Romans 5:10

Romans 5:10. For. A further setting forth of the thought of Romans 5:9.

Being enemies; i.e., being, as we were, the objects of God's holy wrath. That this was while we, on our part, were opposed to God is certainly true; but the best commentators agree in declaring that the other sense is the logical one. The only objection to it rests on a mechanical and false view of Scripture language. It is supposed to imply a wrong state of feeling on the part of God. But this is impossible. When the Scriptures say that God has wrath against sinners (which really means that they are ‘enemies' in the sense we advocate), they do not assert that He has the revengeful, passionate feelings which naturally belong to human enmity. Every assertion, even in our ordinary use of language, is modified by the character of the person spoken of; much more in this case, for God must be right, if there is any distinction between right and wrong. Nor does this view contradict the love of God: His love shines out conspicuously, becomes effective, by means of the plan which removes His enmity without detriment to His holiness.

We were reconciled to God, etc. In accordance with the last remark, we refer this to God's act by means of which we cease to be the objects of His holy wrath. (Comp. Romans 5:11, where ‘reconciliation' should be substituted for ‘atonement,' and where this ‘reconciliation' is said to be ‘received.') The primary sense, therefore, points to the great change which has taken place in the relation of God to us, by means of the voluntary atoning sacrifice of Christ (‘through the death of His Son'). Thus God's wrath was removed, His justice satisfied, and, in consequence, men are reunited to Him as a loving and reconciled Father. While it is true that man is reconciled to God ‘through the death of His Son,' this is not the thought from which the Apostle is arguing, nor is it justified by correct laws of interpretation. ‘All attempts to make this, the secondary meaning of the word, to be the primary, rest not on an unprejudiced exegesis, but on a foregone determination to get rid of the reality of God's anger against sin' (Trench). On the other hand, it is clear that the two sides are practically inseparable; and this because our reconciliation to God, as a moral process on our side is prompted and encouraged by the assurance that God has been reconciled to us, resting on the demonstration of His love to us in the atoning death of Christ, which was the meritorious ground of His reconciliation to us. Our privilege will seem all the greater, our duty the more imperative, from holding fast to the plain meaning of the passage.

Much more, being reconciled, or, ‘having been reconciled,' once for all. The former participle (‘being') pointed to a past state; this indicates a past act Paul is speaking of Christians, who have been justified (Romans 5:1), who have embraced this plan of reconciliation, to whom God is actually reconciled. On this accomplished fact he bases his argument: We shall be saved by (or, ‘in') his life. Fellowship with the life of the ascended and reigning Lord is here suggested. ‘The death of Christ effected our reconciliation; all the less can His exalted life leave our deliverance unfinished. The living Christ cannot leave without final success what His death effected. This, however, is accomplished not merely through His intercession (chap. Romans 8:34), but also through His whole working in His kingly office for believers up to the completion of His work and kingdom; 1 Corinthians 15:22 ' (Meyer). ‘This same Saviour that died for them still lives, and ever lives, to sanctify, protect, and save them' (Hodge).