Romans 12:1

Twenty-fourth Passage (12:1, 2). The Basis of Christian Conduct.

Vv. 1. “ I exhort you, therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living victim, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your rational service. ”

How are we to explain the οὖν, therefore, which joins this verse to what precedes? We fully concur with Schultz in holding that it is impossible to connect chap. 12 directly with the idea of chap. 11, and to identify the mercies of God (Romans 12:1) with the mercy displayed in the course of salvation across the field of history (Romans 11:32). The true connection with what precedes is much wider; it is nothing less than the relation between the two parts of the Epistle. Religion among the ancients was service (cultus); and cultus had for its centre sacrifice. The Jewish service counted four kinds of sacrifice, which might be reduced to two: the first, comprising the sacrifices offered before reconciliation and to obtain it (sacrifice for sin and for trespass); the second, the sacrifices offered after the obtaining of reconciliation and serving to celebrate it (the whole burnt-offering and the peace-offering). The great division of the Epistle to the Romans to which we have come is explained by this contrast. The fundamental idea of the first part, chaps. 1-11, was that of the sacrifice offered by God for the sin and transgression of mankind; witness the central passage, Romans 3:25-26. These are the mercies of God to which Paul appeals here, and the development of which has filled the first eleven Chapter s. The practical part which we are beginning corresponds to the second kind of sacrifice, which was the symbol of consecration after pardon had been received (the holocaust, in which the victim was entirely burned), and of the communion re-established between Jehovah and the believer (the peace-offering, followed by a feast in the court of the temple). The sacrifice of expiation offered by God in the person of His Son should now find its response in the believer in the sacrifice of complete consecration and intimate communion.

Such is the force of these first words: “I exhort you, therefore, by the mercies of God.” This word therefore gathers up the whole doctrinal part, and includes the whole practical part. Comp. the entirely similar therefore, Ephesians 4:1. So true is it that the relation of ideas just expounded is that which fills the apostle's mind, that to designate the believer's conduct in response to the work of God he employs the expression victim and living victim, which pointedly alludes to the Jewish sacrifices.

The term παρακαλῶ, I exhort, differs from the legal commandment, in that it appeals to a sentiment already existing in the heart, faith in God's mercies. It is by this term, also, that Paul, in the Epistle to the Ephesians, Ephesians 4:1, passes from the doctrinal teaching to the practical part. And as this Epistle (notwithstanding its title) is addressed to Christians whom Paul did not know personally (Romans 1:15; Romans 3:2, Romans 4:21), we there find a new proof of the mistake of Renan, who thinks that this expression would be out of place addressed to others than the apostle's personal disciples.

The διά, by, gives the reader to understand that the divine mercies are the power by means of which this exhortation should take possession of his will. The word παριστάναι, to present, is the technical term to denote the presentation of victims and offerings in the Levitical cultus (Luke 2:22).

The victim to be offered is the body of the believer. Many regard the body as representing the entire person. But why not in that case say ὑμᾶς αὐτούς, yourselves? comp. Romans 6:13. De Wette thought that Paul meant by the word to remind his readers that the body is the seat of sin. But this intention would suppose that the question about to be discussed was the destruction of this hostile principle, while the apostle speaks rather of the active consecration of the body. Olshausen supposes that, by recommending the sacrifice of the lower part of our being, Paul meant to say: all the more everything that is in you of a more exalted nature. But he could not have passed over all the rest in silence; comp. 1 Thessalonians 5:23. Meyer distinguishes between the consecration of the body, Romans 12:1, and that of the mind, which, according to him, is referred to in Romans 12:2. But this contrast between the two parts of our being does not come out in the least in the sequel; and we shall see, in point of fact, that the relation between the two verses is wholly different. Let us not forget that those whom the apostle here addresses (ἀδελφοί, brethren), and whom he exhorts, are believers already inwardly consecrated. Chap. 6 has shown how justification by faith provides the principle of sanctification. It is in the name of this finished work that Paul now invites them to lead the life of consecrated victims. Now, the indispensable instrument for this purpose is the body. And hence it is that the apostle, supposing the will already gained, does not require more than the consecration of the body.

The expression θυσία ζῶσα, living victim, refers to the animal victims which were offered in the Levitical cultus by putting them to death. The sacrifice required by Paul is the opposite of these. The victim must live to become, at every moment of his existence, the active agent of the divine will. The term living has not here, therefore, a spiritual sense, but should be taken in the strict sense. The word θυσία is often translated sacrifice. It may have this meaning; but the meaning victim better agrees with the term παραστῆσαι, to present. The epithet ἁγία, holy, might express the idea of real holiness, in opposition to the merely ritual purity of the Levitical victims. But would not Paul have said, in that sense, ὄντως or ἀληθῶς ἁγία, truly holy? He means rather to contrast the new employment of the body in the service of God with its previous use under the dominion of sin.

This body, full of life and constantly employed for good, will present a well-pleasing spectacle to the eye of God; it will be an “offering of sweet-smelling (well-pleasing) savor” in the N. T. sense. And this is what is expressed by the third epithet. Some have connected the regimen τῷ Θεῳ, to God, with the verb παραστῆσαι, to present. But this would be a tautology, and too many important words separate the two terms.

The last words of the verse certainly establish a contrast between the external service of the Old Testament and the spiritual service of the New. Hence several commentators have been led to give the word λογικήν, reasonable, the sense of spiritual; comp. 1 Peter 2:2, where, in consequence of the understood antithesis (material milk), there can be no doubt as to the meaning of this word. But why would not Paul have rather used in our passage the ordinary term πνευματικήν, spiritual? Calvin takes the epithet reasonable as opposed to the superstitious practices of the heathen; and Grotius contrasts it with the ignorance of animal victims. It seems to me that in all these explanations it is forgotten to take account of an important word, the complement ὑμῶν, of you that is to say, “of such people as you.” Is it not this pronoun which explains the choice of the word λογικήν, reasonable, of which, undoubtedly, the true meaning is this: “the service which rationally corresponds to the moral premises contained in the faith which you profess”?

It will be asked whether Paul, by requiring simply that service (cultus) which consists of a life devoted to good, means to exclude as irrational, acts of worship properly so called. Assuredly not, a host of passages prove the contrary; comp. for example, 1 Corinthians 11-14. Only the acts of external service have no value in his eyes except as means of nourishing and stimulating the truly rational service of which he speaks here. Every act of service which does not issue in the holy consecration of him who takes part in it, is christianly illogical.

But what use is to be made of this consecrated body? Romans 12:2 proceeds to answer this question.