sacraments of the New Testament. (5) As Abraham is "the heir of the world," all nations being blessed in him, through his Seed Christ Jesus, and justified solely according to the pattern of his faith, so the transmission of the true religion and all the salvation which the world will ever experience shall yet be traced back with wonder, gratitude, and joy, to that morning dawn when "the God of glory appeared unto our father Abraham, when he was in Mesopotamia, before he dwelt in Charran," Act 7:2 (Rom 4:13). (6) Nothing gives more glory to God than simple faith in His word, especially when all things seem to render the fulfilment of it hopeless (Rom 4:18-21). (7) All the Scripture examples of faith were recorded on purpose to beget and encourage the like faith in every succeeding age (Rom 4:23-24; and compare Rom 15:4). (8) Justification, in this argument, cannot be taken--as Romanists and other errorists insist--to mean a change upon men's character; for besides that this is to confound it with Sanctification, which has its appropriate place in this Epistle, the whole argument of the present chapter--and nearly all its more important clauses, expressions, and words--would in that case be unsuitable, and fitted only to mislead. Beyond all doubt it means exclusively a change upon men's state or relation to God; or, in scientific language, it is an objective, not a subjective change--a change from guilt and condemnation to acquittal and acceptance. And the best evidence that this is the key to the whole argument is, that it opens all the wards of the many-chambered lock with which the apostle has enriched us in this Epistle.

Next: Romans Chapter 5

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

Verse 25. Who was delivered for our offences] Who was delivered up to death as a sacrifice for our sins; for in what other way, or for what other purpose could He, who is innocence itself, be delivered for our offences?

And was raised again for our justification.] He was raised that we might have the fullest assurance that the death of Christ had accomplished the end for which it took place; viz. our reconciliation to God, and giving us a title to that eternal life, into which he has entered, and taken with him our human nature, as the first-fruits of the resurrection of mankind.

1. FROM a careful examination of the Divine oracles it appears that the death of Christ was an atonement or expiation for the sin of the world: For him hath God set forth to be a PROPITIATION through FAITH in HIS BLOOD, Ro 3:25. For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ DIED FOR the UNGODLY, Ro 5:6. And when we were ENEMIES, we were RECONCILED to God by the DEATH of his Son, Ro 5:10. In whom we have REDEMPTION THROUGH HIS BLOOD, the FORGIVENESS of SINS, Eph 1:7. Christ hath loved us, and GIVEN HIMSELF FOR US, an OFFERING and a SACRIFICE to God for a sweet-smelling savour, Eph 5:2. In whom we have REDEMPTION THROUGH HIS BLOOD, the FORGIVENESS of SINS, Col 1:14. And having made PEACE THROUGH the BLOOD of his CROSS, in the BODY of HIS FLESH, through DEATH, Col 1:20, Col 1:22. Who GAVE HIMSELF a RANSOM for all, 1Ti 2:6. Who GAVE HIMSELF FOR US, that he might REDEEM us from all iniquity, Tit 2:14. By which will we are sanctified, through the OFFERING of the BODY of Jesus Christ, Heb 10:10. So Christ was once OFFERED TO BEAR THE SINS of many, Heb 9:28. See also Eph 2:13, Eph 2:16; 1Pe 1:18, 1Pe 1:19; Re 5:9. But it would be transcribing a very considerable part of the New Testament to set down all the texts that refer to this most important and glorious truth.

2. And as his death was an atonement for our sins, so his resurrection was the proof and pledge of our eternal life. See 1Co 15:17; 1Pe 1:3; Eph 1:13, Eph 1:14, c.,c.

3. The doctrine of justification by faith, which is so nobly proved in the preceding chapter, is one of the grandest displays of the mercy of God to mankind. It is so very plain that all may comprehend it and so free that all may attain it. What more simple than this? Thou art a sinner, in consequence condemned to perdition, and utterly unable to save thy own soul. All are in the same state with thyself, and no man can give a ransom for the soul of his neighbour. God, in his mercy, has provided a Saviour for thee. As thy life was forfeited to death because of thy transgressions, Jesus Christ has redeemed thy life by giving up his own he died in thy stead, and has made an atonement to God for thy transgressions; and offers thee the pardon he has thus purchased, on the simple condition, that thou believe that his death is a sufficient sacrifice, ransom, and oblation for thy sin; and that thou bring it as such, by confident faith, to the throne of God, and plead it in thy own behalf there. When thou dost so, thy faith in that sacrifice shall be imputed to thee for righteousness; i.e. it shall be the means of receiving that salvation which Christ has bought by his blood.

4. The doctrine of the imputed righteousness of Christ, as held by many, will not be readily found in this chapter, where it has been supposed to exist in all its proofs. It is repeatedly said that FAITH is imputed for righteousness; but in no place here, that Christ's obedience to the moral law is imputed to any man. The truth is, the moral law was broken, and did not now require obedience; it required this before it was broken; but, after it was broken, it required death.

Either the sinner must die, or some one in his stead: but there was none whose death could have been an equivalent for the transgressions of the world but JESUS CHRIST. Jesus therefore died for man; and it is through his blood, the merit of his passion and death, that we have redemption; and not by his obedience to the moral law in our stead. Our salvation was obtained at a much higher price. Jesus could not but be righteous and obedient; this is consequent on the immaculate purity of his nature: but his death was not a necessary consequent. As the law of God can claim only the death of a transgressor-for such only forfeit their right to life-it is the greatest miracle of all that Christ could die, whose life was never forfeited. Here we see the indescribable demerit of sin, that it required such a death; and here we see the stupendous mercy of God, in providing the sacrifice required. It is therefore by Jesus Christ's death, or obedience unto death, that we are saved, and not by his fulfilling any moral law. That he fulfilled the moral law we know; without which he could not have been qualified to be our mediator; but we must take heed lest we attribute that to obedience (which was the necessary consequence of his immaculate nature) which belongs to his passion and death. These were free-will offerings of eternal goodness, and not even a necessary consequence of his incarnation.

5. This doctrine of the imputed righteousness of Christ is capable of great abuse. To say that Christ's personal righteousness is imputed to every true believer, is not Scriptural: to say that he has fulfilled all righteousness for us, or in our stead, if by this is meant his fulfilment of all moral duties, is neither Scriptural nor true: that he has died in our stead, is a great, glorious, and Scriptural truth: that there is no redemption but through his blood is asserted beyond all contradiction; in the oracles of God. But there are a multitude of duties which the moral law requires which Christ never fulfilled in our stead, and never could. We have various duties of a domestic kind which belong solely to ourselves, in the relation of parents, husbands, wives, servants, c., in which relations Christ never stood. He has fulfilled none of these duties for us, but he furnishes grace to every true believer to fulfil them to God's glory, the edification of his neighbour, and his own eternal profit. The salvation which we receive from God's free mercy, through Christ, binds us to live in a strict conformity to the moral law that law which prescribes our manners, and the spirit by which they should be regulated, and in which they should be performed. He who lives not in the due performance of every Christian duty, whatever faith he may profess, is either a vile hypocrite, or a scandalous Antinomian.

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

25. Who was delivered for our offences, etc. He expands and illustrates more at large the doctrine to which I have just referred. It indeed greatly concerns us, not only to have our minds directed to Christ, but also to have it distinctly made known how he attained salvation for us. And though Scripture, when it treats of our salvation, dwells especially on the death of Christ, yet the Apostle now proceeds farther: for as his purpose was more explicitly to set forth the cause of our salvation, he mentions its two parts; and says, first, that our sins were expiated by the death of Christ, — and secondly, that by his resurrection was obtained our righteousness. But the meaning is, that when we possess the benefit of Christ’s death and resurrection, there is nothing wanting to the completion of perfect righteousness. By separating his death from his resurrection, he no doubt accommodates what he says to our ignorance; for it is also true that righteousness has been obtained for us by that obedience of Christ, which he exhibited in his death, as the Apostle himself teaches us in the following chapter. But as Christ, by rising from the dead, made known how much he had effected by his death, this distinction is calculated to teach us that our salvation was begun by the sacrifice, by which our sins were expiated, and was at length completed by his resurrection: for the beginning of righteousness is to be reconciled to God, and its completion is to attain life by having death abolished. Paul then means, that satisfaction for our sins was given on the cross: for it was necessary, in order that Christ might restore us to the Father’s favor, that our sins should be abolished by him; which could not have been done had he not on their account suffered the punishment, which we were not equal to endure. Hence Isaiah says, that the chastisement of our peace was upon him. (Isaiah 53:5.) But he says that he was delivered, and not, that he died; for expiation depended on the eternal goodwill of God, who purposed to be in this way pacified.

And was raised again for our justification. As it would not have been enough for Christ to undergo the wrath and judgment of God, and to endure the curse due to our sins, without his coming forth a conqueror, and without being received into celestial glory, that by his intercession he might reconcile God to us, the efficacy of justification is ascribed to his resurrection, by which death was overcome; not that the sacrifice of the cross, by which we are reconciled to God, contributes nothing towards our justification, but that the completeness of his favor appears more clear by his coming to life again.

But I cannot assent to those who refer this second clause to newness of life; for of that the Apostle has not begun to speak; and further, it is certain that both clauses refer to the same thing. For if justification means renovation, then that he died for our sins must be taken in the same sense, as signifying that he acquired for us grace to mortify the flesh; which no one admits. Then, as he is said to have died for our sins, because he delivered us from the evil of death by suffering death as a punishment for our sins; so he is now said to have been raised for our justification, because he fully restored life to us by his resurrection: for he was first smitten by the hand of God, that in the person of the sinner he might sustain the misery of sin; and then he was raised to life, that he might freely grant to his people righteousness and life. He therefore still speaks of imputative justification; and this will be confirmed by what immediately follows in the next chapter.

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.

(25) Was delivered—i.e., to death, as in Isa_53:12 (LXX. version); Mat_17:22; et al.

For our offences.—Because of our offences—i.e., in order that He might atone for them.

For our justification.—Because of our justification—i.e., that justification might take effect in us.

The death of Christ is the proper cause of justification, or means of atonement, according to St. Paul; the resurrection of Christ is only the mediate or secondary cause of it. The atoning efficacy lay in His death, but the proof of that efficacy—the proof that it was really the Messiah who died—was to be seen in the Resurrection. The Resurrection, therefore, gave the greatest impulse to faith in the atoning efficacy of the death upon the cross, and in this way helped to bring about justification. Comp. especially 1Co_15:17, “If Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins”—i.e., you have no guarantee that your sins have really been remitted; if the death of Christ had not been followed by His resurrection, the inference would have followed that it was merely the death of an ordinary man, and without any special saving efficacy.

The distinction should be carefully observed between the bearing of these two acts, the death and the resurrection of Christ, on the doctrines of justification and sanctification respectively. For the latter see especially Rom_6:2 et seq.

In looking back over the argument of this fourth chapter, we feel that it is a keen and subtle argumentum ad hominem, addressed to Jews, and based upon their own method of interpretation. Its permanent value is derived from its bearing upon the theological system of St. Paul himself—the doctrines of faith, grace, no boasting, the supreme disposing power of God, the saving efficacy of the death of Christ.

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

25. delivered] As the Victim. Cp. Rom_8:32. Here the Father delivers up His Son. In Gal_2:20; Eph_5:2, &c.; we have the self-surrender of the Son. See Psa_40:8-9, for the union of the two truths. “Lo, I come; … I delight to do Thy will.”

for our offences] Lit. because of our offences; “because we had offended.” Such is the natural meaning of the Gr. The fact of our sins demanded, for their just remission, nothing less than the Lord’s Death.

for our justification] Lit. because of our Justification. The construction is identical. This, and the balance of the clauses, seem to demand the exposition: “He was raised, because our justification was effected;” not, “in order to give us justification,” as many interpret it. The parallel is complete: “We sinned, therefore He suffered: we were justified, therefore He rose.”—To this it is objected that the thought is not doctrinally true; justification being, for each believer, dated not from the Lord’s death, but from the time of faith (see ch. Rom_5:1). But the answer is obvious: the Apostle here states the Ideal of the matter; he means not individual justifications, but the Work which for ever secured Justification for the believing Church. A close parallel is the “It is finished” (Joh_19:30). (See too the ideal language in Rom_8:30; and instructive parallels in Heb_1:3; Heb_10:14.) In the Divine Idea every future believer was declared to be justified, through an accomplished Propitiation, when Jesus rose. His resurrection proved His acceptance as our Substitute, and therefore our acceptance in Him. No doubt the other interpretation is true as to fact: He was raised that, through the Gospel, (which but for His resurrection would never have been preached,) we might receive justification. But the Gr. construction, and the balance of clauses, are certainly in favour of that now given.

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.

25 Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification.

Ver. 25. Who was delivered, &c.] Not that his death had no hand in our justifying, but because our justification, begun in his death, was perfected by his resurrection. Redemption we have by Christ’s abasement, application of it by his advancement. This one verse is an abridgment of the whole gospel, the sum of all the good news in the world, the grand inquest of all the ancient prophets, 1Pe 1:11. Adore we the fulness of the Holy Scriptures.

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.

Who was delivered - To death; compare the notes at Act 2:23.

For our offences - On account of our crimes. He was delivered up to death in order to make expiation for our sins.

And was raised again - From the dead.

For our justification - On account of our justification. In order that we may be justified. The word “justification” here seems to be used in a large sense, to denote acceptance with God; including not merely the formal act by which God pardons sins, and by which we become reconciled to him, but also the completion of the work - the treatment of us as righteous, and raising us up to a state of glory. By the death of Christ an atonement is made for sin. If it be asked how his resurrection contributes to our acceptance with God, we may answer,

(1) It rendered his work complete. His death would have been unavailing, his work would have been imperfect, if he had not been raised up from the dead. He submitted to death as a sacrifice, and it was needful that he should rise, and thus conquer death and subdue our enemies, that the work which he had undertaken might be complete.

(2) His resurrection was a proof that his work was accepted by the Father. What he had done, in order that sinners might be saved, was approved. Our justification, therefore, became sure, as it was for this that he had given himself up to death.

(3) His resurrection is the main-spring of all our hopes, and of all our efforts to be saved. Life and immortality are thus brought to light, 2Ti 1:10. God “hath begotten us again to a lively hope (a living, active, real hope), by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead,” 1Pe 1:3. Thus, the fact that he was raised becomes the ground of hope that we shall be raised and accepted of God. The fact that he was raised, and that all who love him shall be raised also, becomes one of the most efficient motives to us to seek to be justified and saved. There is no higher motive that can be presented to induce man to seek salvation than the fact that he maybe raised up from death and the grave, and made immortal. There is no satisfactory proof that man can be thus raised up, but the resurrection of Jesus Christ. In that resurrection we have a pledge that all his people will rise. “For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him,” 1Th 4:14. “Because I live,” said the Redeemer, “ye shall live also,” Joh 14:19; compare 1Pe 1:21.

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

The eternal Father delivered his Son to death, to expiate our offences; he raised him from the dead for our justification. His death is our redemption; his resurrection is the principal object of our faith. Our faith in the resurrection, is imputed unto justice, as was the faith of Abraham in the promises of God. The apostle here seems to refer out faith and justification only to the resurrection, not to the exclusion of other mysteries of religion, which are all, and every one of them, the objects of our faith. But the resurrection is, as it were, the zeal and consummation of the rest; it eminently includes in itself all the others. (Calmet)

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).

Who was delivered; he saith delivered rather than crucified, to lead us by the hand to the first cause thereof, the determinate counsel of the blessed Trinity: see Act 2:23; 4:27,28; Ro 8:32.

For our offences; i.e. for the expiating of them, Isa 53:10.

And was raised again for our justification; not that his death had no hand in our justification; see Rom 3:24; but because our justification, which was begun in his death, was perfected in his resurrection. Christ did meritoriously work our justification and salvation by his death and passion, but the efficacy and perfection thereof with respect to us depend on his resurrection. By his death he paid our debt, in his resurrection he received our acquittance, Isa 53:8; when he was discharged, we in him, and together with him, received our discharge from the guilt and punishment of all our sins. This one verse is an abridgement of the whole gospel.

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

25. Raised… justification—Christ atones for us on the cross; he justifies us on the throne. That he may purchase our pardon for us he must die; that he may secure the application of his blood to our case he must rise again. He must ever live to intercede for us by pointing to the merit of his death. He must ever live and reign, that he may apply the pardoning grace to the successive generations of the penitent as they appear in faith before him.

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

Who was delivered - To death. For our offenses - As an atonement for them. And raised for our justification - To empower us to receive that atonement by faith.

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

raised

Christ died under our sins 1Pe 2:24; 2Co 5:21 that He was raised and exalted to God’s right hand, "now to appear in the presence of God for us" Heb 9:24 is the token that our sins are gone, that His work for us has the divine approbation and that we, for whom He suffered, are completely justified.

The Scofield Reference Bible (1917 edition), notes by C. I. Scofield — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

In this one verse we have an abridgment of the whole gospel, the death and resurrection of Christ declared, and the benefit and advantages of both assigned. 1. For his death; he was delivered for our offences.

Here note, 1. The person delivered: He, that is, Christ Jesus the righteous; the Lord our righteousness.

Note, 2. The person delivering, not expressed, but necessarily implied and understood. Judas delivered him, the Jews delivered him, God the Father delivered him, and Christ himself delivered himself. All these did one and the same act, but not for one and the same end: Judas delivered him for gain, the Jews for envy, the Father delivered him out of love, and Christ delivered himself in great compassion to a lost world.

Note, 3. Unto what he was delivered, namely, Unto death, even the death of the cross. This in "God was an act of the highest justice, in Christ an act of wonderful obedience, in the Jews an act of the highest wickedness.

Note, 4. For whom, and for what he was delivered: for us and for our offenses: It notes the vicegerency of his sufferings, not barely for our goods the final cause, and for our sins as the meritorious cause; but for us, in our room, place and stead, dying under an imputation of guilt, and dying as the sacrificed beast for the expiation of that guilt: The original word here for offences signifies great falls, grievous offences, and heinous crimes.

This sacrificed lamb was delivered and died to expiate the guilt of guilt of great sins, and to make atonement for the greatest sinners.

Note, 5. It is here said, that Christ was delivered, rather than died for our offences, to lead us to the consideration of the first cause of his suffering for us; namely, The determinate counsel of God, pursuant to which there concession or permission given to wicked instruments to shed his blood; his own Father delivering him up to death for our offences.

Learn hence, That our sins were not only the occasions, but the moving and impulsive cause of Christ’s sufferings. He died as a sacrifice to atone an offended Deity: As the sacrifices of old were brought to the altar, and there slain, so Christ, substituting himself in our room and stead, was brought ot he altar of his cross, and there died as a victim or expiatory sacrifice for our sins. Thus, He was delivered for our offenses.

Observe, next, Our Lord’s resurrection asserted, He was raised again; and its end assigned, for our justification. Christ as our surety was under the arrest of death; but having given satisfaction by his sufferings, our discharge was published to the world by his resurrection; As by dying in our stead, he bare the curse of the law; so by rising again as a common person, we receive our acquittal from the hand of a judge. His death was our payment, his resurrection our discharge; He was raised again for our justification.

Learn thence, That Christ’s resurrection was the cause of our justification; not the meritorious cause, for that was his death and bloodshed; but the declarative and perfect cause of our justification.

His resurrection was a declaration of our justification, the justice of God thereby declaring itself satisfied, by its prisoner being released. His resurrection is also the perfective cause of our justification. The work of redemption wrought for us by his death, is perfected, and made effectual by his resurrection. This makes our redemption complete, which otherwise had been partial and imperfect; nay, none at all. ’Tis upon Christ, as raised, that our faith must be settled: Had he not been raised from the dead, faith in his death had had no foundation, for it had been an unaccountable thing to believe in one that lay under he power of death.

By Christ’s resurrection, the efficacy of his death was declared to all the world: Therefore, says the apostle, Who shall condemn us, when Christ hath died for us? yea, rather is risen again Romans 8.

As our redemption was not in its glory till Christ’s resurrection; so neither is our faith in its full strength and vigour, till it eyes him, Who was delivered for our offences, and raised again for our justification.

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

25. “Who was delivered for our transgressions and arose for our justification.” Christ became our literal, actual, vicarious substitute, taking our place, dying in our room and stead. While He thus paid the penalty and redeemed every son and daughter of Adam’s ruined race, so perfectly and satisfactorily as to preclude all necessity of human condemnation, thus actually blockading hell against the ingress of every soul, and opening the pearly gates, with angelic shouts welcoming every poor victim of sin and sorrow to the fadeless glories of the heavenly hope, yet redemption is one thing and our participation of redeeming grace quite another. The latter we can not only secure through faith in the promises of God, unbelief climaxing an eternal forfeiture. Many have appeared on the earth claiming to be Christ, but they all fail to rise from the dead. The resurrection of Christ is the grand Archimedean lever inspiring universal faith in His Christhood.

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

25. Who was delivered for our offences. “He died for us;” “was made sin for us.” He was to be “cut off, but not for himself.” Raised again for our justification. The resurrection of Christ was his own justification against the condemnation of the world. In his justification, all for whom he died, who have laid hold on him by faith and are found in him, are justified with him, in that their sins are forgiven. Without the resurrection, the sepulcher of Christ would be the grave of all our hopes. This is beautifully symbolized in baptism. “We are buried by baptism into death,” his death, “planted in the likeness of his death,” figuratively die with him. We are also “planted in the likeness of his resurrection.” We rise with him, “new creatures,” justified by his resurrection.

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.

25. ὃς παρεδόθη διὰ τὰ π. As Rom 3:25; cf. Isa 53:12 LXX[124] Joh. Weiss (op. cit[125]), p. 172, points out that the two clauses are an instance of the Hebrew tendency to parallelism, and that consequently they must not be regarded as independent statements of distinct elements in the process of redemption; the verbs might be interchanged without affecting the sense; cf. Rom 8:32; Gal 2:20; Eph 5:2; Eph 5:25. Cf. below, Rom 5:9, δικ. ἐν τῷ αἵματι α.

[124] LXX. the Septuagint Version of the Old Testament

[125] op. cit. opus citatum

ἠγ. διὰ τὴν δικαίωσιν ἡ. Another summary statement developed later. διὰ = with a view to.

δικαίωσιν. Rom 5:18 only; justification as an action = διὰ τὸ δικαιοῦν ἡ.

From one point of view, the resurrection of Christ as the act of GOD is the testimony of GOD to the perfection of the Humanity of Christ as well as to His Divinity, the declaration of the complete righteousness of Jesus. As it is through that perfect Humanity, and by union with It, that the Christian is made one with the Christ, the object of the Resurrection is the declaring righteous of those who, by faith, accept the offered condition of righteousness. This leads to the actual making righteous: but that further thought is not included in this statement; δικαίωσις is limited, as is δικαιοῦν, to the description of GOD’S attitude to the sinner. See Introd. p. xxxvi.

On the Resurrection, see S. H. add. note, pp. 116 ff., and on the connexion of justification with the Resurrection cf. Gifford.

This concludes the first part of the Epistle, in which is set forth what may be called an historical account of the relation of man, both Jew and Gentile, to the revelation of GOD’S Will and to the performance of the same. It has been shown that the revelation of that Will in the Death and Resurrection of Christ answers to the necessities shown to exist both among Jews and Gentiles; the attitude of both to the Will of GOD and the character and issues of His dealings with them all point to the Gospel as the one adequate message of righteousness for man. The treatment then has been historical: the great ethical and spiritual principles involved have been used and stated, but not explained; there follows now the description of these principles as seen by an analysis of the case of the individual sinner (5–8) and of the sinning people (9–11); and then (12 f.) the main characters of the Christian life are explained. The argument that follows, in fact, deals with the Gospel as a power of salvation.

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.

25.] Here we have another example of the alliterative use of the same preposition where the meanings are clearly different (see above, vv. 23, 24). Our Lord was delivered up (to death) for or on account of our sins (i.e. because we had sinned):—He was also raised up (from the dead) for or on account of our justification (i.e. not because we had been, but that we might be justified). This separate statement of the great object of the death and resurrection of Christ must be rightly understood, and each member of it not unduly pressed to the exclusion of the other. The great complex event by which our justification (death unto sin and new birth unto righteousness) has been made possible, may be stated in one word as the glorification of Christ. But this glorification consisted of two main parts,—His Death, and His Resurrection. In the former of these, He was made a sacrifice for sin; in the latter, He elevated our humanity into the participation of that Resurrection-life, which is also, by union with Him, the life of every justified believer. So that, when taking the two apart, the Death of Christ is more properly placed in close reference to forgiveness of sins,—His Resurrection, to justification unto life everlasting. And thus the Apostle treats these two great events, here and in the succeeding chapters. But he does not view them respectively as the causes, exclusively of one another, of forgiveness and justification: e.g. (1) ch. 5:9, we are said to be justified by His blood, and 2Co 5:21 God made Him sin for us, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him: and (2) 1Co 15:17, if Christ is not raised, we are yet in our sins. So that, though these great events have their separate propriety of reference to the negative and positive sides of our justification, the one of them cannot be treated separately and exclusively of the other, any more than can the negative side of our justification, the non-imputation of our sin, without the positive, the imputation of God’s righteousness.

It will be seen from what I have said above that I cannot agree with Bp. Horsley’s view, that as our transgressions were the cause of Jesus being delivered up, so our justification must be the cause of His being raised again. Such a pressing of the same sense on διὰ is not necessary, when Paul’s manifold usages of the same preposition are considered: and the regarding our justification (in the sense here) as a fact past, is inconsistent with the very next words, δικαιωθέντες ἐκ πίστεως, which shew that not the objective fact, but its subjective realization, is here meant.—In these words (of ver. 25) the Apostle introduces the great subject of chaps. 5-8,—DEATH, as connected with SIN,—and LIFE, as connected with RIGHTEOUSNESS. The various ramifications of this subject see in the headings below.

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

Was delivered [παρεδοθη] . See on Mt 4:12; 1Pe 2:23. Used of casting into prison or delivering to justice, Mt 4:12; Mt 10:17, Mt 19:21. Frequently of the betrayal of Christ, Mt 10:4; Mt 17:22; Joh 6:64, 71. Of committing a trust, Mt 25:14, 20, 22. Of committing tradition, doctrine, or precept, Mr 7:13; 1Co 11:2; 1Co 14:3; Rom 6:17; 2Pe 2:21. Of Christ 's yielding up His spirit, Joh 19:30. Of the surrender of Christ and His followers to death, Rom 8:32; 2Co 4:11; Gal 2:20. Of giving over to evil, Rom 1:26, 28; 1Co 5:5; Eph 4:19.

Raised again for our justification. "But if the whole matter of the justification depends on what He has suffered for our offenses, we shall as certainly be justified or have our account made even, if He does not rise, as if He does. Doubtless the rising has an immense significance, when the justification is conceived to be the renewing of our moral nature in righteousness; for it is only by the rising that His incarnate life and glory are fully discovered, and the righteousness of God declared in His person in its true moral power. But in the other view of justification there is plainly enough nothing depending, as far as that is concerned, on His resurrection" (Bushnell). Compare ch. 6 4 - 13.

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

Vv. 25. “Who was delivered on account of our offences, and was raised again on account of our justification.”

In the title our Lord there was involved the idea of a very intimate relation between Jesus and us. This mysterious and gracious solidarity is summed up in two symmetrical clauses, which in a few clear and definite terms present its two main aspects. He was delivered on account of our offences. Perhaps Paul means by the phrase: being delivered, to remind us of the description of the servant of Jehovah, Isaiah 53 : “His soul was delivered (παρεδόθη) to death” (Rom 4:12). He who delivers Him, according to Rom 8:32, is God Himself: “who spared not His own Son, but delivered Him up for us all.” Paul has told us, Rom 3:25, for what end this act was necessary. It was required to manifest conspicuously the righteousness of God. Every sinner needed to be brought to say: See what I deserve! Thus justice was satisfied and pardon possible. And He was raised again on account of our justification. Commentators are unanimous, if I mistake not, in translating: for our justification, as if it were πρός or εἰς, and not διά (on account of). This for is explained in the sense that the resurrection of Christ was needed in order that faith might be able to appropriate the expiation which was accomplished, and that so justification, of which faith is the condition, might take place. But what a roundabout way of arriving at the explanation of this for! And if the apostle really meant for (with a view to), why repeat this same preposition διά which he had just used in the parallel proposition, in its natural sense of on account of, while the language supplied him with prepositions appropriate to the exact expression of his thought (πρός, εἰς, Rom 3:25-26)? I am not surprised that in this way several commentators have found in this symmetry established between the facts of salvation nothing more than an artificial distribution, belonging to the domain of rhetoric rather than to that of dogmatics, and that one has even gone the length of reproaching the apostle “for sacrificing to the mania of parallelism.” If we were shut up to the explanation referred to, we could only join regretfully in this judgment. But it is not so. Let us take the διά in its natural sense, as we are bound to do by its use in the first proposition. In the same way as Jesus died because of our offences, that is, our (merited) condemnation, He was raised because of our (accomplished) justification. Our sin had killed Him; our justification raised Him again. How so? The expiation of our trespasses once accomplished by His death, and the right of God’s justice proved in earnest, God could pronounce the collective acquittal of future believers, and He did so. Over the blood of the sacrifice a sentence of justification was pronounced in favor of guilty man; his condemnation was annulled. Now, in view of this divine fact, a corresponding change must necessarily be wrought in the person of Christ Himself. By the same law of solidarity whereby our condemnation had brought Him to the cross, our justification must transform His death into life. When the debtor is proved insolvent, his security is thrown into prison; but as soon as the latter succeeds in clearing the debt, the debtor is legally set free, and his security is liberated with him. For he has no debt of his own. Such is the bond of solidarity formed by the plan of God between Christ and us. Our lot is as it were interwoven with His: we sin, He dies; we are justified, He lives again. This is the key to the declaration, 1Co 15:17: “If Jesus be not risen, ye are yet in your sins.” So long as the security is in prison, the debt is not paid; the immediate effect of payment would be his liberation. Similarly, if Jesus were not raised, we should be more than ignorant whether our debt were paid; we might be certain that it was not. His resurrection is the proof of our justification only because it is the necessary effect of it. What Paul required to say, therefore, was διά, on account of, and not εἰς, with a view to. If in Christ dead humanity disappeared condemned, in Christ raised again it appears acquitted. And now what is the part of faith in relation to the resurrection thus understood? Exactly that of Abraham in regard to the divine promise. On hearing the promise, he no longer saw himself as he was, but he considered himself as the promise made him. So, the resurrection of Christ once completed, we have no longer to see ourselves as we are in ourselves, but as this fact reveals us to our view: justified. For this resurrection is the incarnation of my justification. If death is the payment of my debt, resurrection is, as it were, the acknowledgment of it.

We must beware, therefore, if we would not efface from the Scriptures their most magnificent revelation, of giving to the word δικαίωσις, justification, as several commentators, Döllinger for example, the entirely arbitrary sense of sanctification: Jesus was raised with a view to our moral amelioration!—or of bringing in here, as some Protestant commentators do (Calv., Thol., Philip.) with the notion of the resurrection, those of the heavenly dominion and the intercession of Christ. The resurrection is here presented by Paul in express terms in its relation to what preceded, namely, His death, not the glorified existence which followed.

Thus is finished the demonstration of the harmony between the revelation of the Old Testament and the justification by faith revealed in the gospel. The grand truth of the righteousness of faith, summarily enunciated 3.21, 22, was first placed on its historical foundation, the work of God in Christ, Rom 3:23-26; then it was confirmed by its harmony with the Old Testament; first with the spirit of the law, Rom 3:27-31, then with the example of Abraham, Rom 4:1-24. One question might yet be raised: Will this justification by faith, which saves us at present, hold good in the future? Can it assure us of salvation even before the judgment-seat? It is to the solution of this so grave question that the following piece is devoted. Thus will be closed the didactic exposition of justification by faith.

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.