Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadHeinrich Meyer Commentary - Romans 8:29 - 8:30
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Rom_8:29-30. More detailed development and expression of τοῖς κ . πρόθ . κλ . οὖσιν ,—as a continued confirmation of the οἴδαμεν , ὅτι κ . τ . λ . “For this divine plan of salvation advancing from the πρόθεσις to the πλῆσις , leads the Christian safely and surely to the δόξα ;” hence it is not conceivable that anything whatever, in opposition to this plan, should exercise other than a beneficial influence upon them (Rom_8:31 ff.).
προέγνω ] foreknew, namely, as those who should one day, in the way of the divine plan of salvation, become σύμμορφοι τῆς εἰκόνος τ . υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ . That this character, in which they were foreknown by God, presupposes the subjection to faith (the ὑπακοὴ πίστεως Rom_1:5), was self-evident to the Christian reader. Erasmus aptly remarks: “Non temere elegit Deus quos elegit, novit suos multo antequam vocaret.” The text merely gives the terminus of the ΠΡΟ in ΠΡΟΈΓΝΩ and ΠΡΟΏΡΙΣΕ quite indefinitely, namely: before their calling. More precise definitions, therefore (e.g. that of Tholuck: “before the foundation of the world,” though in itself correct, Eph_1:4; Eph_3:11), should not be here given. The taking of the πνοέγνω in the sense of prescience, demanded by the signification of the word, has been followed (though with various, and in part very arbitrary, attempts to supply that, as which the persons concerned were foreknown by God) by Origen, Chrysostom, Augustine, Ambrosiaster, Jerome, Theophylact, Oecumenius, Erasmus, Paraphr., Toletus, Calovius, and others, including Reiche, Neander, Tholuck, Reithmayr, Maier, Philippi, van Hengel, Hahn, Ewald, Weiss, and others. The question whether this exposition or the other of the pre-election (Calvin and others, including Rückert, Usteri, Köllner, de Wette, Fritzsche, Krehl, Baumgarten-Crusius, and Lamping), is the true one, cannot be got rid of by mixing up the two conceptions (Umbreit); nor is it to be decided by dogmatic presuppositions, but simply by the usage of the language, in accordance with which προγ . never in the N. T. (not even in Rom_11:2, 1Pe_1:20) means anything else than to know before-hand (Act_26:5; 2Pe_3:17; Jdt_9:6; Wis_6:13; Wis_8:8; Wis_18:6). Comp. Philippi in loc., and his Glaubenslehre, IV. 1, p. 117 ff., ed. 2. That in classic usage it ever means anything else, cannot be at all proved. See, on the contrary, Hom. Cer. 258; Xen. Ap. 30; Plat. Rep. p. 426 C; Theaet. p. 203 D; Tim. p. 70 C; Eur. Hipp. 1072; Dem. 861. 13; Lucian, Prom. 20. Comp. also πρόγνωσις and ΠΡΟΓΝΩΣΤΙΚΌς . An appeal is made to the familiar use of ΓΙΝΏΣΚ . in the sense of judicial cognizance, or even of other resolutions and decisions (Herod. iv. 25, i. 74, 78; Thuc. iv. 30, iii. 99, and many other instances). But, in the first place, it is never in this sense joined with the accusative of the person without an infinitive; and secondly, there is no such precedent of usage for the compound προγινώσκειν , current as it was in Greek authors; for the few passages in which it means to take forethought about something (Thuc. ii. 64. 5; Xen. Cyr. ii. 4. 11, with a very doubtful reading) are not suitable for comparison, either as regards the sense, or as respects the union with the personal accusative in our passage. The incorrectness of this explanation is confirmed, moreover, by the analogy of the following clauses, which always add another and different idea to the one preceding. The right interpretation remains, therefore: praecognovit (Vulg. = praescivit), which, however, is neither to be altered, with Augustine, Vatablus, Grotius, Estius, and others, into approbavit jam ante, to which view also Tholuck and Rückert incline (see on Rom_7:15); nor to be taken, with Hofmann, in that sense of γινώσκειν which obtains in 1Co_8:3; 1Co_13:12, Gal_4:9, 2Ti_2:19 (an appropriating cognizance of what is akin and homogeneous, according to Hofmann). The latter, to which also Delitzsch ultimately comes, Psychol. p. 39, is incorrect, because in accordance with it the πρόγνωσις would be a relation of communion already entered into actively by God, which would necessarily include the προορισμός , and consequently exclude the latter as a special and accessory act. For to suppose that Paul, with προέγνω and προώρισε , does not mean two acts following each other in succession, but asserts the former of the persons, and the latter of the character ascribed to them (Hofmann), is wholly groundless in presence of the clearly progressive description of the apostle. The right view, since faith is the subjective ground of salvation, is that held by Calovius and our older dogmatists: “quos credituros praevidit vel suscepturos vocationem.” It is God’s being aware in His plan, by means of which, before the subjects are destined by Him to salvation, He knows whom He has to destine thereto. Comp. on Rom_11:2.
καὶ προώρισε ] them He destined also beforehand. To what? συμμόρφ . τῆς εἰκ . τ . υἱ . αὐτ .: to be conformed to the image of His Son, i.e. to be such as should present the image of His Son in their conformation. From the following εἰς τὸ εἶναι κ . τ . λ . it is plain that Paul here means the same which in Rom_8:23 he has designated as υἱοθεσίαν , τὴν ἀπολύτρωσιν τοῦ σώματος ἡμῶν , consequently the glory to which God has predestined them, the state of the μέλλουσα δόξα (Rom_8:18), so far as this shall be the same (even in respect of the glorified body, Php_3:21, 1Co_15:49) as that which the exalted Christ has. Comp. 2Co_3:18, 1Jn_3:2. The fellowship in suffering (Calvin, Grotius, Calovius, and others) is here remote. What Paul has in view must be the same as he denotes in Rom_8:30 by ἐδόξασε , consequently the conformitas gloriae. This very thought of the entire glorious appearance, which he means, has suggested the vivid expression συμμόρφ . τ . εἰκόνος ; wherefore we are not, with Chrysostom ( ὅπερ γὰρ ὁ μονογενὴς ἦν φύσει , τοῦτο καὶ αὐτοὶ γεγόνασι κατὰ χάριν ), Theophylact, Bengel, and others, to refer it to the present υἱοθεσία . Theodoret has the right view. The conformity of the inner being is not conveyed in the expression (Hofmann understands it as included), but is the moral presupposition of the glory meant.
σύμμορφος (Lucian, Amor. 39), in Php_3:21 with the dative, here with the genitive. See Bernhardy, p. 171; Kühner, II. 1, p. 295.
εἰς τὸ εἶναι κ . τ . λ .] Not an inferential clause (see on Rom_1:20), but—as the very notion of προώρ . embraces the purpose—the final aim of προώρ . συμμόρφ . Nor is the main thought contained in ἐν πολλ . ἀδελφ ., as de Wette very arbitrarily supposes; but, on the contrary, Paul contemplates Christ as the One, to whom the divine decree referred as to its final aim. Christ was to fulfil His lofty commission not merely by standing in the relation of His glory to the Father as the μονογενής , but by being the First-born among many brethren, i.e. among many who through Him, the essential and primordial Son of God, should, as adopted υἱοὶ Θεοῦ , and consequently in so far as His brethren, have attained to the same δόξα of sharing the possession of the dignity and privilege (Col_1:18) of the First-born. Comp. also Heb_1:6, and Lünemann in loc.
ἐκάλεσε ] Like κλητοῖς in Rom_8:28. For those who despised the invitation to salvation conveyed to them through the preachers of the gospel did not belong to the called, whom God προέγνω and προώρισε ; the following τούτους κ . ἐδικ . also presupposes that the calling has been attended with the result of the ὑπακοὴ πίστεως . Comp. on Rom_8:28. Hence the divine saving grace is to be conceived as working by means of the word on those who become called, namely, in opening and preparing the heart for the reception of the word, Act_16:14; Php_1:6; Php_1:29; Joh_6:44. God has fore-known those who would not oppose to His gracious calling the resistance of unbelief, but would follow its drawing; thereafter He has fore-ordained them to eternal salvation; and when the time had come for the execution of His saving counsel, has called them, etc. (Rom_8:30). With the κλῆσις begins the execution of the προορισμός in accordance with the πρόγνωσις ; and the subjects concerned are, in contrast to the multitude standing outside of this divine process of salvation, the ἐκλεκτοί (Rom_8:33).
ἐδικαίωσεν ] Justification is consequently the sole ground of the glorifying; sanctification is added to it, in order that the justified may attain that goal in the way that God desires.
ἐδόξασε ] Justification, as a divine act of imputation, is really (not merely ideally or in principle, in opposition to Lipsius, Rechtfert. p. 48 f.) accomplished; but the glorification falls to the future (Rom_8:21; Rom_5:2, and constantly in N. T.; comp. also 1Co_2:7, Rom_9:23). Notwithstanding, the aorist neither stands for the future nor for the present (in opposition to Köllner; see Herm. ad Viger. p. 746); nor does it express anywhere in the N. T. a habit, as Flatt thinks—against which view, in the present instance, the analogy of the preceding aorists is decisive; but it represents the de facto certainly future glorification as so necessary and certain, that it appears as if already given and completed with the ἐδικαίωσεν . “Whom He has justified, them He has—viewing the relation from its final aim—therewith also glorified.” See Herm. ad Viger. p. 747; Kühner, II. 1, p. 142. In order thus to place the glorification on the same platform of certainty with the προέγνω , προώρισε , ἐκάλεσε , and ἐδικ ., Paul selected the proleptic aorist. On the other hand, the triumphant flow of the great chain of thought and the thoroughly Pauline boldness of expression (comp. on Eph_2:5) are misapprehended, if the act be regarded as accomplished only in the decree of God (Grotius, Reiche, and Umbreit); or if the expression be referred to the glory of God possessed “at first only inwardly and secretly” (Hofmann), or to “repute with God” (Märcker), or to the bestowal of grace and υἱοθεσία here below (Chrysostom and his followers, Ambrosiaster, Pelagius, and Erasmus), to which also van Hengel adheres, appealing to Joh_12:28.