728x90
18 For I consider that the sufferings of this present time nare not worth comparing with the glory that is to be revealed to us. 19 For the creation waits with eager longing for othe revealing of the sons of God. 20 For the creation pwas subjected to futility, not willingly, but qbecause of him who subjected it, in hope 21 that rthe creation itself will be set free from its bondage to corruption and obtain the freedom of the glory of the children of God. 22 For we know that sthe whole creation thas been groaning together in the pains of childbirth until now. 23 And not only the creation, but we ourselves, who have uthe firstfruits of the Spirit, vgroan inwardly as wwe wait eagerly for adoption as sons, xthe redemption of our bodies. 24 For yin this hope we were saved. Now zhope that is seen is not hope. For who hopes for what he sees? 25 But if we hope for what we do not see, we await for it with patience. 
n2 Cor. 4:17; [1 Pet. 1:5, 6]
o1 Pet. 4:13; 5:1; 1 John 3:2; [ch. 2:7]
pGen. 3:18, 19; Eccles. 1:2
qGen. 3:17
r[Acts 3:21]
sMark 16:15
tJer. 12:4, 11
u[2 Cor. 5:5; James 1:18]
v2 Cor. 5:2, 4
wver. 19, 25; Isa. 25:9; Gal. 5:5
xSee ch. 7:24; Luke 21:28
y[1 Thess. 1:3; 5:8]
z2 Cor. 4:18; Heb. 11:1
a[1 Thess. 1:3; 5:8]
 The Holy Bible: English Standard Version(Wheaton: Standard Bible Society, 2016), 롬 8:18–25.

앞선 17절에서 하나님의 자녀, 상속자들이 겪게되는 고통을 언급했는데 이제 바울은 그들은 격려하기 위해서 다음과 같은 내용을 이후에 전개한다. 
  1. 앞으로 드러날 영광(18-25)
  2. 성령의 도우심(26-27)
  3. 모든 것이 합력하여 선을 이룬다는 사실(28-30)
먼저 바울은 현재 악한 세대에 신자가 받게될 고난과 그들이 이후에 받게될 영광을 대조한다. 고린도 교인들에게 바울은 그가 매맞음, 투옥, 자지 못함, 굶주림등의 모든 종류의 고난을 겪었다고 썼다. 하지만 그는 이러한 시험이 그에게 닥쳐올 장차의 영광과 족히 비교할 수 없다고 여겼다. 천국의 시민으로 그는 이땅에서의 그의 잠시의 삶은 영원의 삶과 비교할 수 없다는 것을 깨달았다. 그뿐만 아니라 앞으로 올 시대의 영광이 현재의 시험과 질적으로 다르다는 것이다. 만약 삶의 어려움들이 우리의 관심을 빼앗아가도록 허락한다면 그들은 우리가 고대하는 영광을 가리는 것이 될 것이다. 우리의 초점이 위의 것, 영원의 중요성에 대한 영적인 관심을 향하도록 해야한다. 
  • Having mentioned in v. 17 the suffering that accompanies membership in the family of God, Paul laid out three grounds of encouragement: (1) the glory that will be revealed (vv. 18–25), (2) the help of the Holy Spirit (vv. 26–27), and (3) the fact that all things work together for good (vv. 28–30).165First he contrasted the sufferings of believers characteristic of the present evil age with the glory that will be theirs (cf. 2 Cor 4:17).166To the Corinthians he wrote that he was thoroughly   p 184  acquainted with hardships of every kind—beatings, imprisonments, sleepless nights, and hunger (2 Cor 6:4–5; 11:23–28). Yet he considered these trials not worth comparing with the glory that was about “to burst upon [him]” (v. 18, Goodspeed).167As a citizen of heaven (Phil 3:20) he realized that his earthly life was but a moment in time in comparison with eternity. Not only that, but the glory of the coming age will be qualitatively distinct from the trials of the present. If we allow the difficulties of life to absorb our attention, they will effectively blot out the glory that awaits us. Our focus needs to be on things above (Col 3:2), spiritual concerns of eternal significance (cf. 2 Cor 4:18).168
  • 165Cf. Murray, Romans, 1:300, 310, 313.
  • 166The Greek text says it will be revealed εἰς ἡμᾶς, usually understood as “to us” or “in us.” The NEB has “which is in store for us.”
  • Goodspeed E. J. Goodspeed, The New Tesament: An American Translation
  • 167μέλλουσαν denotes certainty as well as imminence.
  • 168Luther laments the time wasted thinking about the creation as it now is rather than that which it is looking forward to. He quotes Seneca’s observation that “we fail to know what is necessary, because we study unnecessary things” (Romans, 107–8).
  •  Robert H. Mounce, Romans, vol. 27, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1995), 183–184.

18절) 현재의 고난은 장차 우리에게 드러날 영광과 비교할 수 없다. 
이후에 우리가 마주하게될 궁극적인 영광은 너무타 크고 놀라울 것인데 그 영광을 얻기 까지, 영광을 얻기 위해서 현재의 고난을 받게 될 것이다. 우리들은 육체의 부활과 새하늘과 새땅을 기대한다. 
  • The ultimate glory that Christians will receive is so stupendous that the sufferings of this present timeare insignificant in comparison (cf. 2 Cor. 4:17). They look forward both to the resurrection of the body (1 Thess. 4:13–18) and to the new heaven and new earth (Rev. 21:1–22:5; see Isa. 65:17).
  •  Crossway Bibles, The ESV Study Bible(Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2008), 2171.

19절) 피조물은 간절히 하나님의 아들들이 나타나는 것을 고대한다. 본문에서는 피조물을 의인화해서 장차 영광의 놀라움을 강조하고 있다. 

20-21절) 피조물이 허무한 것에 굴복하는 것은 자발적인 것이 아니라 그것에 굴복하게 하시는 분 때문이다. 소망안에서 피조물 자신은 부패의 굴레에서 벗어나고 하나님의 자녀의 영광의 자유를 얻게 될 것이다. 
아담이 범죄함으로 모든 피조세계는 허무함에 종속되었다. 가시와 엉겅퀴가 났고, 여인은 출산의 고통을, 그리고 전도서에서 말하는대로 모든 것이 헛되다는 내용이 반복된다. 태초의 창조는 이러한 것들, 타락의 결과들을 가지고 있지 않았다. 마지막때에 이러한 죄의 영향력으로부터 벗어나 변화되어 지금보다 더욱 아름답고, 생산적이며 우리가 상상하는 것보다 더욱 살기 쉬울 것이다. 
  • When Adam sinned, the created world was also subjected to futility. One thinks of the thorns and thistles that were to accompany work in Gen. 3:17–19, the pain in childbirth for the woman (Gen. 3:16), and the repeated refrain that all is vanity in Ecclesiastes (where the Septuagint uses the same Greek word here used for “futility”). The original creation(Genesis 1–2) did not have these things, and on the last day it also will be transformed and freed from the effects of sin and will instantly become far more beautiful, productive, and easy to live in than one can ever imagine.
  •  Crossway Bibles, The ESV Study Bible(Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2008), 2171.

피조물이 허무함에 굴복하는 것은 피조물안에 내재하는 어떤 잘못 때문이 아니라 하나님이 결정하신 것 때문이다. 그의 불순종에 대한 형벌로 아담은 가시와 엉겅퀴로 저주받은 땅으로부터 그의 음식을 얻게 되었다. 그러나 그 저주는 영구적이지 않다. 물리적인 우주는 아담의 죄로 망쳐졌지만 여전히 소망은 있다. 21절 본문은 바로 그 소망을 언급한다. 
  • Paul spoke of the creation being “subjected to frustration” (v. 20).171That was not because of some inherent fault in creation but because that is what God decided.172In punishment for his   p 185  disobedience, Adam was to garner his food from ground cursed with thorns and thistles. But the curse was not permanent. The physical universe was frustrated by Adam’s sin, yet there is hope. Verse 21 states the content of that hope.173The day is coming when the created order will be set free from its bondage to decay. Freed from corruption, it will share in “the freedom of the glory of the children of God” (literal translation).174The scene is eschatological. Some have suggested that this points to life during the millennium, but it is better to see it as the entire created universe celebrating together the glorious state of final redemption and restoration. Paul’s use of personification is striking. As sin brought the curse of death to the physical universe, the day is coming when a new heaven and earth will be in place (2 Pet 3:13; Rev 21:1). They will take their place with the children of God in the perfect freedom of a sinless universe.
  • 171O. Bauernfeind notes that ματαιότης in Rom 8:20 takes up the thought of Eccl 1:2 (“Utterly meaningless! Everything is meaningless,” TDNTabr., 572). The “frustration” of the created order lay in its inability (due to human sin) to fulfill its intended goal or purpose.
  • 172The “one who subjected it” is certainly God. Because of διά with the accusative (which seems to suggest not the agent but the reason for subjection) some hold that the clause speaks of Adam or Satan. However, as in John 6:57, διά with the accusative may be used in place of διά with the genitive (EDNT1.297).
  • 173Manuscripts that read διότι make v. 21 the reason for hope. The UBS text (4th ed. rev.) reads ὅτι, which makes v. 21 the content of the hope.
  • 174The NIV and others translate τὴν ἐλευθερίαν τῆς δόξης with “the glorious freedom,” but that tends to lessen the eschatological emphasis of the verse.
  •  Robert H. Mounce, Romans, vol. 27, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1995), 184–185.

22-23절) 모든 피조물이 이제까지 출산의 고통속에서 함께 탄식하는 것을 알고 있다. 그리고 피조물뿐만 아니라 성령의 처음 익은 열매인 우리들도 양자될 것, 곧 우리 몸의 구속을 고대하며 속으로 탄식한다.
본문에서 말하는 고통은 해산하는 고통이다. 아이를 출산할 때의 고통은 무의미하지 않다. 이것은 새로운 생명, 삶에 대한 희망을 가지고 있는 것이다. 
  • Currently, however, the entire universe is in travail as if it were giving birth.175As in childbirth, the pain is not meaningless but “carries with it the hope of new life for all creation.”176Likewise, we ourselves are inwardly groaning177as we await the final phase of our adoption178—the redemption of our bodies (cf. Phil 3:21).
  • 175The prefix σύν in the two compound verbs means “together with” one another, not withChrist or withus.
  • 176Bruce, Romans, 164.
  • 177Moo comments that by associating our “groaning” with that of creation, Paul characterized it as nonverbal and therefore indicative of an inner attitude of frustration at the moral and physical infirmities of the present age and of eager longing for the end of this state of “weakness” (Romans 1–8, 556).
  • 178The NIVSB note on 8:23 calls attention to three states in the adoption process: first, God’s predestination (Eph 1:5); then our inclusion as children of God (v. 14); and finally, the resurrection of the body.
  •  Robert H. Mounce, Romans, vol. 27, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1995), 185.

성경에서 처음 익은 열매는 곡식의 가장 좋은 부분으로 하나님께 드려지는 것을 의미한다. 마찬가지로 하나님께서는 신자들에게 성령을 주심으로 그들이 상속자로, 그분의 양조로서 받게될 다른 많은 축복의 보증금을 지불하신 것이다. 
  • In the OT, “firstfruits” describes the first and best part of a crop that is to be offered to God (e.g., Exod 23:19; Lev 2:12). Similarly, God gives the Spirit to believers as the down payment on the many other blessings that he promises to bestow on his heirs, his adopted children (v. 17; see 2 Cor 1:22; 5:5; Eph 1:14).
  • OT Old Testament
  • e.g. for example
  • v. verse in the chapter being commented on
  •  Douglas J. Moo, “The Letters and Revelation,”in NIV Zondervan Study Bible: Built on the Truth of Scripture and Centered on the Gospel Message, ed. D. A. Carson (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2015), 2307.

하나님이 백성들도 또한 탄식하며 그의 구원 사역의 완성을 기다린다. 그 긴장감은 여기 바울의 신학 속에서 이미와 아직으로 보여집니다. 그리스도인은 이미 성령의 처음 익은 열매를 가지고 있지만 그들은 그들의 몸이 완전히 구속되고 그들이 죽은 자 가운데서 일어날 때에 그들의 마지막 선택, 입양의 날을 여전히 기다립니다. 그들의 입양은 이미 법적인 의미에서 일어났습니다. 그리고 이미 그 많은 특권을 누리고 있습니다. 하지만 여기 바울은 완벽한 부활의 몸을 받는 더 큰 특권을 언급하기 위해서 ‘양자됨’을 언급합니다. 
  • God’s people also groanand long for the completion of his saving work. The tension is seen here between the already and not yet in Paul’s theology. Christians already have the firstfruits of the Spirit, but they still await the day of their final adoption when their bodies are fully redeemed and they are raised from the dead. Their adoptionhas already occurred in a legal sense (v. 15), and they already enjoy many of its privileges, but here Paul uses “adoption” to refer to the yet greater privilege of receiving perfect resurrection bodies.
  •  Crossway Bibles, The ESV Study Bible(Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2008), 2171.

우리의 구원은 우리의 죽을 몸들이 언젠가 부패의 사슬로부터 자유케 될 것이라는 소망을 포함합니다. 우리는 소망에 의해 구원받는 것은 아니지만 우리의 구원은 소망으로 특징지워진다. 그러므로 완전함으로 볼 때 구원은 필연적으로 미래이기에 우리는 소망안에서 그것을 기다려야 한다. 그러나 보여지는 소망이 소망의 전부는 아니다. 


저작자표시 변경금지

'성경묵상 > 로마서' 카테고리의 다른 글

롬 8:31-39 누가 우리를 그리스도의 사랑에서 끊으리요  (0) 2018.05.10
롬 8:26-30 모든 것이 합력하여 선을 이룸  (0) 2018.05.09
롬 8:12-17 종의 영 vs 양자의 영  (0) 2018.05.02
롬 8:9-11 하나님의 영이 거하시면  (0) 2018.04.30
롬 8:5-8 육신의 생각과 영의 생각  (0) 2018.04.27
728x90


Heirs with Christ
12 So then, brothers,5we are debtors, cnot to the flesh, to live according to the flesh. 13 For if you live according to the flesh you will die, but if by the Spirit you dput to death the deeds of the body, you will live. 14 For all who are eled by the Spirit of God are fsons6of God. 15 For gyou did not receive hthe spirit of slavery to fall back into fear, but you have received the Spirit of iadoption as sons, by whom we cry, j“Abba! Father!” 16 kThe Spirit himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God, 17 and if children, then lheirs—heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ, mprovided we suffer with him in order that we may also be glorified with him. 
5Or brothers and sisters; also verse 29
cSee ver. 2
dCol. 3:5
eGal. 5:18
fver. 16, 19; ch. 9:8, 26; Deut. 14:1; Hos. 1:10; John 1:12
6See discussion on “sons” in the Preface
g1 Cor. 2:12
h2 Tim. 1:7; [Gal. 2:4; Heb. 2:15; 1 John 4:18]
iver. 23; Gal. 4:5; [ch. 9:4; Isa. 56:5; Jer. 31:9]
jGal. 4:6; [Mark 14:36]
k2 Cor. 1:22; 5:5; Eph. 1:13, 14; 1 John 3:24
lGal. 3:29; 4:7; Titus 3:7
m2 Cor. 1:7; 2 Tim. 2:12; See Acts 14:22
 The Holy Bible: English Standard Version(Wheaton: Standard Bible Society, 2016), 롬 8:12–17.


12-13절) 그러므로 형제들아. 우리가 빚진 자이지만  육신에게 빚을져 육신을 따라 살아서는 안된다. 너희가 육신대로 살면 너희가 죽을 것이지만 만약 성령으로 네 육체의 행위를 죽이면 너희는 살게 될 것이다. 
우리는 어디에 속해 있는 사람인가? 육신에 속한 사람들인가 성령에 속한 사람들인가? 문제는 우리가 그리스도를 믿음으로 받아들였다고 해서 자동적으로 육에 속한 속성이 없어지는 것이 아니라는 것이다. 우리는 계속해서 몸의 행실을 죽여야만 한다. 

육신대로 살면 반드시 죽을 것이라는 바울의 경고에 그렇다면 신자가 구원을 잃게 되는 것인가라는 질문이 생긴다. 칼빈주의자들은 육신에 따라 살아가는 사람은 그리스도 없이 영원한 죽음의 심판으로부터 오직 연명하는 존재들로 이해했다. 반면에 중생한 사람은 죄를 지을지라도 그 사람은 성령께서 거듭나지 못한 증거를 보여주는 죄의 삶으로부터 지키실 것이다. 그리스도인은 성령님을 통해서 끊임없이 가르침과 권고와 훈련을 통해서 육체의 악행을 종식시키는 삶을 사는 사람들이다. 그리스도인의 삶 속에서 육체를 따라 살아가는 스냅샷이 보여질때에라도 시간이 지남에 따라 진보의 증거가 있어야 한다. 거룩은 그리스도인의 표준이자 목표일뿐만 아니라 그들의 운명이다. 아미니안주의자들은 영원한 죽음의 심판이 여전히 그리스도인들에게 현실적인 가능성으로 남아있다고 주장한다. 이러한 해석이 몇몇 구절에 의해서 가능하다 하더라도 다음의 몇몇 구절을 통해서 그런 주장은 철저히 배제된다. 
  • The question sometimes arises whether Paul’s warning that those who live according to their sinful nature will die means that it is possible for believers to lose their salvation. Calvinists and others correctly understand that one whose life is controlled by the lower nature is without Christ and lives constantly only a heartbeat away from the judgment of eternal death (cf. Rom 6:23). On the other hand, although a regenerate person will sin (1 John 1:8), that person will be kept by the Spirit from a   p 181  life of sin that would give evidence of an unregenerate heart (Eph 1:13–14; 1 John 3:9; Jude 24).151The Christian is one in whom the Spirit is constantly at work through instruction, exhortation, and discipline to bring to an end “the misdeeds of the body.” Although there may be times in a Christian’s life when a snapshot would show a person living according to the flesh, over time there should be evidence of progress (Phil 1:6).152Clearly there is an imperative involved in sanctification, upon which this passage focuses, but there is also an indicative upon which it is based (cf. Rom 6:14; Phil 2:12).153Holiness is not only the standard and goal of Christians (1 Pet 1:15–16); it is also their destiny (Rom 8:29–30; cf. Phil 3:12–14; 1 John 3:2). The Arminian position is that the judgment of eternal death remains a real possibility for the Christian. Although that is a possible interpretation of this and a few other New Testament passages, it is excluded by others (see also John 10:28–29; Col 3:3–4; 1 Pet 1:3–5).
  • 151See the brief but helpful discussion of the perseverance of the saints in S. J. Grenz, Theology for the Community of God(Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1994), 593.
  • 152C. H. Spurgeon said, “The believer, like a man on shipboard, may fall again and again on the deck, but he will never fall overboard,” quoted in A. H. Strong, Systematic Theology(Philadelphia: Judson, 1907), 885.
  • 153See H. Ridderbos, Paul: An Outline of His Theology, trans. J. R. De Witt (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975), 254–55.
  •  Robert H. Mounce, Romans, vol. 27, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1995), 180–181.

14절) 하나님의 영으로 인도함을 받는 사람은 곧 하나님의 아들이다. 
구약에서 하나님께서는 이스라엘을 그분의 아들로 불렀다. 그리고 이스라엘 백성은 하나님을 아버지라고 불렀다. 믿는 신자들을 하나님의 자녀라고 명명함으로써 바울은 그들을 하나님의 백성으로, 생명을 얻기로 작정되어 있다라고 규정한다. 
  • In the OT, God calls Israel (sometimes also called “Ephraim”) his “son” (Exod 4:22; Jer 31:9, 20), and Israelites accordingly call God “Father” (Jer 3:19). So by naming believers “the children of God,” Paul is identifying them as the people of God, destined for “life” (v. 10).
  • OT Old Testament
  • v. verse in the chapter being commented on
  •  Douglas J. Moo, “The Letters and Revelation,”in NIV Zondervan Study Bible: Built on the Truth of Scripture and Centered on the Gospel Message, ed. D. A. Carson (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2015), 2306.

누가 하나님의 자녀인가라는 질문에 대한 충분한고 구체적인 대답이 바로 본 절이다. 바로 하나님의 인도하심을 받는 그 사람이 하나님의 아들이라는 것이다. 성령은 신자를 인도할 뿐만 아니라 또한 그 행동을 촉발한다. 하나님은 창조의 의미에서 있어서 모든 것의 아버지이시고 특히 기업의 의미에서 이스라엘의 아버지가 되신다. 사람이 하나님의 자녀가 되는 유일한 방법은 바로 예수 그리스도를 믿음을 통해서 이다. 결과적으로 사람이 성령에 의해서 계속 인도되지 않는다면 그들은 하나님의 가족의 구성원이 아니다. 하나님의 영에 이끌리는 것이 바로 이 관계의 특징이다. 
  • In contrast to those whose lives are controlled by their sinful nature are those who allow themselves to be led by the Spirit of God (v. 14).154Harrison writes that “the relation of the Spirit to the sons of God is presented as being much like that of a shepherd to his sheep. They are ‘led’ by him as their guide and protector.”155These, and only these, are sons of God.156This may be the most succinct and specific   p 182  answer in Scripture to the question, Who is a child of God? While doctrinal correctness is important, no amount of theological acuity can substitute for the guiding presence of the Spirit. Not only does the Spirit guide the believer, but he initiates the action as well. While God is the Father of all in the sense of creation, and specifically the Father of Israel in a corporate sense (Deut 32:6; Isa 63:16; Jer 31:9), the only way for a person to become a child of God is through faith in Jesus Christ (John 1:12–13). The corollary is that unless people are continually being led (indicated by the Greek present tense) by the Spirit, they are not members of God’s family. The NIVSB note on 8:14 says that “being led by God’s Spirit is the hallmark of this relationship.” Beware of the temptation to adjust this requirement to the level of common practice.
  • 154BAGD cites Rom 8:14 as an example of the passive ἄγονται (“be led, allow oneself to be led” [p. 14]). It is difficult to see the distinction Moo would like to make between being “led by the Spirit” and “as in Gal. 5:18 to have the direction of one’s life as a whole determined by the Spirit” (Romans 1–8, 534). Käsemann translates ἄγονται as “driven by the Spirit” since it is “taken from the vocabulary of the enthusiasts according to 1 Cor 12:2” (Romans, 226), but the connection is less than certain.
  • 155Harrison, “Romans,” 92.
  • 156This takes ὅσοι in a restrictive sense rather than inclusive (“only those” rather than “all those who”). Feeling that Paul may have intended to be ambiguous, Dunn translates “as many as” (Romans, 1:450). Among others who choose the restrictive sense are Montgomery (“only those”) and Conybeare (“they alone”). H. Rhys writes, “The people who are led are the Christians, and Paul would not have thought of including anyone else” (The Epistle to the Romans[New York: Macmillan, 1961], 102). Sanday and Headlam distinguish between υἱοί and τέκνον, pointing out that the latter “denotes the natural relationship of child to parent” while the former “implies, in addition to this, the recognized statusand legal privileges reserved for sons” (Romans, 202). No such distinction is being made, however, between υὶοί in v. 14 and τέκνα in v. 16.
  • NIVSB New International Version Study Bible
  •  Robert H. Mounce, Romans, vol. 27, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1995), 181–182.

15절) 왜냐하면 너희는 두려움에 빠지게하는 종의 영을 받지 않았고 아들로서의 양자의 영을 받았으므로 우리가 아빠 아버지라고 부르짖는 것이다. 
본문의 양자는 ‘휴이오데시아’로 당시 그레고 로만시대의 양자의 풍습을 설명하는 것이다. 이렇게 양자가 된 아이는 본래의 자녀가 지니는 모든 권리와 특권을 보장받났다. 우리는 이미 하나님의 가족으로 양자가 되었지만 그 상태의 많은 권리들은 하나님의 구속의 역사가 끝났을때 주어지게 될 것이다. 본문의 ‘아바’는 아람어로 아버지를 의미하는데 매우 친근한 호칭이다. 이 단어는 신약에 세번 등장한다. 막 14:36, 롬 8:15, 갈 4:6
  • Greek huiothesia; refers to the Greco-Roman practice of adoption, which guaranteed to adopted children all the rights and privileges of natural children (v. 23; 9:4; Gal 4:5; Eph 1:5). See “Sonship,” p. 2664. While already adopted into God’s family, many of the benefits of that status will be given only when God’s work of redemption is finished (see v. 23). Abba.An Aramaic word for “Father” often used in intimate family settings. Jesus addressed God with this word (Mark 14:36), and believers adopted into God’s family enjoy the same kind of intimate relationship with God.
  • v. verse in the chapter being commented on
  • p. page
  • v. verse in the chapter being commented on
  •  Douglas J. Moo, “The Letters and Revelation,”in NIV Zondervan Study Bible: Built on the Truth of Scripture and Centered on the Gospel Message, ed. D. A. Carson (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2015), 2306.

양자됨은 근본적으로 관계의 변화를 일으킨다. 누구의 자녀인가에 따라 엄청난 권한과 의무가 생기게 되는 것이다. 온전한 하나님의 자녀로, 하나님을 두려움없이 아빠라고 부를수 있다면 우리는 양자의 영을 받은 것이다. 

본문은 종의 영과 양자의 영을 비교 대조한다. 종의 영은 두려움을 양자의 영은 하나님을 아바 아버지라고 부른다. 언제 그 영을 받느냐는 바로 그들의 회심의 순간이다. 바로 그 성령을 받는 순간 종됨의 시간은 끝나고 자녀됨이 시작되었다고 말한다. 
  • Paul clarifies this new sonship by contrasting two kinds of spirit, the spirit of slavery that produces fearand the Spirit of adoption*that cries out, Abba, Father. Receivedpoints back to their conversion when they received the Spirit. Paul is saying that at that moment enslavement ended and sonship began. The enslaving power of sin and the law has already been dealt with (6:6, 16–22; 7:6, 25). It
  • *8:15Since the Spirit of adoptionis the Holy Spirit, many have concluded that the “spirit of slavery” (niv a spirit that makes you a slave) must also be the Holy Spirit, concluding that it is the Spirit’s work under the old epoch of the law, in which people were enslaved to the law (Calvin 1979; Dunn 1988a). However, it is unlikely that Paul would have said the Holy Spirit was behind the enslaving power of the law, and the consensus today is that spiritin the first instance is rhetorical, simply meaning that those without Christ are enslaved to sin and know only fear.
  •  Grant R. Osborne, Romans, The IVP New Testament Commentary Series (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2004), 205.

지금 시대에는 아들이 아버지의 가업을 잇는 확률이 5% 미만이라고 한다. 하지만 고대 사회에는 농부의 아들은 농부가 되고 어부의 아들은 어부가, 목수의 아들은 목수가 되었다. 이렇게 누구의 아들이냐하는 것이 자신의 정체성을 세우는 매우 중요한 동인이 되는 것이다. 그래서 우리는 예수님을 목수의 아들이라고 호칭한다.(마 13:55)

16-17) 성령이 친히 우리 영과 함께 우리가 하나님의 자녀인것을 증거하신다. 만약 자녀이면 하나님의 상속자 그리고 그리스도와 함께한 상속자로 그분과 함께 영광을 얻기 위하여 그분과 함께 고난도 받게 된다. 
우리가 하나님을 아빠라고 부르게 되면 성령이 우리가 하나님의 자녀인 것을 증언하실 것이다. 또한 하나님의 자녀라면 상속자가 되는 것을 의미하는데 이 상속은 기업을 받는 것 뿐만 아니라 그 고난도 함께 받게 되는 것을 의미한다. 우리가 하나님의 백성, 자녀가 된다라고 할때 하나님의 나라를 기업으로 받게 된다. 그 하나님 나라의 기업이 항상 우리에게 축복을 가져다주는 것은 아니다. 도리어 고난이 우리에게 요청되기도 한 것이다. 
나는 하나님의 자녀로서 영광과 고난을 함께 받을 준비가 되어 있는가? 실제로 부모가 돌아가시면 자녀들은 부모의 유업을 상속받는다. 하지만 만약 부모가 부채만을 가지고 있다면 그 부채를 갚아야하는 책임도 상속받게 되는 것이다. 그것을 갚기 싫어서 부모와의 연을 끊는 이들도 있다는 것을 기억하라. 하나님 나라의 축복만을 원하고 만약 고난이 예견될때 자신이 그리스도인임을, 상속자임을 포기한다면 우리는 온전한 하나님의 자녀가 될 수 없다. 

본문에서의 증인은 성령과 우리의 영, 이 두분이시다. 성령과 우리의 영이 함께 우리가 하나님의 가족인 것을 증거한다는 것이다. 

본문 17절에서 바울은 이제 하나님의 자녀에서 하나님의 상속자로 그 관점을 옮기고 있다. 구약으로부터 신약에 이르기까지 상속자가 된다는 것이 어떤 의미인지 아는 것은 매우 중요하다. 
  • Paul now turns to his second point: we are not only the children of God but are also the heirs of God(v. 17). In fact, the eschatological themes introduced here, the future promises for the people of God, are elaborated in verses 18–30. In a sense, the inheritance noted here is spelled out in what follows. The inheritance theme is certainly a major biblical emphasis. In the Old Testament it was first the land of Canaan that was Israel’s inheritance (Gen 15:7; Num 34:2; Deut 1:7–8, 38; Josh 23:4; Ps 78:55). In the later writings Israel itself becomes God’s inheritance/possession (Is 19:25; Jer 10:16; 16:18; 51:19), and Yahweh becomes Israel’s inheritance (Ezek 44:28). In later Judaism and the early church the kingdom blessings become associated with the inheritance of Israel (Psalms of Solomon14:10; 1 Enoch40:9; 4 Maccabees 18:3), in particular the kingdom and eternal life (Mk 10:17 and parallels; Mt 25:34; Gal 5:21; 1 Cor 15:50). In the New Testament and especially Paul, the emphasis is on the close connection between sonship and inheritance (Gal 3:29; 4:7; Rom 8:17; cf. Foerster and Hermann 1965:769–81; Byrne 1979:68–69). Paul here combines the latter two; sonship leads to the inheritance of all the kingdom blessings, especially life in its fullest and final sense. In Romans 4:13–15 Paul linked this with Abraham’s “inheritance” now given to all who come to God through faith in Christ (also Gal 3:18, 29). Heir of Godprobably means that we receive our inheritance fromGod (genitive of source), though several take this to mean we inherit God himself (Murray 1968; Cranfield 1975; Schreiner 1998). Because we are his adopted children, we are also his heirs. Yet we are not only heirs of God but also co-heirs with Christ.In the Roman world the adopted child’s inheritance depended to some extent on the willingness of the natural heir to include the adopted child. This means that Christ as well as the Father gives us our inheritance.
  •  Grant R. Osborne, Romans, The IVP New Testament Commentary Series (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2004), 207–208.

본문속에서 형식의 변화를 볼 수 있는데 예를 들면 11절에서 우리(we)라는 복수를, 13절에 너희(you)라는 2인칭 복수를, 14절에서는 3인칭 복수 they, 15절에서는 다시 you를 사용한다. 

아들됨
SONSHIP(D. A. Carson)
When the Bible uses “son” metaphorically to refer to someone other than a biological son, the range of its usage is rather large. The high point is Jesus the Son of God; Christians too, both men and women, are called sons (NIV “children”) of God. The paths toward the full range of the biblical usage of “son” are rich and diverse.
OVERTONES OF SONSHIP
Sonship in the Ancient World
In addition to the many instances in the Bible where sonship is entirely natural and biological (e.g., Gen 22:2; Ruth 4:13, 17; 1 Sam 16:18; Ezek 18:14; Matt 10:37; Luke 15:11), sonship is often metaphoric. The root of these metaphoric uses lies in the way sons achieved their identity. In the Western world today, only about 5 percent of sons end up doing the same work their fathers did; in the ancient world, the overwhelming majority of sons took up the same vocation as that of their fathers. The sons of farmers became farmers, the sons of fishermen became fishermen—and in both cases the sons learned their trade from their fathers, not at a college or in an apprenticeship with someone outside the family. These realities established their identity. That is why Jesus can be identified as “the carpenter’s son” (Matt 13:55) and, presumably after the death of his (apparent) father Joseph, as himself “the carpenter” (Mark 6:3).
These social realities generate many of the sonship metaphors in the Bible. Jesus says that the peacemakers “will be called children [sons] of God” (Matt 5:9): he presupposes that God is the supreme peacemaker, and insofar as human beings make peace, they are acting like God; so that on that axis, at least, they can be called sons of God. Similarly, those who love their enemies are “children [sons] of God” (Luke 6:35). Biologically, of course, Abraham is the ancestor of all Israelites, but because faith characterized so much of his life, he is, more important, “the father of all who believe” (Rom 4:11), and believers are “the children [sons] of Abraham” (Gal 3:7). Biologically, the Judeans of Jesus’ day are Abraham’s descendants, but Jesus is prepared to challenge their claim to Abraham as their father on the grounds that they are not acting like Abraham (John 8:39–41). Their actions—their lies about who Jesus is and their efforts to kill him—demonstrate that their real “father” is the devil himself (John 8:44). In this metaphoric usage, paternity—who one’s father is—is established not by genes but by conduct.
The Range of “Sons”
Understandably, in the original languages there are many metaphoric uses of the expression “sons of [something]” that are translated into simpler expressions in English because English does not use “sons of [something]” in the same way. Translators rightly render “son of a murderer” as “murderer” (2 Kgs 6:32). The “son of a bow” is rendered “arrows” (Job 41:28). A “son of might” is a “fighter” (2 Sam 17:10); the “sons of wise men” are “wise counselors” (Isa 19:11). These and many more examples show us the patterns of thought that make some uses of “son(s) of God” easier to understand.
SON(S) OF GOD
The uses of this expression are diverse. The Bible designates Adam as “the son of God” (Luke 3:37): human beings were made in the image of God (Gen 1:27), designed to reflect God in all ways appropriate to their status. As soon as someone in the line of David becomes king, he is declared to be God’s “son” (2 Sam 7:14; Ps 2:7; cf. Ps 89:19–29). Even when a Davidic king reigns unjustly, he does not thereby cease being God’s “son” (e.g., Ezek 21:10), for the category of “sonship” discloses how he oughtto be like God.
Collectively, God calls the people of Israel his “son” (Exod 4:22–23), whether they are properly reflecting him or not. The Bible uses the plural expression “sons of God” to refer to angels (see NIV text notes on Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; see also Pss 29:1; 89:6, though the NIV renders the expression as “heavenly beings”), including the fallen angel called Satan (Job 1:6; 2:1). The collective “children [sons] of God” frequently refers to God’s covenant people, whether under the terms of the old covenant (e.g., Deut 14:1; Isa 43:6; Jer 3:19) or the new (e.g., Rom 8:14; Phil 2:15; 1 John 3:1). This Father-child relationship is in view not only when the Bible calls believers children, but also when believers refer to God as Father (e.g., Mal 2:10) or, in the NT, address him as Father (e.g., Matt 6:9).
One other facet of the Bible’s usage of “children [son(s)] of God” as applied to believers must be underscored. The final vision of the Bible ratchets up the intensity or perfection of many expressions introduced much earlier in the Bible—and it does the same for sonship. For example, “God’s dwelling place is now among the people … They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God” (Rev 21:3). When similar words are said to the Israelites in the wake of the giving of the law at Sinai, God’s dwelling place is tied to the tabernacle (Exod 25:8) and later the temple (1 Kgs 8:13), and God will be with them, manifesting himself to them as they traverse the wilderness (Exod 29:44–45; Num 1:51). When similar words are connected with the promise of a new covenant (Jer 31:31–34), the focus is no longer on the tabernacle and priestly system but on the inward transformation characteristic of the new covenant. In Rev 21, in the context of a new heaven and a new earth, within the walls of the new Jerusalem, God’s presence with his people entails perfection: no more sin, no more of sin’s miserable entailments, and no need of tabernacle or temple because the entire city is the Most Holy Place (Rev 21:22; see “Temple,” p. 2652). In exactly the same way, this vision in Rev 21 ratchets up the significance of “son”: “he who is victorious will inherit all this, and I will be his God and he will be my son” (Rev 21:7, author’s paraphrase)—and in this context the son, the believer, is utterly sinless (contrast the sins of those who are not sons, v. 8), perfectly reflecting the heavenly Father so far as God’s image-bearers can.
JESUS THE SON OF GOD
The Bible applies the title “Son of God” to Jesus in several distinctive ways—and this is where the trajectories of biblical themes running throughout the Bible come together.
The True Israel
Just as Israel is depicted as God’s son—a frequently failing son—so Jesus recapitulates key episodes in Israel’s life to disclose himself as the Son who does not fail. “Out of Egypt I called my son” (Hos 11:1) pictures the exodus, but Jesus too is “called” out of Egypt (Matt 2:15). Israel was tested and tempted during 40 years in the wilderness and frequently failed; Jesus is tested and tempted during 40 days and nights in the wilderness—the devil casts doubts on whether Jesus really is “the Son of God”—but this Son proves utterly loyal (Matt 4:1–11).
The True Davidic King
As is true with other kings in David’s line, when Solomon ascends to the throne, God declares, “I will be his father, and he will be my son” (2 Sam 7:14; cf. Ps 2:7). That same passage, however, promises to David (ca. 1000 BC) an unending dynasty (2 Sam 7:16). God progressively discloses how this will be fulfilled. Less than three centuries later, the prophet Isaiah foresees a king “on David’s throne” whose “government and peace” will never end and who will be called “Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace” (Isa 9:6–7). Other passages closely identify this coming Davidic king, sometimes designated “Messiah” (see “The Kingdom of God: Jesus as the Davidic King,” p. 2663), with God the supreme Shepherd (e.g., Ezek 34:1–24). Jesus the Son of God insists that he has received from his Father the command to be the ideal good shepherd (John 10:1–18). Mark’s Gospel begins by announcing “Jesus the Messiah [almost certainly referring to the Davidic king], the Son of God” (Mark 1:1), and this is confirmed almost immediately at the baptism of Jesus, “You are my Son, whom I love” (Mark 1:11). When Mark’s Gospel draws to a close and the centurion who witnesses Jesus’ death exclaims, “Surely this man was the Son of God!” (Mark 15:39), whatever pagan notions the centurion presupposes by the expression, Mark’s readers recognize that Jesus is, at very least, the promised Davidic king, the Messiah. Jesus supremely enters into this kingly role by his resurrection from the dead (Rom 1:3–4). When Heb 1:5 ties Jesus to the promise of 2 Sam 7:14, it is not confusing Jesus with Solomon but connecting him through this verse with the trajectory of Davidic kings that finds its promise and culmination in him. This makes him superior to the angels, for only he reigns perfectly in the name of his heavenly Father.
The Unique Son, One With the Father
NT writers find diverse ways to distinguish Jesus’ sonship from ours. For example, in Paul’s writings, believers become sons/children of God by adoption; the same thing is never said of Jesus. But it is John who repeatedly insists that Jesus is the “one and only Son” (e.g., John 1:18; 3:16) and then explains more fully what he means. While human beings may be “sons/children of God” because along one axis or another we act like God (making peace, loving our enemies, reigning in David’s line), only Jesus is the perfect Son of God because “whateverthe Father does the Son also does” (John 5:19, emphasis added). For example, as the Word of God, Jesus the Son has created everything (John 1:3); like the Father, the Son raises the dead and “gives life to whom he is pleased to give it” (John 5:21). Small wonder that God is determined that all should honor the Son “just as they honor the Father” (John 5:23), which can certainly not be said of other “sons/children of God.” Jesus the Son is not only the one through whom God “made the universe” (Heb 1:2), but he is “the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word” (Heb 1:3).
Intertwinings
The different ways in which the Bible applies “Son of God” to Jesus do not always follow independent trajectories through the Bible. Frequently they intertwine. For example, while Matt 1–4 emphasizes that Jesus as the Son of God is the new Israel, in the midst of this passage are the words “This is my Son, whom I love” (3:17), almost certainly picking up the Davidic/kingly use of sonship that was also implicit in the initial genealogy (ch. 1). Again, while Heb 1:5–13 focuses on the Davidic/kingly theme of sonship, the preceding verses display Jesus as the unique Son who is one with his Father (Heb 1:1–4). These and other numerous instances of intertwined uses of “Son of God” applied to Jesus demonstrate that the diverse uses, rather than entirely separate uses, “cross-pollinate” one another to generate a theologically rich notion of Jesus the Son of God.
NIV New International Version
e.g. for example
cf. compare, confer
e.g. for example
NIV New International Version
NIV New International Version
e.g. for example
e.g. for example
e.g. for example
NT New Testament
e.g. for example
p. page
v. verse in the chapter being commented on
cf. compare, confer
ca. about, approximately
p. page
e.g. for example
NT New Testament
e.g. for example
ch. chapter
 D. A. Carson, “Sonship,”in NIV Zondervan Study Bible: Built on the Truth of Scripture and Centered on the Gospel Message, ed. D. A. Carson (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2015), 2664–2665.
















저작자표시 변경금지

'성경묵상 > 로마서' 카테고리의 다른 글

롬 8:26-30 모든 것이 합력하여 선을 이룸  (0) 2018.05.09
롬 8:18-25 우리에게 나타날 영광  (0) 2018.05.03
롬 8:9-11 하나님의 영이 거하시면  (0) 2018.04.30
롬 8:5-8 육신의 생각과 영의 생각  (0) 2018.04.27
롬 8:1-4 그러므로 이제  (0) 2018.04.26
728x90
9 You, however, are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if in fact xthe Spirit of God dwells in you. yAnyone who does not have zthe Spirit of Christ does not belong to him. 10 But if Christ is in you, although the body is dead because of sin, the Spirit is life because of righteousness. 11 If the Spirit of ahim who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, he who raised Christ Jesus4from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies bthrough his Spirit who dwells in you. 
xver. 11; 1 Cor. 3:16; 6:19; 2 Cor. 6:16; 2 Tim. 1:14
yJude 19; [John 14:17]
zSee Acts 16:7
aSee Acts 2:24
4Some manuscripts lack Jesus
b[2 Cor. 3:6]
 The Holy Bible: English Standard Version(Wheaton: Standard Bible Society, 2016), 롬 8:9–11.

신약에서 삼위일체에 대한 언급은 없다. 하지만 본문에서하나님의 영과 그리스도의 영을 교차해서 사용하고 있다. 
  • Paul switches quickly from “the Spirit of God lives in you” (v. 9) to “the Spirit of Christ” (v. 9) to “Christ is in you” (v. 10) to “the Spirit … is living in you” (v. 11). The NT does not explicitly teach the doctrine of the Trinity (that God is one God existing in three Persons), but passages such as this clearly imply it.
  •  Douglas J. Moo, “The Letters and Revelation,”in NIV Zondervan Study Bible: Built on the Truth of Scripture and Centered on the Gospel Message, ed. D. A. Carson (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2015), 2306.

9절) 만일 하나님의 영이 너희 가운데 거하시면 너희가 육신에 있지 않고 영에 있는 것이다. 그러므로 누구든지 그리스도의 영이 없으면 그에게 속한 것이 아니다. 
본절은 하나님의 영과 그리스도의 영을 교차해서 사용한다. 우리 속에 그분의 영이 내주하시느냐를 묻고 있다. 앞서 8절에서 육신에 있는 자들은 하나님을 기쁘시게 할 수 없다라고 했다. 그렇기에 하나님의 영에 거하는 자는 하나님의 영의 통제를 받게 되는 것이고 그렇기에 하나님을 기쁘시게 하는 삶을 살게 된다. 반면에 불신자는 결코 하나님을 기쁘시게 할수 없다. 왜냐하면 그들은 죄와 사망의 영향력 속에 살기 때문이다. 
  • Unbelievers can never please God, for they belong to the realm of sin and death. Believers belong to the realm of the Spirit, so they have life and peace (v. 6). The criterion for being a true believer is clearly stated: if the Spirit of God lives in you.The ifform does not mean Paul is uncertain about their condition. He considers this a factual description—they know Christ and therefore have the Spirit living in them (note the contrast with 7:18, 20, where sin “lives in” a person). In successive clauses they are in the Spirit and the Spirit lives in them. This is an important doctrine. When people come to faith in Christ, they are immediately indwelt by the Holy Spirit. In fact, as will be seen in verse 16, this is the basis of the believer’s assurance. When we have the Holy Spirit and feel his presence, we are truly the children of God. Jesus himself promised the disciples in John 14:17 that “you know [the Holy Spirit], for he lives with you and will be in you.” To make his point more emphatic, Paul then says the opposite: those who do not have the Spirit of Christdo not belong to Christ.Notice that in the first half of the verse he is the Spirit of Godand in the second half the Spirit of Christ.There is a hint of Trinitarian doctrine here, as the Spirit is sent both by God the Father and by God the Son.
  •  Grant R. Osborne, Romans, The IVP New Testament Commentary Series (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2004), 200.

10-11절)  그러나 만약 그리스도가 너희 안에 거하시면 그 몸은 죄로 인해서 죽었을찌라도 그 영은 의로 말미암아 살아 있는 것이다. 만약 예수를 죽은 자 가운데서 살리신 영이 너희 가운데 거하시면 예수 그리스도를 죽음에서 살리신 그 분이 또한 너희의 죽을 몸을 너희 안에 거하시는 그의 영을 통해서 살리실 것이다. 
내주하시는 그리스도의 현존은 신자들의 생명을 보장한다. 신자들의 육체가 죽음에 속할지라도 그들의 영은 이제 삶을 즐기고 있다. 사망은 죄의 결과로 다가온고 생명은 칭의의 보상이다. 사망은 하나님의 부재이고 생명은 바로 그분 앞에 서있는 것이다. 성령이 한 사람의 삶에 내주하느냐 그렇지 않느냐는 진정 삶과 죽음의 문제이다.  
  • The presence of the indwelling Christ is the believer’s guarantee of life.142Although believers’ physical bodies are subject to death, their spirits are even now “enjoying life” (Williams).143Death comes as a consequence of sin; life is the reward of justification. Death is the absence of God; life is a right standing before him. Whether or not a person is indwelt by the Spirit is truly a life-and-death matter.
  • Throughout his writings Paul drew a close connection between the resurrection of Christ and that of his followers. To the Corinthians the apostle wrote, “The one who raised the Lord Jesus from the dead will also raise us with Jesus” (2 Cor 4:14; cf. 1 Cor 6:14; 1 Thess 4:14). In Rom 8:11 the Spirit (who lives in the believer) is the means by which God gives life.144The prerequisite for resurrection is the presence of the indwelling Spirit. Since that is the case in the life of the believers (and the construction in Greek indicates that it is145), then God, who raised Jesus from the dead, will give life to their mortal bodies.146Not only has   p 180  the spirit of the Christian been made alive (v. 10), but in time the body (now under the curse of death) will be resurrected as well. The indwelling Spirit is the guarantee of the believer’s future resurrection.147
  • 142In v. 9 it was the “Spirit of God” who was said to live in the believer; now in v. 10 it is “Christ.” Moo writes that “the indwelling Spirit and the indwelling Christ are distinguishable but inseparable” (Romans 1–8, 523). For verses emphasizing the indwelling Christ, see John 14:23; Gal 2:20; Eph 3:17.
  • Williams C. B. Williams, The New Testament
  • 143Many recent commentaries hold that πνεῦμα in v. 10 refers to the Holy Spirit (the NIV’s “your spirit” translates τὸ πνεῦμα). Were Paul talking of the human spirit he would have said that it “is alive,” not that it “is life.” Fitzmyer comments that Paul was playing on the two meanings of πνεῦμα: “Without the Spirit, the source of Christian vitality, the human “body” is like a corpse because of the influence of sin … but in union with Christ the human “spirit” lives (Romans, 491).
  • 144Following the UBS preferred reading of διά with the genitive rather than the variant in which διά is followed by the accusative. In the latter case the text would be saying that the presence of the Spirit in one’s life provides a reason for the resurrection rather than that the Spirit will be the agent in resurrection.
  • 145εἰ plus the indicative (οἰκεῖ) is a simple condition, which assumes the reality of the premise for the sake of the argument.
  • 146Calvin holds that Paul was not here speaking of the last resurrection “but of the continual operation of the Spirit, by which He gradually mortifies the remains of the flesh and renews in us the heavenly life” (Romans and Thessalonians, 166).
  • 147Denney notes that “this is one of the passages in which the presuppositions of the Trinitarian conception of God come out most clearly” (“Romans,” 647).
  •  Robert H. Mounce, Romans, vol. 27, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1995), 179–180.

10절에서 바울은 신자들안에 거하시는 그 영에서 신자들안에 거하시는 그리스도로 초점을 옮겨간다. 그리스도의 희생적인 대속이 그 영의 사역을 위한 기초를 제공한다. 그래서 초점이 그리스도의 사역으로 돌아간 것이다. 그리스도가 내주하실때 두가지 일이 일어난다. 첫째로 죄 때문에 너희들의 몸이 죽는다. 그러나 이것은 죄에 대한 죽음이 아니라 죄로 인한 죽음이다. 그래서 우리는 여전히 죄인으로서 육체의 죽음에 직면한다는 사실을 언급해야 한다. 둘째로 영은 의로 말미암아 살아 있는 것이다. 본문에서 성령과 육신의 몸을 대조한다. 여전히 사망이 우리의 죽을 육체를 지배하지만 우리 안에 새로운 힘이 내주하는데 하나님 안에서 우리에게 새로운 생명을 주시는 그 성령이 우리와 함께 하신다. 
  • In verse 10 Paul shifts from the Spirit in the believer to Christ in the believer (v. 10)*. The sacrificial atonement of Christ provided the basis for the work of the Spirit, so the focus shifts back to Christ’s work. When Christ dwells within, two things happen. First, your body is dead because of sin.This could mean that the Christian has died to sin, as in 6:2–11. However, this is not death tosin (as in 6:2, 11) but death because ofsin, so it must refer to the fact that as sinners we still must face the death of the (physical) body(cf. 5:12). This is proven by the emphasis on the resurrection of mortal bodiesin verse 11. The body faces death, but that will lead to resurrection. While sin has been nullified on the cross and we have victory over sin in Christ and the Spirit, we still struggle against sin (7:14–25) and face the terrible consequences of sin, physical death. In this sense it may be best to translate this clause, “although your body is dead because of sin” (so Cranfield 1975; Moo 1996; Schreiner 1998). The rest of the verse is difficult to interpret but should probably read, “yet the Spirit produces life because of righteousness.” Thus the contrast is between the Holy Spirit and our physical bodies. While death still controls our mortal bodies, there dwells within us a new power, the Holy Spirit who represents the new life in God that is ours. As above, lifemust be understood via inaugurated eschatology, that is, the presence of God’s life in us now and the guarantee of eternal life to come. Schreiner (1998:415), as in 8:2, sees Ezekiel 37 behind this teaching, stating that Paul saw the valley of dry bones fulfilled in the promise of resurrection life through the Spirit. The basis of this is righteousness,certainly to be seen as forensic here, that is, the justification (see on 3:21, 24) of the believer, producing righteousness. So while our bodies will die, the Spirit is the presence of God’s life in us and gives us the promise that death will lead to resurrection.
  • *8:10There are three contrasting pairs here: flesh/spirit, dead/alive and sin/righteousness.Because of the connection with the human body in verse 10, many take pneumaas the human spirit (so Hodge 1950; Sanday and Headlam 1902; Wilckens 1980; Fitzmyer 1993b; Stott 1994; niv; nasb; jb; neb; nlt). However, the Holy Spirit is central in this section and is certainly the meaning of pneumain verses 9 and 11 surrounding this verse. Also, he is “the Spirit of life” in 8:2, and the human spirit is never called “life” in the New Testament. So it is best to see this also as the Holy Spirit (so Calvin 1979; Barrett 1957; Cranfield 1975; Bruce 1985; Dunn 1988a; Morris 1988; Moo 1996; Schreiner 1998; kjv; nrsv; reb). 
  •  Grant R. Osborne, Romans, The IVP New Testament Commentary Series (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2004), 200–201.
10절에서는 몸과 영, 사망과 생명, 죄와 의가 대조된다. 

우리는 본문안에서 삼단 논법을 발견한다. 
첫번째 가정 : 성령이 우리 안에 거하신다.
두번째 가정 : 성령은 생명이시다. 
결론 : 그러므로 생명이 우리안에 거한다. 

11절에서는 성령이 예수를 죽은 자 가운데서 살리셨다라고 말한다. 그리고 그 영이 우리 가운데 거하실 것이다라고 말한다. 결론적으로 그 영이 우리를 죽을 몸에서 살리실 것이다. 
  • Paul’s point is that death will be overcome by final resurrection. However, that is not just a future hope but a present reality made possible by the Spirit “making its home” (so Moo 1996:493) in us. We have a mortal bodynow that is subject to death, but awaiting us is a “glorified body” (1 Cor 15:40–44) that will be ours for eternity. Augustine speaks of the “four states” of the believer (natural, legal, evangelical and glorified) and sees the fourth here: “This state is not attained in this life. It belongs to the hope by which we await the redemption of our body, when this corruptible matter will put on incorruption and immortality. Then there will be perfect peace, because the soul will no longer be troubled by the body, which will be revived and transformed into a heavenly substance” (Bray 1998:213).
  •  Grant R. Osborne, Romans, The IVP New Testament Commentary Series (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2004), 202.


저작자표시 변경금지

'성경묵상 > 로마서' 카테고리의 다른 글

롬 8:18-25 우리에게 나타날 영광  (0) 2018.05.03
롬 8:12-17 종의 영 vs 양자의 영  (0) 2018.05.02
롬 8:5-8 육신의 생각과 영의 생각  (0) 2018.04.27
롬 8:1-4 그러므로 이제  (0) 2018.04.26
롬 7:21-25 하나님의 법과 죄의 법  (0) 2018.04.25
728x90
5 For rthose who live according to the flesh set their minds on sthe things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit set their minds on tthe things of the Spirit. 6 For to set uthe mind on the flesh is death, but to set the mind on the Spirit is life and peace. 7 For the mind that is set on the flesh is vhostile to God, for it does not submit to God’s law; windeed, it cannot. 8 Those who are in the flesh cannot please God. 
r[Gal. 6:8]
sGal. 5:19–21
tGal. 5:22, 23, 25
uver. 13; [Col. 2:18]; See ch. 6:21
vJames 4:4
w1 Cor. 2:14
 The Holy Bible: English Standard Version(Wheaton: Standard Bible Society, 2016), 롬 8:5–8.

5-6절) 육신을 따르는 자는 육신의 일을, 영을 따르는 자는 영의 일을 생각한다. 육신의 생각은 사망이요 영의 생각은 생명과 평안이다. 
사람의 생각은 매우 중요하다. 무엇을, 어떻게 생각하느냐가 우리의 삶을 결정한다고 해도 과언이 아니다. 무엇을 선택하고 어떤 삶을 살 것인지에 대한 우리의 결정은 우리가 무엇을 생각하는지에 달려있다. 도덕적인 선택은 지적인 경향에 선행하고 이를 결정합니다. 사람들은 자신이 행동하는 방식으로 생각하지 않고 그들이 생각하는 방식으로 행동합니다. 윤리적인 결정은 잘못 인도된 이성보다 더 자주 오류의 중심에 놓여 있습니다. 
  • People’s decisions about how they intend to live determines how they think about things. Moral choice precedes and determines intellectual orientation. People do not think themselves into the way they act but act themselves into the way they think. Ethical decision, more often than misguided reason, lies at the heart of error.
  •  Robert H. Mounce, Romans, vol. 27, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1995), 177.

우리는 과연 무엇을 따르고, 추구하고 무엇을 생각하는가? 결국 이것이 우리의 삶의 방향을 정하게 되고 우리는 그것에 따라 살아가게 될 것이다. 그리고 그것의 결국은 사망이냐 생명이냐로 귀결되는 것이다. 

바울은 무엇을 생각하느냐의 결과를 극단적으로 대조하고 있다. 바클레이는 이렇게 말했다. “세상의 일들이 삶을 완전히 지배하도록 허락하는 것은 자멸하는 것이다. 그것은 영적 자살이다.” 이에 대해서 갈 6:8은 이렇게 말한다. 
갈라디아서 6:8(NKRV)
8자기의 육체를 위하여 심는 자는 육체로부터 썩어질 것을 거두고 성령을 위하여 심는 자는 성령으로부터 영생을 거두리라

  • Paul continued the contrast by pointing out the consequences that necessarily follow each way of thinking. The carnal mind132leads to death. Barclay writes that “to allow the things of the world completely to dominate life is self extinction; it is spiritual suicide.”133On the other hand, the Spirit-controlled mind leads to life and peace.134The same   p 178  contrast is found in Gal 6:8: “The one who sows to please his sinful nature, from that nature will reap destruction; the one who sows to please the Spirit, from the Spirit will reap eternal life.”135
  • 132The NIV has “the mind of sinful man” but includes in the margin the alternate “the mind set on the flesh.” The Greek text is τὸ φρόνημα τῆς σαρκός.
  • 133Barclay, Romans, 104.
  • 134Moo holds that Paul was not talking about a subjective state of mind but about the objective reality of the salvation into which the believer has entered (Romans 1–8, 520). But EDNTnotes that φρόνημα τῆς σαρκός and φρόνημα τοῦ πνεύματος describe “two fundamentally different ways of orienting one’s life and actions, corresponding to two mutually exclusive ways of standing—before faith … and in faith” (3.439).
  • 135Compare Jesus’ teaching regarding the two roads, the broad road that leads to destruction and the narrow road that leads to life (Matt 7:13–14).
  •  Robert H. Mounce, Romans, vol. 27, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1995), 177–178.

영어 성경은 본문을  "those who live according to the flesh” 라고 기록하고 있다. 그런데 헬라어의 의미는 “those who are according to the flesh.”이다. 이는 바울이 실제적으로 기능적보다는 존재론적으로 기술하고 있는 것이다. 이는 그들이 무엇을 행하는 것보다 그들이 어떤 존재인지에 초점을 맞추고 있다는 것이다. 4절이 그 걸음을 묘사했다면 5-8절은 그 걸음 배후에 있는 본성을 묘사한 것이다. 말하자면 타락한 본성, 육신은 그 본성이 갈망하는 것을 마음에 둔다. 이것은 생각과 의지의 과정을 포함한다. 그들은 무엇이 옳은가로 선택하는 것이 아니라 자기중심적 욕구에 기반해서 선택한다. 반면에 영을 따르는 사람은 영의 것을 마음에 둔다. 
  • Both contrasts deal with the mindset of two groups of people: the converted and the unconverted. The niv translates, those who live according to the flesh,but the Greek says, “those who are according to the flesh.” In actuality, Paul describes the ontological rather than the functional, that is, who they are rather than what they do (contra Dunn 1988a). Verse 4 describes the walk, verses 5–8 the nature behind that walk. Those of the flesh (again, describing the fallen nature) have their minds set on what that nature desires(literally, “the things of the flesh”). This includes the thinking process and the will (indeed, the whole person); it goes back to 1:21, 28 and the fact that depravity is especially manifest in the mindset of “those who are according to the flesh.” Note that they deliberately choose not on the basis of what is right but on the basis of self-centered desires. Everything they do is controlled by the concerns of this world. In contrast, those who are characterized by the Spirit have their minds set on“the things of the Spirit” (niv translates what the Sprit desires). They are directed by the Spirit and both think and choose that which is in accordance with the Spirit. Hendriksen says (1981:248), “Those who live according to the Spirit, and therefore submit to the Spirit’s direction, concentrate their attention on, and specialize in, whatever is dear to the Spirit. In the conflict between God and sinful human nature the first group sides with human nature, the second sides with God.”
  •  Grant R. Osborne, Romans, The IVP New Testament Commentary Series (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2004), 198.

6절 본문에서 생각은 단순한 생각(thoughts)를 의미하는 것이 아니라 사람들이 가지고 있는 바램, 관점, 세계관(desires, outlook, worldview)을 말한다.
  • Mindhere refers not just to the thoughts but to the desires, outlook and worldview of the person. When the mindset is grounded in the flesh, deathin its broadest sense is the result. This is not just final death in eternal punishment but a state of death that rules over the unsaved throughout their lives (cf. 5:12–15; 7:10–13), ending in the “second death” of Rev 2:11 and 20:6. Morris (1988:306) says that “to be bounded by the flesh is itself death. It is a cutting off of oneself from the life that is life indeed.” Those who center on the Spirit, however, experience life and peace. Lifeis eternal life in 2:7, 5:21, and 6:22–23 and present life in Christ in 7:10 and 8:2. Here it is both. Peacewith God is the result of justification (5:1). While it could refer to the tranquility of the soul (a peaceful heart, so Dodd 1932; Morris 1988), it more likely refers to the state of being reconciled to God, of being in right relationship with him.
  •  Grant R. Osborne, Romans, The IVP New Testament Commentary Series (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2004), 198–199.

7-8절) 육신의 생각은 하나님과 원수가 되며 하나님의 법에 굴복, 순종하지 않을 뿐만 아니라 할 수도 없다. 또한 육신에 있는 자들은 하나님을 기쁘시게 할 수 없다. 
본절에서 바울은 왜 육신의 생각이 사망에 이르게 하고 하나님과 원수가 되게 하는지를 설명하고 있다. 원수됨의 토대는 하나님의 법에 순종하기를 거부하는 것이다. 바울은 이러한 이들은 율법에 굴복하지 않을 뿐만 아니라 굴복할 수도 없다라고 말한다. 죄의 본성 때문에 하나님의 법을 따르는 것이 완전히 불가능해진 것이다. 이것이 바로 전적 타락이다. 죄된 본성에 의해 의지가 굴복당한 것이다. 이러한 이들이 때로 선을 행하는 것은 하나님을 위해서, 하나님을 따르기 때문이 아니라 상황으로 인한 것이다. 죄는 그들의 삶의 전 영역을 통제한다. 죄인들이 하나님의 법에 굴복할 수 없기 때문에 그들은 하나님을 기쁘게 할 수 없다. 
  • Paul now explains why (dioti, because,omitted from the niv) the fleshly mind must be in a state of death (vv. 7–8): the sinful mind is hostile to God.The term hostiledoes not just describe a person who has become an enemy of God; rather it describes a fierce, active enmity toward all that God is and stands for. The entire mindset is directed against the things of God, and this opposition is the chief characteristic of the state of death. It desires that which pleases self rather than that which pleases God, and its actions oppose that which God demands. This of course does not mean that secular persons are incapable of doing good but does mean that they do not seek the things of God. The basis of that hostility is its refusal to submit to God’s law. God’s lawcould be the Mosaic ordinances (as in vv. 3–4) or God’s demands in general (as in 7:21, 23, though in 7:22 “God’s law” refers to the Mosaic law), but in the larger context of chapters 7–8 it most likely refers to the Torah. The hostile mind of the carnal person is completely incapable of placing itself under (the meaning of submit) God’s law. Paul intensifies this refusal by saying it is grounded in the very nature when he adds, nor can it do so.Because of the nature of sin, it is completely incapable of following God’s law, again a reflection back to 1:18–32. This of course is total depravity, the domination of the will by the sinful nature. Once more, this does not imply that unbelievers are incapable of doing good or recognizing what is good; instead, it means they cannot choose good for God’s sake. When they do good, it is due to the situation rather than to any desire to please God or follow him. Sin controls every aspect of their lives. In fact, that is the very point of the next verse. Because sinners are incapable of submitting to God’s law, they cannot please God. They are “in the flesh” (compare 7:5); that is, they have the flesh as the sphere of their existence. Thus it is impossible for them to be pleasing to God. The verb pleaserefers to a desire to please God and denotes that unbelievers exemplify an attitude of indifference, a lack of desire to bring pleasure to God, indeed an inability even to want to do so (contra Paul in 1 Thess 2:4; see Schneider 1990:151).
  •  Grant R. Osborne, Romans, The IVP New Testament Commentary Series (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2004), 199–200.


저작자표시 변경금지

'성경묵상 > 로마서' 카테고리의 다른 글

롬 8:12-17 종의 영 vs 양자의 영  (0) 2018.05.02
롬 8:9-11 하나님의 영이 거하시면  (0) 2018.04.30
롬 8:1-4 그러므로 이제  (0) 2018.04.26
롬 7:21-25 하나님의 법과 죄의 법  (0) 2018.04.25
롬 7:13-20 하나님의 사람에게 율법의 위치  (0) 2018.04.23
728x90
There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.12 For the law of hthe Spirit of life ihas set you2free in Christ Jesus from the law of sin and death. 3 For jGod has done what the law, kweakened by the flesh, lcould not do. mBy sending his own Son nin the likeness of sinful flesh and ofor sin,3he condemned sin in the flesh, 4 in order that pthe righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, qwho walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit. 
1Some manuscripts add who walk not according to the flesh (but according to the Spirit)
h1 Cor. 15:45; 2 Cor. 3:6
iver. 12; See ch. 6:14, 18; 7:4
2Some manuscripts me
jHeb. 10:1, 2, 10, 14; See Acts 13:39
kGal. 4:9; Heb. 7:18
lHeb. 10:6, 8
m2 Cor. 5:21
nPhil. 2:7; See John 1:14
oLev. 16:5; Heb. 10:6, 8; 13:11
3Or and as a sin offering
pch. 1:32; 2:26
qGal. 5:16, 25
 The Holy Bible: English Standard Version(Wheaton: Standard Bible Society, 2016), 롬 8:1–4.

본문은 마치 패배가 짙은 경기를 하다가 마지막에 승리를 하는 역전 드라마를 연상시킨다. 죄의 세력가운데 놓여 있던 우리들, 죄의 법을 섬기는 곤고한 우리들을 이야기하다가 이제 그것을 역전시켜서 승리로 이끄시는 그리스도 예수안에 사는 삶, 새생명의 성령의 법을 말하고 있다. 

1절) 그러므로 이제 그리스도 예수 안에 있는 자에게는 결코 정죄함이 없다. 
본문은 그러므로라는 단어로 시작된다. 바울은 앞선 논쟁과 관련해서 아주 중요한 요약과 결론을 본문에서 맺고 있는 것이다. 이는 우리 주 예수 그리스도를 통한 승리에 대한 첫번째 선포이며 7:6에서 언급된 성령의 새로운 삶에 대한 내용으로 연결된다. 본문의 이제(now)는 앞선 7:6과 연결되어 그리스도와 함께 연합되었기 때문에 하나님 앞에서 '이제' 바로 서있는 이들을 위해서 구속사의 새 시대가 그리스도 예수로 인해서 이제 시작되었음을 보여주고 있다. 이 구속의 이야기의 핵심은 그리스도 안에 있는 자들에게 정죄함이 없다는 것이다. 이것의 의미는 하나님께서 보내신 당신의 아들이 직접 십자가에 달려 죽으심으로 죄의 댓가를 모두 지불하셨다는 것이다. 이후의 구절들은 내주하는 죄가 내주하는 성령의 능력을 통해서 극복된다는 점을 보여주고 있다. 4-11절에서 성령에 대한 10번의 언급이 등장한다. 
  • Thereforeindicates that Paul is stating an important summary and conclusion related to his preceding argument. The “therefore” is based first on the exclamation of victory that comes “through Jesus Christ our Lord” (7:23–25), which in turn is linked back to 7:6, where the idea of the “new life of the Spirit” is first mentioned. But more broadly Paul seems to be recalling his whole argument about salvation in Christ from 3:21–5:21. The nowin 8:1 matches the “now” in 7:6, showing that the new era of redemptive history has “now” been inaugurated by Christ Jesus for those who are “now” in right standing before God because they are united with Christ. But the summary relates further to the whole argument presented in chs. 3, 4, and 5. No condemnationechoes the conclusion stated in 5:1 (“Therefore … we have peace with God”) and underscores the stunning implications of the gospel first introduced in 1:16–17. As Paul immediately goes on to explain, there is “no condemnation” for the Christian because God has condemned sin in the flesh by sending his own Son (8:3) to pay the penalty for sin through his death on the cross. The following verses then show that indwelling sin is overcome through the power of the indwelling Spirit, with ten references to the Spirit in vv. 4–11.
  •  Crossway Bibles, The ESV Study Bible(Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2008), 2170.

  • Paul begins by returning to the condemnation brought about by sin in 5:12–14 and 7:1–6, saying, there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus.The emphasis on nowreturns to the idea of the two epochs in salvation-history. The now-ness of this new age of salvation (cf. 3:26; 5:9, 11; 6:19, 21) means that the condemnation of the old era is no longer. The term condemnationoccurs only in 5:16, 18 elsewhere in the New Testament, the passage on Christ overturning the results of Adam’s sin (5:12–21). So clearly this means that the condemnation resulting from sin has been removed for those who are in Christ Jesus(3:24; 6:11, 23; cf. 7:4), that is, are united with him in his death and resurrection. For them his atoning sacrifice has led to God’s judicial forgiveness. In short, the forensic condemnationof the sinner by God has been removed by the forensic justificationof the sinner in Christ. Moo says it well (1996:473), “Paul’s judicial ‘for us’ language and his ‘participationist’ ‘in him’ language combine in perfect harmony.”
  •  Grant R. Osborne, Romans, The IVP New Testament Commentary Series (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2004), 193.

인류의 죄로 인해서 일어난 바로 그 죄의 댓가는 그리스도의 죽음으로 지불되었습니다. 그 바람직하지 않은 평결은 제거되었습니다. 이제 그리스도 안에 있는 모든 이들은 바로 그 용서의 수혜자들 입니다. 만약 사실에 근거하는 실재로서의 정죄가 사라진다면 주관적인, 개인적인 경험으로서의 정죄가 있을 합법적인 자리는 없습니다. 죄책감을 주장하는 것이 우리의 구원으로 하나님을 돕는 것이라고 주장하는 또다른 방법입니다. 인간은 본성 자체에 자신의 행함을 통해서 하나님의 구원을 도울 수 있다는 생각을 깊이 가지고 있습니다. 이것은 도리어 그리스도의 구원을 온전히 받아들이고 따르는데 큰 장애물이 됩니다. 
  • The just penalty incurred by the sins of the human race was paid by the death of Christ. The unfavorable verdict has been removed. Now all those who are in Christ are the beneficiaries of that forgiveness.119It follows that if condemnation as an objective reality has been removed, there is no legitimate place for condemnation as a subjective experience. To insist on feeling guilty is but another way of insisting on helping God with our salvation. How deeply imbedded in human nature is the influence of works-righteousness!
  • 119νῦν, “now,” is temporal, referring to the new epoch in human history that has replaced the former dispensation of condemnation (cf. 2 Cor 3:7–9).
  •  Robert H. Mounce, Romans, vol. 27, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1995), 174.

2절) 정죄함이 없는 이유는 바로 생명의 성령의 법이 그리스도 예수 안에 있는 너희(나)를 죄와 사망의 법으로부터 해방하였기 때문이다. 본문은 생명의 성령의 법과 죄와 사망의 법을 대조한다. 본문에 등장하는 법은 모두 ‘노모스’로 원리(principle)를 의미한다. 

왜 정죄함이 없다는 것인가? 왜냐하면 그리스도안에 있는 생명의 성령의 법이 사망으로 이끄는 죄의 법으로부터 우리를 자유케 하기 때문이다. 사도는 두개의 서로 다른 법을 대조하고 있다. 옛 법은 죄의 영향력으로 불가피하게 사망을 가져온다. 새로운 법은 성령의 법으로 옛 것의 영향력으로부터 신자들을 자유케 하는 것이다. 성령이 새로운 법은 그리스도 예수와 연합하는 삶을 통해서만 신자들이 그들의 삶속에서의 죄의 영향력을 깨뜨릴 수 있다고 말합니다. 승리를 주시는 분이 바로 하나님의 영이며 그 영은 모든 하나님의 참된 자녀들이 소유하고 있습니다. 
  • And why is there no condemnation? Because the law of the Spirit, that is, life in Christ Jesus, has set us free from the law of sin, which leads to death.120A quick comparison with the NIV text will indicate that Paul’s answer as previously paraphrased involves considerable interpretation. Some justification is in order. The apostle was contrasting two different laws (or principles). The old law is the power of sin that inevitably results in death.121The new law, which sets the believer free   p 175  from the power of the old, is the law of the Spirit. The new law of the Spirit says that only by living in union with Christ Jesus can believers break the power of sin in their lives. It is the Spirit of God who provides victory, and that Spirit is the possession of every true child of God.
  • 120Cf. Weymouth’s translation “the Spirit’s law—life in Christ Jesus.” Other translations of ὁ γὰρ νόμος τοῦ πνεύματος τῆς ζωῆς ἐν Χριστῶ̣ Ιησοῦ are “the new spiritual principle of life” (Phillips) and “the law of the life-giving Spirit” (TCNT).
  • NIV New International Version
  • 121The NIVSB note on 8:2 points out that Paul used “law” in several ways. Here it denotes a controlling power. Elsewhere in Romans it is God’s law (2:17–20), the Pentateuch (3:21b), the OT as a whole (3:19), or a principle (3:27).
  •  Robert H. Mounce, Romans, vol. 27, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1995), 174–175.

3절) 왜냐하면 율법(모세의 율법)이 육신으로 말미암아 할 수 없는 것을 하나님은 하신다. 죄악된 육신의 모양으로 그 자신의 아들을 보내심으로 죄를 위해서 육신의 죄를 정죄하셨다. 
앞서 7장에서 언급한대로 율법은 인간성의 문제를 해결할 수 없다. 왜냐하면 죄는 그 자신의 목적을 위해서 율법을 사용하기 때문이다. 
본문의 죄있는 육신의 모양은 그분이 죄가 없으심에도 불구하고 완전한 인간이 되셨음을 의미한다. 

만약에 그리스도께서 우리의 본성을 취하지 않으셨다면 그분은 우리중의 하나가 되실수 없었을 것이다. 또한 그분이 완전히 우리와 같은 본성을 취하셨다면(죄인이 되셨다면) 그분은 우리의 구세주가 되실 수 없다. 
  • If Christ had not taken on our nature, he could not have been one of us. On the other hand, had he become completely like us (i.e., had he sinned), he could not have become our Savior. 
  •  Robert H. Mounce, Romans, vol. 27, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1995), 175.
예수님께서는 죄있는 육신의 모양을 취하심으로 완전히 우리와 같아 지셨다. 하지만 그분은 죄를 짓지 않은 유일한 인간으로 우리를 대속하신 것이다. 
예수님의 사역은 바로 인류를 얽매고 있는 죄를 끝장내시는 것이었다. 그 사명을 이루시기 위해서 예수님은 육신을 취하신 것이다. 바로 그분이 그 육신을 가지고 죽으시고 부활하심으로 육신의 죄를 정하신 것이다. 
  • 히브리서 2:14–15(NKRV) 14자녀들은 혈과 육에 속하였으매 그도 또한 같은 모양으로 혈과 육을 함께 지니심은 죽음을 통하여 죽음의 세력을 잡은 자 곧 마귀를 멸하시며 15또 죽기를 무서워하므로 한평생 매여 종 노릇 하는 모든 자들을 놓아 주려 하심이니
  • 히브리서 2:17(NKRV) 17그러므로 그가 범사에 형제들과 같이 되심이 마땅하도다 이는 하나님의 일에 자비하고 신실한 대제사장이 되어 백성의 죄를 속량하려 하심이라

새 생명은 죄가 제거되어야만 시작될 수 있다. 이전의 여러 본문을 통해서 율법의 한계를 지적했다. 모세 율법은 그 자신들의 죄를 인식하게 함으로 진노를 가져올 뿐이다. 우리 본성의 부패함은 하나님의 율법이 우리들에게 쓸모 없게 만든다. 반면에 이것은 우리가 죽음을 향해서 돌아갈 수 없다는 삶의 방식을 보여준다. 
  • Yet this new life in the Spirit is grounded (gar, for) in Christ and conversion. In verses 1–3 there is an ABA pattern, with the life in the Spirit framed by the effects of the cross. The new life cannot begin until the condemnationunder sin has been removed. To accomplish this God condemned sinthrough the sin offeringof Christ. Recapitulating the emphasis in chapter 7, Paul tells us first that the law was powerless to [remove condemnation] in that it was weakened by the sinful nature(literally, “the flesh”). We have already seen that the Mosaic law brings wrath by making people recognize that their sins are transgressions (4:13–15; 7:7) and so causes sin to increase (5:20). The law aroused the “sinful passions” and brought forth death (7:5; 8–11). From this standpoint, the law would indeed be powerlessto remove condemnation since it actually produced condemnation. Again, the law in itself did not do this; rather it was sin (on which see 7:5) that accomplished this by using the law as its instrument (7:11, 14, 17–20). Calvin says on this (1979:280), “The corruption then of our nature renders the law of God in this respect useless to us; for while it shows the way of life, it does not bring us back who are running headlong into death.”
  •  Grant R. Osborne, Romans, The IVP New Testament Commentary Series (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2004), 195.

본문속에서 바울은 하나님께서 자신의 아들을 보내셨다는 것을 강조한다. 요한 복음에서는 예수를 보내심에 대한 언급이 여러번 등장한다. 
하나님께서는 예수님의 죄에 대한 희생의 결과로 죄를 정죄하시고 또한 신자들을 의롭다 하셨다. 이렇게 행하심으로 죄의 세력은 무너졌다. 
  • God as a result of Jesus’ sin offering both condemned sin and justified the believer. In so doing the power of sin was broken (so Käsemann 1980; Cranfield 1975; Schreiner 1998; contra Moo 1996).
  •  Grant R. Osborne, Romans, The IVP New Testament Commentary Series (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2004), 196.

4절) 육신을 따르지 않고 그 성령을 따라 걷는 우리에게 율법의 의로운 요구가 성취되게 하시기 위해서 이다. 
본문의 율법의 의로운 요구가 성취된다라는 의미는 그 요구가 그리스도의 사역의 기초 위에 살아가는 그리스도인의 새로운 삶 속에서 성취된다는 의미이기도 하고 또는 율법의 완전한 댓가가 십자가 위에서 만났음을, 채워졌음을 의미한다. 율법의 요구는 죄에 대한 댓가, 궁극적으로 사망이다. 그런데 영을 따라 살아가는 우리들에게는 그 율법의 요구가 충족된 것이다. 십자가 위에서 죄사함이 선포되었을 뿐만 아니라 이제 그 기초 위에서 새로운 삶을 살아갈 수 있음을 의미하는 것이다. 
  • righteous requirement of the law … fulfilled. This could mean the requirement is fulfilled in the new life that Christians live on the basis of Christ’s work, or it may refer to the full penalty of the law being met at the cross.
  •  Crossway Bibles, The ESV Study Bible(Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2008), 2170.

5:21-7:25을 보면 죄와 율법은 정죄와 패배를 불러일으킨다. 하지만 이 본문 중에 칭의의 결과로 가능한 승리의 삶을 옅볼 수 있고(5:1-11) 두번째 아담으로오신 그리스도의 사역의 결과(5:15-21)와 그리스도안에서 죄에 대해서 죽은 우리들의 회심의 사실(6:1-11).
본문 1-11절은 그리스도 예수 안에서 보장된 승리의 삶에 대한 내용을 다룬다. 본문을 4부분으로 나누면 1) 1절은 그리스도안에 있는 존재의 기본적인 결과, 정죄 없음을 다루며 2) 2-4절은 죄와 사망의 법으로부터 자유케하는 생명의 영을 통해서 어떻게 이것이 이루어질 수 있는지를, 3) 5-8절은 육신과 영의 투장, 갈등을 4) 9-11절은 승리가 우리안에 성령에 의해서 역사함을 또한 성령을 통한 생명의 약속이 지금과 마지막 부활때와 관계있음을 묘사한다. 
  • Sin and the law have produced condemnation and defeat in 5:21–7:25. In the midst of this, however, there have been glimpses of the life of victory and hope that is available as a result of justification (5:1–11): the result of the work of Christ as the second Adam (5:15–21) and the fact that at conversion we have died to sin in Christ (6:1–11). In him we are free from the power of sin as we give ourselves over to God in obedience and right living (6:12–22). This passage acts as a conclusion to that section, for victory is only assured when the Spirit of Christ is in us and we yield to his presence. There are four sections here: (1) verse 1 states the basic result of being in Christ,the absence of condemnation;(2) verses 2–4 tell how this occurs, as the Spirit of lifeliberates from the law of sin and death;*(3) verses 5–8 describe the conflict between the flesh and the Spirit; (4) verses 9–11 describe the victory wrought by the Spirit in us and relate the promise of life via the Spirit, both now and at the final resurrection.
  • *8:2There is considerable debate about whether lawshould be understood metaphorically as a “rule” or “authority” (as in 7:21, 23; so Sanday and Headlam 1902; Murray 1968; Cranfield 1975; Käsemann 1980; Fitzmyer 1993b; Moo 1996) or whether it refers to the Mosaic law (as in the rest of chap. 7; so Wilckens 1980; Dunn 1988a; Snodgrass 1988:99; Schreiner 1998). If the latter, it means the Mosaic law has no value apart from the Spirit; without the Spirit it becomes the law that leads to sin and death. If the former, it means the emphasis is on the Spirit’s power to liberate us from sin and death. Each is viable and would fit the context (“principle” in 7:21, 23 and Mosaic law in 7:22, 25). There are several reasons for favoring the metaphorical use over the literal use of law: (1) 7:6 strongly separates the “Spirit” from the “written code.” (2) Verse 3 says clearly that the law is “powerless” to do such a thing. (3) The closely parallel “law of sin” in 7:23 is the principle of sin. (4) This seems to recapitulate the “two powers/kingdoms” theme of chapters 6–7, the realm of the Spirit versus the realm of sin and death. However, there are equally compelling reasons pointing to the Mosaic law as the reference: (1) The positive view of the law is in keeping with Paul’s defense of it in 7:14–25. (2) The teaching about the law in chapters 7–8 center on the law and the flesh (chap. 7) versus the law and the Spirit (chap. 8). (3) There is no actual contradiction between verses 2 and 3 (see above). (4) This teaches the flip side of 7:6; there the law was an instrument of sin, here an instrument of the Spirit. (5) The “two kingdoms” aspect is still present in the law used by the Spirit and the law used by sin and death. (6) In verse 4 the “righteous requirements of the law” are “fully met in us,” culminating the positive view of the law in verse 2. In a very difficult decision, I must side with the Mosaic-law interpretation here as making slightly better sense of the passage.
  •  Grant R. Osborne, Romans, The IVP New Testament Commentary Series (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2004), 192–193.

본문의 메시지는 이제 우리로 하여금 성령안에서 더 나아진 성화의 경험이 가능하다는 것을 말해준다. 우리는 육신을 따를지 영을 따를지 두가지 선택중에 하나를 택해야 한다. 
  • The purpose for God sending his Son to be the sin offering was to fulfill the righteous requirements of the law(v. 4). This could be primarily forensic, meaning that Christ judicially fulfilled the law’s demands on the cross (so Calvin 1979; Hodge 1950; Fitzmyer 1993b; Moo 1996), or it could be fulfilled when Christians obey God and live out the law’s requirements (Murray 1968; Cranfield 1975; Morris 1988; Schreiner 1998). However, this is no either-or. In the context, Paul has just finished speaking of Christ’s sin offering,and the whole of 8:1–17 describes the new life in the Spirit. The true purpose of the law is fulfilled when justification launches sanctification, that is, when Christ’s sacrificial death enables these requirements to be fully met in us(in the Greek this is a divine passive meaning “God fulfills” it). Note that it is fulfilled in us,which means that we participate in the results. The idea of fulfilled is similar to that in Matthew 5:17, which says Christ came to “fulfill” the law, that is, caught it up in himself and lifted it to a higher plane (thus completing it). So here the true requirements of the law are completed in both the sin offering of Christ and the life of obedience that follows. Moo (1996:483) speaks of an “interchange” here—“Christ becomes what we are so that we might become what he is.” This of course does not mean sinless perfection. Chapter 7 demonstrates the struggle we all go through. However, the message of this section is that we can experience progressive sanctification in the Spirit, that is, grow in righteous living. This can only occur when we live not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.*What Christ has done for us on the cross (v. 2) is worked out in Spirit-empowered living, and both together fulfill the law. There are two choices—to live by the flesh or the world’s standards or to live in obedience to the Spirit’s leading. This flesh/Spirit opposition will dominate the next few verses. As in chapter 6, we are back to the idea of the two powers or realms; there it was sin versus grace, and here it is flesh versus Spirit. There the solution was to die with Christ; here it is to live in the Spirit. The two are interdependent.
  • *8:5Moo (1996:486–87) argues that the contrast is between the unconverted and the converted in verses 5–8, not between two different approaches to the Christian life (the flesh and the Spirit). He points out that being in the flesh(v. 8) cannot describe a believer, and that the third-person language here is descriptive rather than hortatory. Moreover, in verse 9 Paul says, “You are not controlled by the flesh but by the Spirit,” clearly separating the two groups.
  •  Grant R. Osborne, Romans, The IVP New Testament Commentary Series (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2004), 196–197.


저작자표시 변경금지

'성경묵상 > 로마서' 카테고리의 다른 글

롬 8:9-11 하나님의 영이 거하시면  (0) 2018.04.30
롬 8:5-8 육신의 생각과 영의 생각  (0) 2018.04.27
롬 7:21-25 하나님의 법과 죄의 법  (0) 2018.04.25
롬 7:13-20 하나님의 사람에게 율법의 위치  (0) 2018.04.23
롬 7:7-12 율법과 죄의 관계  (0) 2018.04.20
728x90
21 So I find it to be a law that when I want to do right, evil lies close at hand. 22 For dI delight in the law of God, ein my inner being, 23 but I see in my members fanother law waging war against the law of my mind and making me captive to the law of sin that dwells in my members. 24 Wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from gthis body of death? 25 Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, I myself serve the law of God with my mind, but with my flesh I serve the law of sin. 
The Holy Bible: English Standard Version(Wheaton: Standard Bible Society, 2016), 롬 7:21–25.

본문 21-25절은 바울안에서 선과 악의 싸움을 묘사하면서 결론을 내고 있다. 본문에서 속 사람은 하나님의 법을 즐거워하지만 또 내 지체 속의 또 다른 법이 있는데 그 법은 내 마음의 법, 하나님의 법 혹은 율법과 싸워서 나를 죄의 법으로 사로 잡는다. 바울은 다시 한번 구원받은 자신의 마음이 여전히 선과 악의 전장임을 밝히고 있다. 하나님을 기뻐하고 선한 일을 선택하고 그것을 행하기 원하지만 여전히 내 속에 죄의 법이 힘을 발휘하여서 나로 하여금 선을 행하지 못하고 악을 행하도록 한다는 것이다. 하나님의 법을 즐거워한다라고 할때 이 의미는 하나님의 법에 대한 그리스도인의 헌신을 반영하는 것이다. 그리스도인은 그리스도안에서 성취된 하나님의 언약으로서의 법을 즐거워하는 것이다. 여기서 속사람은 바울이 고전 4:16, 엡 3:16에 언급한 내용으로 우리 존재의 정신적 영적인 측면을 언급한다. 우리가 하나님의 법과 그것의 목적을 묵상하면 우리는 그 법이 신령하고 거룩하며 의롭고 선하다는 것을 알게 된다. 
- The war within is clarified further by the antithesis in verses 22–23, summarizing his emphasis throughout this chapter but especially the battle between good and evil in verse 21. On the positive side, Paul delights in God’s lawin his inner being.* The verb means to “rejoice in” something and reflects the basic Jewish (and Christian) devotion to God’s law. Once again, Christians rejoice in the law as divine covenant and as fulfilled in Christ (Mt 5:17–20). While God’s lawcould refer to the whole Old Testament as divine revelation, the Mosaic law was often called “the Torah of God,” and it is likely that God’swas added partly to distinguish it from the lawof verses 21, 23. The sphere within which this delight occurs is the inner being,used elsewhere in Paul of a Christian (2 Cor 4:16; Eph 3:16) and referring to the mental and spiritual aspect of our being. This idea of mental activity controls the rest of the chapter (the law of my mind,v. 23; I myself in my mind,v. 25). As we meditate on the law and its purpose, we are filled with joy at what God has done. Mentally, we joyfully know that the law is spiritual, holy, righteous and good (vv. 12, 14, 16) and desire to live by its precepts (vv. 15, 18, 19, 21).
Grant R. Osborne, Romans, The IVP New Testament Commentary Series (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2004), 187–188.

마음은 영적인 성장이 일어나는 자리이고 또한 전투가 일어나는 자리이기도 하다. 그 싸움은 그 의식적인 영역 안에서 다른 법/죄의 법과 하나님의 법/내 마음의 법이 서로 대항하여 싸운다. 신자들은 바로 공격자인 죄와 수비자인 하나님의 법의 전장이 된다. 게다가 죄는 여기서 내안에서 역사함으로 나를 죄의 법에 사로잡힌 죄수로 만든다. 여기서 내 지체는 육체적인 몸을 의미하기도 하고 전인을 의미하기도 한다. 당시 헬라의 이원론의 영향때문에 죄으 영향력이 육체에 더욱 강력하게 역사하는 것으로 묘사되었을 수 있다. 실제의 전투를 상상해 보면 적이 쳐들어와서 전투에 승리하여서 우리 각 사람을 노예화 해서 붙잡은 것이다. 
  •  
However, the problem is that there is another law at work in the members of my body.This other principle or power (the law of sinbelow) is dynamically active in the person. Sin was first conceived as a power or realm (6:2–14), then as an enslaving master (6:16–22), and now as a law or controlling force at work in us. Paul then switches metaphors and looks at sin as an invading army waging war against the law of my mind(see also vv. 8, 11). The law of my mindparallels God’s lawin verse 22 and is the sphere within which God is at work, in the thinking process as well as the volition. The mind is the place where spiritual growth occurs (see 12:2 on “the renewing of your mind”) and where the battle takes place. The warfare is carried out in the conscious realm, and entails another law/law of sinbattling against both God’s law(the work of the Spirit within; see 7:6) and the law of my mind(the “new self,” cf. Rom 6:6). The believer has become a battleground with sin as the aggressor and God’s lawplaced on the defensive. More than that, sin is the victor here and makes me a prisoner of the law of sin at work within my members.There is a difference of opinion whether my membersrefers to the physical body (because of parallels with mind) or to the whole person (the thrust it had in 6:13, 19; 7:5). While a good argument can be made for this referring to the physical body as controlled by sin, it is still better to see it more broadly of every aspect of our being attacked by the power of sin (including the mind and the body). Imagine that the enemy (sin) has made war against, triumphed over, captured and then enslaved the individual—a very serious portrait indeed! In this sense there is a dualism, with two opposing forces at work in us and the side of evil winning. But the extreme pessimism once again must be understood in light of Paul’s purpose. This section describes a Christian trusting in the flesh, and chapter 8 shows that victory only comes in the Spirit. Origen writes (Bray 1998:198), “It appears that in this passage Paul is teaching us that the mortification of the flesh … is not something which happens overnight but rather is a gradual process, because the force of habit is such and the attraction of sin is so great that, even though our mind may want to do what is right and has decided to serve the law of God, yet the lusts of the flesh continue to urge him to serve sin and obey its laws instead.”
Grant R. Osborne, Romans, The IVP New Testament Commentary Series (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2004), 188–189.

21절) 바울은 여기서 자신이 한 법을 깨달았다고 선포한다. 바로 그 법은 선을 행하기 원하는 자신에게 악이 함께 있다는 것이다. 
많은 이들이 여기서 말하는 법이 모세율법인지 아니면 일반적인 원칙인지 논쟁이 많은 부분이다.  
23-22절) 내 속사람은 하나님의 법을 즐거워하지만 내 지체속의 다른 법이 내 마암의 법과 싸워 내 지체 속에 있는 죄의 법으로 나를 사로 잡는다. 
- Yet at the same time that other principle (v. 23) was at work throughout his body. It was at war against his desire to obey the law of God.107 This basic conflict is nowhere better expressed than in Gal 5:17–18: “For the sinful nature desires what is contrary to the Spirit, and the Spirit what is contrary to the sinful nature. They are in conflict with each other, so that you do not do what you want” (cf. Jas 4:1; 1 Pet 2:11). Paul went on to say that this alien power took him captive to the law of sin at work in his members. Romans 7:23 speaks of three laws.108 By the “law of [his] mind” Paul referred to the principle of rational thought. Goodspeed calls it the “law of [his] reason.” It corresponds to that which Paul knew to be the right thing to do. The relationship between “another109 law” and “the law of sin” is quite clear; they are undoubtedly to be taken as one and the same. This “law” (read “principle”) is the propensity toward sin that arises from a person’s lower nature. So what I am by nature is in constant conflict with what I aspire to be as a child of God in whom the Spirit of God dwells.110 That conflict will never be settled until, seeing   p 171  God, we shall be like him (1 John 3:2).
Robert H. Mounce, Romans, vol. 27, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1995), 170–171.
 
νόμος occurs four times in vv. 22–23. I understand “the law of my mind” and “the law of sin” as more specific ways of representing “God’s law” and “another law.”
Robert H. Mounce, Romans, vol. 27, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1995).

24-25절) 오호통재라. 나는 곤고한 사람이로다. 이 사망의 몸에서 누가 나를 구원할 것인가? 오직 우리를 구원하실 수 있는 유일한 구원자는 바로 우리 주 예수 그리스도이시다. 이로 말미암아 하나님께 감사하리라. 그런데 내 자신이 마음으로는 하나님의 법을 육신으로는 죄의 법을 섬긴다. 
본문의 마음은 '노우스'이고 육신은 '사륵스'이다. 여기서 노우스는 인간의 마음, 속사람을 의미하고 사륵스는 죄 많은 인류를 의미한다. 
- Caught up in this spiritual warfare,111 Paul cried out: What a wretched man am I! Who is able to free me from the “clutches of my own sinful nature?” (Phillips).112 The “body of death” was like a corpse that hung on him and from which he was unable to free himself.113 It constantly interfered with his desire to obey the higher impulses of his new nature. Who is able to rescue the believer crying out for deliverance? The answer is, Thanks be to God, there is deliverance through Jesus Christ our Lord (v. 25).114 Through the death and resurrection of Christ, God has provided the power to live in the freedom of the Spirit (cf. 8:2).115
Verse 25b (a separate paragraph in the NIV) summarizes the entire discussion of vv. 13–24.116 Paul said that he himself (who he really was in Christ) had committed himself to serving the law of God (it was the rational thing to do) but that his lower nature was still a slave to the principle of sin. No modern translation captures the meaning better than the NEB: “In a word then, I myself, subject to God’s law as a rational being, am yet, in my sinful nature, a slave to the law of sin.” Although the chapter ends on this realistic observation, the positive declaration in the   p 172  first part of v. 25 has prepared us for the exciting truths about to be set forth in the chapter that follows.
Robert H. Mounce, Romans, vol. 27, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1995), 171–172.

갤럽이나 바나 연구소와 같은 곳에서 21세기 초 교회에 대한 조사에 의하면 세속성이 증가하고 있다고 보고하고 있다. 우리는 이 시대에 신자와 불신자의 삶의 양식, 도덕성이나 우선순위에 있어서 차이점을 발견할 수 없다. 이것은 이전보다 그리스도인들이 그리스도를 향해 덜 헌신적이라는 것을 의미한다. 오늘날 교회의 가장 중요한 과제는 불신자들에게 나아가는 것이 아니라 주님을 위해서 아무것도 하지 않는 잠자고 있는 그리스도인들을 깨우는 것이다. 바로 본 구절은 그러한 사람들에 대해서 묘사한 것이다. 우리는 그들의 우선순위가 바뀔 수 있도록 그들을 도와야만 한다. 
- All the studies (Gallup, Barna and others) of the church at the dawn of the twenty-first century have reported the growing secularity that dominates. On the whole, you cannot tell a Christian from a non-Christian in terms of lifestyle, morals or priorities. This means that more Christians than ever are only partially committed to Christ. One of the important tasks of the church today is not just reaching the unchurched but waking up the dormant Christians who come but do nothing for the Lord. This passage describes those people. We must help them change their priorities and make Jesus Christ their Lord.This brief note of victory is in a sense a preview of coming attractions, for it points forward to chapter 8, where the means for accomplishing this is more fully explained.
Grant R. Osborne, Romans, The IVP New Testament Commentary Series (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2004), 190.

칼빈은 25절 본문에 대해서 이렇게 말했다. "신자들은 육체 안에 그들이 거하는 한 의의 목표에 도달할 수 없다. 하지만 그 몸을 벗을 때까지 그들은 그들의 결주를 해나가야 한다." 칼빈의 말 처럼 우리의 내면에서의 싸움, 죄의 법과 하나님의 싸움의 법은 끝나지 않을 것이다. 내가 하나님을 행해 거룩하게 헌신되어 있는 순간 나는 역시 곤고한 사람임을 기억해야 한다. 이런 나를 온전케 하나님의 법을 따르도록 하실 수 있는 분은 바로 주 예수 그리스도이시다. 
- Yet the problem still persists, for Paul concludes his argument by recapitulating (so then)his teaching regarding the two natures of every person. There is no triumphal end to this chapter. Rather, the war continues, and the believer has to choose between surrendering to the lordship of Christ and thus gaining victory (v. 25)* or choosing to obey the law of sinand thus facing spiritual defeat (v. 25). Again, the battle takes place in the mind,where Paul is consciously a slave to God’s law,meaning he wants (note the emphasis on volition seven times in vv. 15–21) to serve God’s law (cf. v. 22) with all his heart. But the mindis opposed by the flesh,and he becomes a slave to the law of sin. Here we have the paradox on slavery reversed from that in 6:22, where we have been set free from slavery to sin in order to become slaves to God. Now we try to serve God but end up serving sin. The spiritual self is defeated by the carnal self. At first glance this seems to end on a note of absolute defeat, as if there is no hope in the spiritual battle (and so many conclude that this cannot describe a Christian). But that is not so. The two options are presented in v. 25—choose to follow Christ or allow sin to dominate. Dunn (1988a:398–99) calls this the battle of two epochs, the old Adamic epoch in which sin dominates and the new epoch of Christ. While we in one sense have died to the old realm (6:1–7), we still live in this world and so are still subject to its power through the flesh. Paul wants us to know that the conflict is real, and we cannot escape it. The answer is hinted at in verse 25a and then explicated fully in chapter 8, namely life in Christ and the Spirit. Calvin summarizes the teaching here (1979:274): “the faithful never reach the goal of righteousness so long as they dwell in the flesh, but that they are running their course, until they put off the body.”
Grant R. Osborne, Romans, The IVP New Testament Commentary Series (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2004), 190–191.


저작자표시 변경금지

'성경묵상 > 로마서' 카테고리의 다른 글

롬 8:5-8 육신의 생각과 영의 생각  (0) 2018.04.27
롬 8:1-4 그러므로 이제  (0) 2018.04.26
롬 7:13-20 하나님의 사람에게 율법의 위치  (0) 2018.04.23
롬 7:7-12 율법과 죄의 관계  (0) 2018.04.20
롬 7:1-6 얽매였던 것에 대하여 죽음  (0) 2018.04.19
728x90
13 Did that which is good, then, bring death to me? By no means! It was sin, producing death in me through what is good, in order that sin might be shown to be sin, and through the commandment might become sinful beyond measure. 14 For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am of the flesh, wsold under sin. 15 For I do not understand my own actions. For xI do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I hate. 16 Now if I do what I do not want, I agree with ythe law, that it is good. 17 So now zit is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me. 18 For I know that nothing good dwells ain me, that is, in my flesh. For I have the desire to do what is right, but not the ability to carry it out. 19 bFor I do not do the good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I keep on doing. 20 Now if I do what I do not want, cit is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me. 
The Holy Bible: English Standard Version(Wheaton: Standard Bible Society, 2016), 롬 7:13–20.

본문 13-25절에서는 만약 율법이 죄가 아니라면 선한 율법이 사망에 대해서 책임이 있다는 것인가?라는 질문에 대해 설명한다. 
바울은 그 잘못이 율법에게 있지 않고 죄에게 있다라고 주장한다. 율법을 통해서 죄의 모든 흉악함이 드러나고 율법의 선함이 입증된다. 본절은 크게 세 부분 14-17, 18-20, 21-25절로 세분화된다. 여기에서 바울이 불신자를 묘사하는지 신자를 묘사하는지에 대한 논쟁이 있다. 
- If the law is not sin, is it the case that the good law is responsible for death? Paul argues that the fault lies with sin, not with the law. Through the law, sin is revealed in all its hideousness, and the law is vindicated as good. The section can be subdivided into vv. 14–17, 18–20, and 21–25. A long-standing debate centers on whether Paul is describing believers or unbelievers. Although good arguments are given by both sides, the most widely held view—beginning especially with Augustine and reaffirmed in the Reformation—is that Paul’s primary reference is to believers. In support of this position: (1) the shift to the present tense; (2) unbelievers do not desire so intensely to keep God’s law (v. 21); (3) the distinction between the “I” and the “flesh” (v. 18); (4) the delight in God’s law (v. 22); (5) deliverance from the sinful body is future (v. 24; 8:10, 11, 23); (6) the tension between good and evil in the concluding statement in 7:25; and (7) the fact that Christians are already righteous in Christ but are not yet perfected until the day of redemption. A second position, not as widely held but supported by a number of evangelical scholars, is that Paul is referring to unbelievers. In support of this position: (1) the structure of the passage (vv. 7–25 matches the life of the unregenerate previewed in v. 5, whereas 8:1–17 fits with the life of believers identified in 7:6); (2) the Holy Spirit is not mentioned in vv. 13–25 but is referred to 19 times in ch. 8; (3) to say that Christians are “sold under sin” (7:14) and “captive to the law of sin” (v. 23) stands in tension with chs. 6 and 8, which trumpet the freedom of believers from slavery to sin; (4) the suggestion that the present tense does not denote present time but the spiritual state of Paul when unconverted; (5) the desire to keep God’s law reflects the mind-set of the pious Jew who wanted to live a moral life (as the verses emphasize, such people do not and cannot keep the law); and (6) the section’s opening verse (v. 13) explains how the law brought death to Paul as an unbeliever. Advocates of both positions agree that (1) Christians still struggle with sin through their whole lives (see Gal. 5:17; 1 John 1:8–9); and (2) Christians can and should grow in sanctification throughout their lives by the power of the Holy Spirit dwelling within them (Rom. 8:2, 4, 9, 13–14). Those who hold to the first position usually see this passage as describing both Paul’s own experience and the experience of Christians generally. Although Christians are free from the condemnation of the law, sin nonetheless continues to dwell within, and all genuine Christians (along with Paul) should be profoundly aware of how far they fall short of God’s absolute standard of righteousness. Thus Paul cries out, “Wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death?” (7:24). The answer follows immediately: the one who hasdelivered Christians once for all (see 4:2–25; 5:2, 9) and the one who willdeliver them day by day is “Jesus Christ our Lord!” (7:25). As in many other places in Paul’s letters, this reflects his emphasis on both the “already” aspect of salvation (that believers have beensaved) and the “not yet” aspect (that believers will besaved ultimately and for all eternity at the return of Christ), and that they live in the tension between the already and the not yet.
Crossway Bibles, The ESV Study Bible(Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2008), 2169.

13절) 바울은 지속적으로 자신이 이전에 가르친 내용에 대해서 질문하면서 자신의 논지를 전개한다. 여기서 그는 어떻게 선한 율법이 죽음을 일으킬 수 있는지를 묻고 있다. 앞서 12절에서 율법은 거룩하고 계명도 거룩하고 의롭고 선하다라고 단언하고 있다. 그런데 어떻게 이럴 수 있느냐라고 묻고 그것에 대해서 그럴수 없다라고 말한다. 
바울은 사망을 가져오는 것이 율법이 아니라 죄라는 것을 지적했다. 율법은 단순히 그 목적을 이루기 위해서 죄에 사용된 수단이었다. 그러나 그렇게 함으로써 죄는 그 자신의 진정한 죄의 성격을 드러냈다. 그것은 죽음을 가죠오는데 선한 것을 사용함으로써 그것이 얼마나 말할수 없을정도로 악한지를 보여주었다. 
- Paul rejected the implication by pointing out that it was sin, not law, that brought about death. Law was simply the instrument used by sin to accomplish its purpose. But in so doing, sin exposed its own true character as sin. It demonstrated how unspeakably sinful it really is by using that which is good to bring about death.90
Robert H. Mounce, Romans, vol. 27, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1995), 166.
14-25절의 내용이 바울의 회심 전의 경험인지 후의 경험인지에 대한 논란이 있다. 

14절) 우리는 율법이 신령하다는 것을 안다. 하지만 육신에 속한 나는 죄 아래 팔렸다. 율법이 우리를 죄에 넘긴 것이 아니다. 

17절) 그것을 행하는 자가 내가 아니요 내 속에 거하는 죄이다. 본문은 바울 자신이 개인적인 책임을 회피하는 것이 아니라 바로 죄의 힘을 강조하기 위한 것이다. 

15-20절) 바울은 인간의 처절한 상태를 생생하게 묘사한다. 선한 인간은 하나님께 순종하려고 노력
하지만 그들은 그들 자신이 그겋게 지속적으로 할 수 잆다는 사실을 발견한다. 바로 인간은 어떤 종류의 죄악의 힘의 지배하에 있기 때문이다. 그렇다고 바울이 인간이 그들의 행동에 책임이 없다라고 주장하는 것은 아니다. 도리어 그는 인간이 아담의 죄에 개입한 덕분에 치명적으로 하나님으로부터 떠나 죄를 향해 굽어져 있음을 상기시킨다. 
- Paul vividly portrays the frustration of the human condition. The very best people seek to obey God, but they find themselves unable to do so consistently. What this reveals, Paul concludes, is that people are subject to some kind of sinful power: “sin living in me” (vv. 17, 20), “my sinful nature” (v. 18). Paul is not suggesting that people are not responsible for their actions. Rather, he is reminding us that human beings are fatally bent away from God and toward sin by virtue of their involvement in Adam’s sin (5:12–21).
Douglas J. Moo, “The Letters and Revelation,”in NIV Zondervan Study Bible: Built on the Truth of Scripture and Centered on the Gospel Message, ed. D. A. Carson (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2015), 2305.

바울은 지금 자신의 상태를 통해서 죄가 얼마나 강력하게 우리의 삶을 장악하고 악을 행하게 하는지를 설명하고 있다. 나의 마음이 선을 원하지만 그 선을 행하지 않고 도리어 악을 행하고 있다는 것이다. 그러면서 이를 행하는 것이 내가 아니라 내 속에 거하는 죄라고 말하며 나 자신과 죄를 분리하여서 설명하고 있다. 과연 죄와 그 죄를 짓는 나 자신을 분리할 수 있는가라는 질문이 있지만 여기서 바울은 죄를 짓는 자신을 회피하려는 것이 아니라 그 죄가 얼마나 강력한지를 강조하고 있는 것이다.

14-25절의 내용
7:14–25The question that has plagued commentators for centuries is whether in this latter section of chap. 7 Paul was describing his experience before or after conversion. Both positions may be argued rather persuasively.91In support of the first approach are a number of phrases throughout the account that seem to reflect a preconversion setting. Paul confessed that he was “sold as a slave to sin” (v. 14). He knew that “nothing good lives in [him]” (v. 18). He was a “prisoner of the law of sin” (v. 23), a “wretched man” who called out for someone to “rescue [him] from this body of death” (v. 24). Are confessions like these what we would expect from the very apostle who said, “Follow my example, as I follow the example of Christ” (1 Cor 11:1)?
A strong argument against the opposing position (that Paul was describing his spiritual experience as a Christian) is the question that must be raised regarding the real value of a conversion that leads into a spiritual quagmire of such impotence and misery. How could this be the abundant life that Jesus came to bring (John 10:10)? Further, the dramatic contrast between chap. 7, with its continual failure, and chap. 8, which describes victory through the Spirit, argues a preconversion setting. In the former Paul was a wretched man crying out for deliverance (7:24); in the latter he had been “set free from the law of sin and death” (8:2) and was controlled by the indwelling Spirit of God (8:9).
The arguments for the alternate interpretation are equally convincing. Throughout the entire section (7:13–25) Paul used the present tense. He told his readers what was happening in his life. Repeatedly (over twenty times) he made such statements as, “I do not understand what I do” (v. 15). Had he been referring to an earlier period, would he not have said, “I did not understand what I was doing”? As the section includes   p 167  statements that seemingly are incompatible with the experience of a Christian, other statements could never come from a nonbeliever; for example, “In my inner being I delight in God’s law” (v. 22). Earlier in his letter Paul said about those outside of Christ, “There is no one righteous … no one who seeks God” (3:10–12). Surely such rebels do not delight in God’s law in their inner being.
J. C. O’Neill solves the problem by denying that Paul wrote 7:14–25. He argues this from the general use of the word “law” and the dualism between flesh and spirit. His “best explanation” is that it was incorporated into Paul’s original letter by a Hellenistic Jew to “help persuade his non-Jewish neighbours of their need of deliverance if they were to live up to the high ideals they knew they should follow.”92All such highly speculative reconstructions fall beneath their own weight. The long and detailed history of interpretation of this crucial passage shows no tendency to give serious considerations to explanations that rely more on imagination than evidence.
In the final analysis the approach to be preferred must be the one that is more reasonable in terms of the larger context. At this point in his discussion of sanctification, would Paul have been more apt to tell his readers about his struggle with sin before he became a Christian or describe his ongoing difficulty in actually living out his deepest spiritual desires? Since elsewhere he said that in his earlier days he was “immaculate by the standard of legal righteousness” (Phil 3:6, Moffatt), it seems quite improbable that he was at that time deeply involved in a personal struggle against sin.93I believe that in this section Paul was revealing with considerable candor his difficulty in meeting the radical demands of the Christian faith. At the same time, he was using his own experience to describe the inevitability of spiritual defeat whenever a believer fails to appropriate the Spirit of God for victory.94
Romans 7 does not describe the totality of Paul’s spiritual experience. In fact, it is preparatory to what follows. It sets the stage for the triumph of chap. 8. It probably is true that in the lives of most earnest Christians   p 168  the two conditions Paul described exist in a sort of cyclical advance. Recognition of our inability to live up to our deepest spiritual longings (chap. 7) leads us to cast ourselves upon God’s Spirit for power and victory (chap. 8). Failure to continue in reliance upon the power of the Spirit places us once again in a position inviting defeat.95Sanctification is a gradual process that repeatedly takes the believer through this recurring sequence of failure through dependency upon self to triumph through the indwelling Spirit.
In v. 14 Paul reminded his readers of the obvious fact that the law is spiritual. Since it has its origin in God, it must of necessity give expression to the holiness of God’s character. In contrast, Paul acknowledged that he was unspiritual.96It takes very little self-examination for the Christian to agree that our life and conduct fall miserably short of the divine expectation. Even though the believer has a new nature acquired by a spiritual rebirth, the old nature continues to exert its maleficent influence. To the church at Corinth, Paul wrote that he could not address them as spiritual but as worldly, that is, unspiritual (1 Cor 3:1). Using a metaphor from slavery he confessed that he had been sold into the captivity of sin as a slave.97His times of defeat by the power of the lower nature made him feel like a slave to sin. He did not understand his own actions.98On a regular basis he failed to carry out what he meant to   p 169  do;99instead he found himself doing the very things he despised.100Acting in this contrary fashion is what it means to be sold under sin.
In the very act of violating his best intentions, Paul was agreeing that the law is a noble thing (v. 16). If it were not good, he would not have had any sense of guilt when he failed to live up to its standards. His best intentions were one with the law. He concluded that when he acted against his own wishes, it must have been the work of sin that had taken up residence in him (v. 17).101It was not the real Paul.102He was not trying to escape the responsibility for his own actions but to explain how deeply lodged within him was the old corrupt nature. In his failure to live up to his own expectations, sin had taken over and dominated his life. So he confessed that nothing good dwelt in his natural self (v. 18).103The old man was totally corrupt. The desire to do the right thing was there,104but not the power to perform it. Instead of doing the good he desired, he kept on doing the evil he did not want to do (v. 19). He concluded, in v. 20, that if he did that which was contrary to his own deepest desires, the real culprit must have been sin that lived within him. In failing to live out his best intentions, he had fallen into slavery to sin.
The experiences of life led Paul to conclude that whenever he desired   p 170  to do that which was good, sin reared its ugly head. His desire to do what was right was inevitably confronted by sin’s insistence that he do the opposite. So regular was this opposition that Paul could designate it as a “law.”105It was a controlling principle of life. It is true that in his inner self he joyfully concurred with the law of God (v. 22).106As the psalmist put it, he was the man blessed by God whose “delight is in the law of the Lord” (Ps 1:2; cf. 40:8). This confession removes the possibility that Paul was speaking about his life before coming to Christ.
Yet at the same time that other principle (v. 23) was at work throughout his body. It was at war against his desire to obey the law of God.107This basic conflict is nowhere better expressed than in Gal 5:17–18: “For the sinful nature desires what is contrary to the Spirit, and the Spirit what is contrary to the sinful nature. They are in conflict with each other, so that you do not do what you want” (cf. Jas 4:1; 1 Pet 2:11). Paul went on to say that this alien power took him captive to the law of sin at work in his members. Romans 7:23 speaks of three laws.108By the “law of [his] mind” Paul referred to the principle of rational thought. Goodspeed calls it the “law of [his] reason.” It corresponds to that which Paul knew to be the right thing to do. The relationship between “another109law” and “the law of sin” is quite clear; they are undoubtedly to be taken as one and the same. This “law” (read “principle”) is the propensity toward sin that arises from a person’s lower nature. So what I am by nature is in constant conflict with what I aspire to be as a child of God in whom the Spirit of God dwells.110That conflict will never be settled until, seeing   p 171  God, we shall be like him (1 John 3:2).
Caught up in this spiritual warfare,111Paul cried out: What a wretched man am I! Who is able to free me from the “clutches of my own sinful nature?” (Phillips).112The “body of death” was like a corpse that hung on him and from which he was unable to free himself.113It constantly interfered with his desire to obey the higher impulses of his new nature. Who is able to rescue the believer crying out for deliverance? The answer is, Thanks be to God, there is deliverance through Jesus Christ our Lord (v. 25).114Through the death and resurrection of Christ, God has provided the power to live in the freedom of the Spirit (cf. 8:2).115
Verse 25b (a separate paragraph in the NIV) summarizes the entire discussion of vv. 13–24.116Paul said that he himself (who he really was in Christ) had committed himself to serving the law of God (it was the rational thing to do) but that his lower nature was still a slave to the principle of sin. No modern translation captures the meaning better than the NEB: “In a word then, I myself, subject to God’s law as a rational being, am yet, in my sinful nature, a slave to the law of sin.” Although the chapter ends on this realistic observation, the positive declaration in the   p 172  first part of v. 25 has prepared us for the exciting truths about to be set forth in the chapter that follows.
Robert H. Mounce, Romans, vol. 27, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1995), 166–172.


저작자표시 변경금지

'성경묵상 > 로마서' 카테고리의 다른 글

롬 8:1-4 그러므로 이제  (0) 2018.04.26
롬 7:21-25 하나님의 법과 죄의 법  (0) 2018.04.25
롬 7:7-12 율법과 죄의 관계  (0) 2018.04.20
롬 7:1-6 얽매였던 것에 대하여 죽음  (0) 2018.04.19
롬 6:20-23 그러나 이제는  (0) 2018.04.18
728x90
7 What then shall we say? That the law is sin? By no means! Yet if it had not been for the law, oI would not have known sin. For I would not have known what it is to covet if pthe law had not said, “You shall not covet.” 8 But sin, qseizing an opportunity through the commandment, produced in me all kinds of covetousness. rFor apart from the law, sin lies dead. 9 I was once alive apart from the law, but when the commandment came, sin came alive and I died. 10 The very commandment sthat promised life proved to be death to me. 11 For sin, tseizing an opportunity through the commandment, udeceived me and through it killed me. 12 So vthe law is holy, and the commandment is holy and righteous and good. 
The Holy Bible: English Standard Version(Wheaton: Standard Bible Society, 2016), 롬 7:7–12.

하나님의 사람들의 삶 속에 율법의 자리?? 
율법이 죄냐? 그럴 수 없다. 율법이 아니고는 죄를 알지 못한다. 하지만 죄가 율법을 이용하여 내 속에서 탐심을 이루었다. 율법이 없을때는 죄가 죽은 것이지만 계명이 이르자 죄는 살아나고 나는 죽게 되었다. 그래서 생명에 이르게해야할 그 계명이 나를 죽음에 이르게 하는 것이 된 것이다. 하지만 그렇다고 해서 율법 자체가 악하거나 죄가 아니고, 계명도 거룩하고 의롭고 선한 것이다. 

본문 7-25에서 바울은 1인칭 단수형을 사용하고 있다. 이것에 대한 여러 견해가 있는데 첫째는 자기 자신의 자서전적인 표현이라는 것, 둘째는 아담을 대표하는 것, 셋째는 이스라엘, 넷째는 모든 인류를 대표한다는 것이다. 이것에 대한 여러 견해는 아래와 같다 .
- First, there is the question of Paul’s switch to first-person singular forms in this section. There are four different theories regarding the identity of the speaker (see Fitzmyer 1993b; Moo 1996 for more extensive bibliography): (1) autobiographical—Paul is relating his own experience with the law and sin, either as he was growing up or more generally of his life as a whole (Hodge 1950; Dodd 1932; Murray 1968; Bruce 1985; Gundry 1980; Cranfield 1975; Morris 1988; Schreiner 1998); (2) Adam (especially vv. 7–12)—he is speaking of Adam’s experience in the garden (Theodore of Mopsuestia, Michel 1966; R. N. Longenecker 1964:88–95, Garlington 1990c:208–10; Stuhlmacher 1994); (3) Israel—the Irefers to Israel before and after receiving the law, especially her struggle with the law (Chrysostom; M. Black 1973; Käsemann 1980; Wright 1991:197–98; Karlberg 1986; Stott 1994; Seifrid 1992b; Moo 1996; Trudinger 1996); (4) general humanity—this refers not to anyone in particular but to all people who wrestle with God’s demands on them (Dunn 1988a; Fitzmyer 1993b). The second is unlikely because there is no type of Adamic Christology developed here (compare 5:12–21), and there is little evidence that Paul intended the Ito stand for Adam or to depict Adam as under the law. The third is very possible and definitely does fit the centrality of the law in this passage and the Jewish nature of 7:7–25, but it does not quite do justice to the whole passage (see the discussion in the next paragraph). The centrality of the law in chapter 7 does not prove that Paul has Israel in mind because the law is also central in chapter 8 (vv. 2, 3, 4, 7), a passage that no one doubts describes the Christian life. The best is a combination of the first and fourth views. Morris (1988:277) says, “In this chapter he keeps on using the first person singular pronoun though he has not done this since the opening of his letter.… Moreover, words like, ‘What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from the body of this death?’ (v. 24) are impossibly theatrical if they apply to the people, but not to Paul himself.” Yet it is equally unlikely that he is speaking only of himself, for the language broadens out to include all humanity. Therefore it is best to say with others (Cranfield 1975; Morris 1988; Stott 1994; Schreiner 1998) that Paul uses his own experience to describe the basic human situation. Garlington (1990c:199–202) follows Dunn (1988a) in interpreting this section via the doctrine of the two ages, i.e., the contrast between the old and new creations. Paul is being both autobiographical and typical as he describes the plight of all of us.
Grant R. Osborne, Romans, The IVP New Testament Commentary Series (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2004), 173–174.

7-8절) 율법이 죄인가? 그럴 수 없다. 율법으로 말미암지 않고는 우리가 죄를 알지 못한다. 율법에서 '탐내지 말라'라고 말하지 않았다면 우리가 탐심을 알지 못하였을 것이다. 그러나 죄가 계명으로 말미암아 기회를 타서 내안에 모든 종류의 탐심을 만들어 냈다. 율법을 떠나서는 죄는 죽은 것이기 때문이다. 

탐심에 대한 금지는 도리어 금지한 것에 대한 욕구를 더하게 했다. 8절에서 죄가 죽었다라는 의미는 죄가 존재하지 않는다라는 의미가 아니라 죄가 활동하지 않고 잠복해 있다라는 의미이다. 
- The prohibition against coveting exacerbated the desire for what was forbidden. Sin lies deadmeans that sin was latent rather than nonexistent.
Crossway Bibles, The ESV Study Bible(Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2008), 2169.

앞서 5절에서 '율법으로 말미암는 죄의 정욕'을 불러 일으킨다라고 했는데 이에 대해서 7절은 그렇다면 율법이 죄인가?라는 질문을 던진다. 그리고 중요한 것은 이러한 질문을 던지는 것을 바울 개인으로 볼것인지, 아담으로 대표되는 인류 전체로 볼 것인지, 이스라엘로 볼 것이지에 대한 다른 견해가 있다. 
- The question naturally arises from the claim of v. 5 (“sinful passions aroused by the law”) and the earlier series of negative comments on the law (v. 4; 3:20; 4:15; 5:20; 6:14–15). I … I.From this point to the end of the chapter, Paul uses the first-person singular (“I,” “me”). He is undoubtedly reflecting on (1) his own experience, but in keeping with first-century Jewish ways of thinking, his own experience is bound up with (2) his solidarity as a human being with Adam and his sin and with (3) his own people Israel. These three foci mingle in this passage. In this verse Paul is thinking of his own life but also of the experience of Israel as a whole: it was through the law that the Israelites became “conscious of [their] sin” (3:20).
Douglas J. Moo, “The Letters and Revelation,”in NIV Zondervan Study Bible: Built on the Truth of Scripture and Centered on the Gospel Message, ed. D. A. Carson (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2015), 2304.

8절과 11절에서 사용된 기회라는 단어를 '아포르케'로 교두보라는 의미이다. 적국의 전장에서 전투를 수행하기 위해서 진지를 구축하는 것을 의미한다. 
중요한 것은 규칙이 생기면 사람들은 무엇이든지 금지한 것을 행하고 싶어 한다는 것이다. 금지된 과일, 선악과가 더욱 달콤해 보이는 것이다. 인간의 관점에서 법은 후회를 일으키고 반역을 초래하는 제한이라고 실수로 보여집니다. 바울은 창세기에 기록된 아담의 첫번째 죄를 염두에 두었을 것입니다. 율법을 떠나서 죄는 죽었다는 의미에서 그것은 정의되지 않았고 그것은 기술적으로 존재하지 않는 것입니다. 빠르고 직선적인 화살이라고 하더라도 표적이 없으면 표적의 중심을 맞출 수 없습니다. 
- Law defines sin. Apart   p 164  from law sin exists but cannot be designated as “sin.” Without restriction there is nothing to break. Law provides the opportunity for sin’s nefarious activity.80 Sin seizes the opportunity and arouses within a person through the commandment all manner of evil desire.81 The point is often made that only after a rule is put in place do people want to do whatever it forbids. What Paul was saying, however, goes beyond the psychological observation that stolen fruits are the sweetest. From a human perspective law is mistakenly viewed as a restriction that in turn causes resentment and gives rise to rebellion. Paul may have had the Genesis account of Adam’s first sin in mind. Apart from law sin is dead in the sense that undefined, it technically does not exist (cf. 4:15). No matter how swift and straight the arrow, without a target there can be no bull’s-eye.
Robert H. Mounce, Romans, vol. 27, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1995), 163–164.

그럼에도 바울은 율법과 죄 사이의 관계를 매우 조심스럽게 규정해야 합니다. 그래서 그는 이와 연관된 두가지 거짓 요구에 응답함으로 율법은 죄가 아니지만 죄와 여전히 연관이 있음을 보여줍니다. 1) 일반적으로 그는 율법을 떠나사 죄가 무엇인지 아는 것은 불가능하다고 말합니다. 여기서 안다라는 의미는 지적인 앎이 아니라 경험적인 앎을 말합니다. 사람들은 죄가 무엇인지 정확히 깨닫지 못하지만 율법을 통해서 그것에 참여하게 됩니다.  2) 구체적으로 말하자면 바울은 10계명중에 탐심이라는 하나의 죄의 예를 듭니다. 율법이 "탐심하지 말라"라고 규정할 때, 바울은 그의 죄를 의식하게 되었을 뿐마ㄴ 아니라 그것에 더욱 끌리게 되었습니다. 어떤 이들은 이것을 성욕으로 좁히기도 하지만 이는 거의 모든 종류의 죄악된 용망을 포함합니다. 사실상 탐욕은 십계명과 유대교의 토라의 핵심으로 널리 간주되었습니다. 
- Paul responds with his characteristic indeed(“certainly not”; see 3:4, 6, 31; 6:2, 15), showing his abhorrence at the very thought. Still, he must clarify the connection between the law and sin very carefully. So he responds to this false charge in two related ways, showing that while the law is not sin, it is still related to sin. (1) Generally, he says he would never have known what sin wasapart from the law. Here knownis experiential and not just intellectual. People do not just realize what sin is but actually come to participate in it through the law (as stated in 7:5). (2) Specifically, Paul then turns to a single example of sin from the tenth commandment, coveting. When the law specified, “Thou shalt not covet” (Ex 20:17; Deut 5:21), Paul not only became conscious of his sin but was more attracted to it. While some narrow this to sexual lust, it almost certainly encompasses all types of sinful desires. In fact, covetousness was widely regarded as the core of the Ten Commandments and of the Torah in Judaism (cf. 4 Maccabees 2:6; Jas 1:15; so Cranfield 1975; Fitzmyer 1993b).
Grant R. Osborne, Romans, The IVP New Testament Commentary Series (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2004), 175.


9절) 율법을 깨닫지 못했을 때에는 내가 살았는데 계명이 이르자 죄는 살아나고 나는 죽었다. 
이것이 바울의 주관적인 경험인지 아니면 아담과 관련된 것인지는 분명하지는 않다. 아담과 관계된 것이라면 그가 하나님 앞에서 죄를 짓기 전의 하나님과의 관계임을 의미한다. 탐심에 대한 금지는 도리어 죄에 대한 욕구를 증폭시켰고 죄는 사망에 이르게 했다. 
- If the verse relates to Paul, he is speaking of his subjective experience. If it relates to Adam, it refers to his relationship with God before he sinned. The prohibition against coveting stimulated the desire to sin, and sin in turn led to death.
Crossway Bibles, The ESV Study Bible(Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2008), 2169.
- Paul may be reflecting on (1) his own state of relative “innocence” in childhood or before he came truly to understand what the law was requiring of him; (2) his solidarity with Adam, who was, indeed, “alive” before he disobeyed God’s commandment about the tree of the knowledge of good and evil (Gen 2:17; 3:1–7); or (3) his solidarity with the Israelites, who experienced a kind of “death” (v. 10) when God’s law came and branded them clearly as sinners (3:20; 4:15; 5:13–14).
Douglas J. Moo, “The Letters and Revelation,”in NIV Zondervan Study Bible: Built on the Truth of Scripture and Centered on the Gospel Message, ed. D. A. Carson (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2015), 2304.

율법을 깨닫지 못했을 때가 언제인가? 율법에서는 13세 이전에는 이러한 책임이 없다라고 한다. 또는 율법을 받기 전의 인간의 상태를 의미하기도 한다. 바울의 경우에 다메섹 도상에서 주님을 만나고 회심하기 이전을 의미할 수도 있다 .
- There was a time, said Paul, when he was “alive apart from law” (v. 9). Some see here a reference to the time prior to his bar mitzvahwhen, at the age of thirteen, he assumed moral responsibility for his conduct before the law. Others take it in a general sense of all people before the giving of the law.82 Paul probably referred to his preconversion days before he had grasped the full scope and power of the law’s demands.83 He was, so to speak, “alive.”84 But now he understood from experience the power of sin to use the law for its own advantage. The commandment “came home to [Paul]” (Moffatt), and sin “sprang into life” (TCNT).85 With the coming of law, sin revived. Paul realized that   p 165  apart from Christ he was condemned to death.86 He discovered that although the commandment was designed to bring life (Lev 18:5; Luke 10:25–28), it turned out to be a sentence to death (Rom 7:10). How did this happen? Sin deceived him (v. 11). The deceptive nature of sin runs throughout Scripture from the account of the fall (Gen 3:13) to the final days of human history (2 Thess 2:9–10).87 Elsewhere Paul counseled us to be aware of the schemes of Satan (2 Cor 2:11). Although defeated by Jesus’ death on the cross, Satan continues his wicked and deceptive plans, trying to subvert the best interests of God’s people. Paul pointed out that Satan’s ploy has been to convert an instrument intended for life (the law) into an instrument of death.
Robert H. Mounce, Romans, vol. 27, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1995), 164–165.

12절) 율법은 거룩하고 계명도 거룩하고 의롭고 선하다. 
율법은 선하지만 여전히 악을 일으킨다. 10-11절에서 그 죽음이 그 계명을 통해서 왔다. 계명은 그 자체로 선함에도 불구하고 악에 사용되어 죽음을 이으킨다. 바울은 죽음을 일으키는 두가지를 말한다. 죄가 바고 그 실제적인 이유이고 율법은 그 수단적 이유이다. "세상을 향한 하나님의 신적인 계획에서 율법이 주장하는 기능은  마침내 하나님에 대항하는 죄의 악마적 성품의 가면이 벗겨질 때 성취되었습니다. 아담 이후의 세상과 각 개인의 상태는 하나님께 정면으로 대적하는 악마적 성경을 가지고 있습니다 "
- The twofold thrust in verses 7–12* (the law is good but still stimulates evil) produces a key question: Did that which is good, then, become death to me?It would be easy to conclude that the law, though good (v. 12), meant death. This in a sense restates the question of verse 7, Is the law sin?by asking further, Is the law death? In fact, verses 10–11 come close to saying just that, that death came through the commandment.With his characteristic Certainly not!(see v. 7) Paul forcefully dispels this erroneous thought. The villain is not the law but sin, which used the law as its agent in producing death. Once again (as in v. 11) the law is the instrument (through what was good)used by sin to produce death. In a sense Paul is laying down a twofold model of that which produces death—sin is the actual basis, and the law is the instrumental basis. So the blame for producing death falls squarely on sin. There are two divine purposes regarding sin here. First, God wants to “reveal” (the meaning of recognize) to everyone the true nature of sin. As neb says, its “true character” is “exposed.” Second, God uses the commandmentto prove to all that sin is utterly sinful,a strong idiom that means it is shown to be “exceedingly sinful” or “completely evil.” Through the law, the depth of its perversity is finally realized. Sin is recognizednot only to be sin but to be extremely so. In other words, it is absolutely opposed to God and opposed by God. This shows the law to be good,in that it exposes the deep underside of sin. Grundmann says it well (1964: 311, from Morris 1988): “The function which we assert the law to have in the divine plan for the world is finally achieved when sin is unmasked in its demonic character as utter enmity against God. The state of the world and each individual since Adam has a demonic character as directed against God.”
Grant R. Osborne, Romans, The IVP New Testament Commentary Series (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2004), 179–180.




저작자표시 변경금지

'성경묵상 > 로마서' 카테고리의 다른 글

롬 7:21-25 하나님의 법과 죄의 법  (0) 2018.04.25
롬 7:13-20 하나님의 사람에게 율법의 위치  (0) 2018.04.23
롬 7:1-6 얽매였던 것에 대하여 죽음  (0) 2018.04.19
롬 6:20-23 그러나 이제는  (0) 2018.04.18
롬 6:15-19 의의 종인가 죄의 종인가  (0) 2018.04.16
728x90
7 Or do you not know, brothers1—for I am speaking to those who know the law—that the law is binding on a person only as long as he lives? 2 For ea married woman is bound by law to her husband while he lives, but if her husband dies she is released from the law of marriage.23 Accordingly, fshe will be called an adulteress if she lives with another man while her husband is alive. But if her husband dies, she is free from that law, and if she marries another man she is not an adulteress. 
4 Likewise, my brothers, gyou also have died hto the law ithrough the body of Christ, so that you may belong to another, to him who has been raised from the dead, jin order that we may bear fruit for God. 5 For while we were living in the flesh, our sinful passions, aroused by the law, were at work kin our members lto bear fruit for death. 6 But now we are released from the law, having died to that which held us captive, so that we serve in the mnew way of nthe Spirit and not in the old way of the written code.3
The Holy Bible: English Standard Version(Wheaton: Standard Bible Society, 2016), 롬 7:1–6.

모세 율법의 부정적인 영향이 로마서 안에서 자주 언급된다. 바울은 율법을 소유한 것이 하나님 앞에서 이스라엘의 상황을 향상시키지 못했음을 주장한다. 중요한 것은 율법의 소유가 아니라 순종이다. 그런데 이스라엘은 율법을 이루는데 실패했다. 결과적으로 율법은 사람을 의롭다 할 수 없다. 사실상 이스라엘에 대한 율법의 모든 영향은 부정적이다. 율법은 죄를 인식하게 하고 진노를 불러 일으키고 범죄를 증가시킨다. 만약 그리스도인들이 죄로부터 자유케 되기 위해서는 그들은 반드시 율법의 구속력있는 권위하에서 벗어나야 한다. 
- The negative effect of the Mosaic law has been a recurring motif in Romans. Paul has argued that possession of the law did not improve Israel’s situation before the Lord. For it is not possession of the law but obedience that counts, and Israel failed to fulfill the law (2:12–13, 17–24). As a result, the law is unable to justify a person (3:20, 28). In fact, the overall impact of the law on Israel has been negative: It stirs up consciousness of sin (3:20), brings wrath (4:15), and increases trespass (5:20). If Christians are to be free from sin, they must therefore also be taken out from under the law’s binding authority (6:14–15).
Douglas J. Moo, Romans, The NIV Application Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 2000), 217.

- Much of what Paul says in this paragraph parallels chapter 6: As believers “die to sin” (6:2) and are set free from it (6:6), so they “die to the law” (7:4) and are set free from it (7:6). As freedom from sin leads to serving God and producing fruit pleasing to him (6:18–22), so freedom from the law leads to serving “in the new way of the Spirit” (7:6) and producing “fruit to God” (7:4). These parallels may suggest that 6:15–7:6 is a single, two-staged, exposition of the new life that freedom from sin and the law produces.1 But it is better to view chapters 6 and 7 as somewhat parallel arguments about the believer’s relationship to two of the key powers of the old regime: sin and the Mosaic law.
Douglas J. Moo, Romans, The NIV Application Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 2000), 218.

바울은 율법이 사람이 살아 있을 동안만 주관한다는 사실을 결혼관계에 비유하고 있다. 

1-3절) 그법, 바로 죄를 죄되게 하는 모세 율법이 사람이 살 동안만 주관한다. 예를 들어 남편 있는 여인이 남편이 살아 있을때는 당연히 그 남편에게 속하여 매인바 되어 있으나 남편이 죽으면 남편의 법에서 벗어나게 된다. 그러므로 남편이 살아 있을 때에 다른 남자에게 가면 음행을 행한 것이나 남편이 죽으면 그 법에서 자유롭게 되어 다른 남자에게 갈지라도 음녀, 간음한 것이 아니다. (고전 7:39, 눅 16:18 )
본문 1절에서 법은 일반적인 로마 법과 모세 율법을 모두 의미한다. 또한 법 아는 자들은 일차적으로 유대인들이고 나아가 하나님을 경외하는 이방인들도 포함된다. 
- Probably, as throughout ch. 7, the law of Moses. Since God gave this law specifically to Jews, “those who know the law” may refer to Jewish Christians. But many, if not most, of the Gentile Christians in Rome were probably former “God-fearers”: Gentiles who had not converted to Judaism but who were interested in Judaism, attending the synagogue and coming to know the law of Moses in that setting.
Douglas J. Moo, “The Letters and Revelation,”in NIV Zondervan Study Bible: Built on the Truth of Scripture and Centered on the Gospel Message, ed. D. A. Carson (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2015), 2303.

본문 1절의 기본 원칙은 바로 법적인 요구는 사람의 생전에만 적용된다는 것이다. 여기서의 법은 모세의 율법이 아니라 일반적 법 전반을 의미한다고 볼 수 있다. 법은 죽은 자가 아니라 살아있는 사람의 행동을 규제한다. 여기서 바울은 그의 독자들이 그 법, 율법을 알고 있는 자들인 것을 상기시틴다. 
- Verse 1 states a basic principle with which all would agree, that is, legal claims are binding upon a person only during that person’s lifetime. In this context Paul spoke of “law” in terms of its fundamental character rather than as a reference to the Mosaic legislation.62 People were under the jurisdiction of law only so long as they lived. Law regulated the activities of the living, not the dead. Paul, in an aside, reminded his readers that he was writing to those who knew the law. They were acquainted with the basic precepts of legal jurisdiction. They understood what law was all about.
Robert H. Mounce, Romans, vol. 27, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1995), 160.

2-3절은 4절을 묘사하기 위한 비유이다. 남편이 죽은 여인은 결혼의 법으로부터 자유케 되는데 이는 율법에 대해서 죽은 그리스도인과 같다. 그녀의 남편의 죽음으로 인해서 그녀는 다른 남자와 결혼할 수 있게 된다. 그래서 율법에 대한 그리스도인의 죽음은 그나 그녀를 다른 이 예수 그리스도께 속하게 한다. 하지만 이 알레고리가 작동하기 위해서는 몇번의 저글링, 변화가 이루어져야 한다. 예시에서는 그 남편의 죽음이 자유를 가져오지만 적용에서는 율법이 아니라 신자의 죽음이 자유를 가져온다. 알레고리가 작동하기 위해서 다양한 시도가 제시되었지만 이는 2-3절을 우화가 아닌 4절에 대한 적용을 가지고 1절의 요점을 묘사하는 것으로 보는 것이 좋다. 바울이 보여주기 원한 것은 바로 죽임이 율법으로부터의 자유를 가져온다는 것입니다. 동시에 그는 이러한 자유가 새로운 관계로 이끌 수 있음을 암시합니다. 
- Verses 2–3 are sometimes taken as an allegorical illustration of verse 4. The woman whose husband dies, freeing her from the “law of marriage,” is like the Christian who “dies to the law.” As the death of her husband allows her to marry another man, so the Christian’s death to the law allows him or her to “belong to another,” Jesus Christ. But to make the allegory work, some juggling with the parallels has to be done. In the illustration it is the death of the husband that brings freedom, but in the application the believer, not the law (= the first husband), dies. Various more or less ingenious attempts to make the allegory work have been proposed, but it is simpler to think of verses 2–3 not as an allegory but as an illustration of the point of verse 1 with some application to verse 4. Paul simply wants to show that a death can indeed bring freedom from the law; at the same time, he hints that such freedom can also lead to a new relationship.
Douglas J. Moo, Romans, The NIV Application Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 2000), 218–219.

4-6절) 이제 남편이 죽은 사건을 신자가 그리스도의 죽음을 통해서 율법에 대해서 죽임을 당한 것으로 묘사한다. 

신자들이 그리스도의 몸으로 말미암아 율법에 대해서 죽임을 당하였다. 이는 부활하신 이에게 가서 우리가 하나님을 위해 열매를 맺게 하기 위해서 이다. 우리가 육신에 있을 때는 우리가 율법으로 말미암는 죄의 정욕으로 말미암아 사망을 위해 열매를 맺었다. 그러나 이제는 우리가 우리를 얽매던 것에 대해 죽음으로 율법으로부터 자유케 되었기 때문에 우리가 성령의 새로운 방식으로 섬기고 율법 조문의 옛 방식으로 섬기지 않는다. 
5절의 육신은 헬라어로 '사르크'로 하나님을 떠난 자연적인 인간의 실존, 존재를 의미하는 단어로 로마서에서 여러번 사용된다. 
- realm of the flesh.Greek sarx, a key motif in this part of Romans (see also vv. 18, 25 [see NIV text notes]; 8:3 [three times], 4, 5 [twice], 6, 7, 8, 9, 12 [twice], 13). Paul uses the word sarxto refer to “natural” human existence apart from God (see note on 1:3). He pictures unbelievers as living in a realm dominated by this power.
Douglas J. Moo, “The Letters and Revelation,”in NIV Zondervan Study Bible: Built on the Truth of Scripture and Centered on the Gospel Message, ed. D. A. Carson (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2015), 2304.

6절에 '그러나 이제는(But now)',  이제 바울은 육체와 죄, 사망이 지배하는 옛 실제와 신자들이 이제 살고 있는 새로운 실제를 대조한다. 율법으로부터 성령으로의 이동은 율법주의로부터 진정한 영성으로의 이동이다. 
본문 4절이 말하는대로라면 우리는 이전에 율법과 결혼한 관계였다. 그래서 율법의 요구아래 있었고 그것에 지배를 받을 수 밖에 없었다. 하지만 마음대로 다른 이에게 가서 결혼할 수 없었는데 그리스도 안에서 그분을 통해서 우리가, 신자들이 율법에 대해서 죽었다. 여기서 이 결혼의 비유는 정확하지 않다. 이전 단락에서 죽은 사람은 남편이다. 4절에서 죽은 이는 그녀 자신의 죽음을 통해서 첫번째 배우자, 율법과 헤어진 아내, 신자이다. 여기서 중요한 것은 바로 죽음에 의해서 결혼 관계가 깨어졌다는 것이다. 믿음으로 사람이 십자가에 달리신 그리스도와 하나되었을때 신자의 죽은 것이 된다. 그리스도의 죄에 대한 죄를 위한 죽음은 우리의 죄에 대한 죽음이 된다. 이 죽음의 목적이 바로 우리로 하여금 다른 남편, 바로 죽음에서 부활하신 바로 그분에게 속하도록 하기 위함이다. 우리가 그분안에서 죽었고 바로 그분 안에서 우리는 새로운 삶을 발견하게 됩니다. 우리의 주님이 바로 우리의 새로운 남편이 되십니다. 그리고 이것은 우리가 하나님께 열매를 맺기위해서 입니다. 만약 바울이 결혼의 비유를 계속하도록 의도했다면 여기서 '열매를 맺음'은 바로 자손을 언급하는 것일 것입니다. 
- Law is the husband to which the believer was at one time married. But a death has occurred. The believer has died to the law.66 The analogy, however, is not exact.67 In the previous paragraph it was the husband who had died. Here it was the “wife” (the believer) who was separated from her first spouse (the law) by her own death. The important point is that the marriage relationship had been broken by the death of one of its participants. The death of the believer took place when by faith that person became identified with the crucified Christ (cf. 6:3–7).68 Christ’s death to and for sin becomes our death to sin (cf. Gal 2:19–20). The purpose of this death is that we might belong to another husband—to the one who was raised from the dead. The one in whom we died becomes the very one in whom we find our new life. Our Savior becomes our new “husband.” And this, in turn, is in order that we may   p 162  bear fruit to God.69 If Paul intended us to carry on the analogy of marriage, “bear[ing] fruit” would refer to offspring. Probably a more general idea was in mind (Phillips has “be productive for”).70
Robert H. Mounce, Romans, vol. 27, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1995), 161–162.

4절이 본 단락의 핵심이다. 어떤 것에 대한 죽음은 말하자면 속박으로부터 자유케 됨을 의미한다. 신자들은 죄의 속박으로부터 자유롭게 되었을 뿐만 아니라 그들은 또한 모세의 율법의 속박으로부터 놓임을 받았다. 이러한 놓임은 그리스도의 몸을 통해서, 말하자면 예수님의 십자가위에서의 죽음을 통해서 성취되었다. 

6절에 사용된 율법 조문(wrritten code)는 '그람마'라는 단어이다. 바울은 조문과 성령을 대조해서 사용했다. 그람마는 여기서 성령과 대조되어 모세율법을 의미한다. 좀더 나아가면 율법의 잘못된 사용을 의미한다고 말하기도 한다. 앞서 '노모스'(1절)을 사용했는데 여기서는 '그람마'라는 단어를 사용함으로 바울은 모세 율법의 밖을 향하는 속성을 좀더 분명하게 보여준다. 돌판에 새겨진 하나님의 율법은 사람의 마음을 변화시킬 수 없다. 오직 하나님의 성령만이 그 일을 하실 수 있다. 바울은 이러한 성령의 사역을 이후 8장에서 발전시킨다. 
- “Written code” translates gramma(lit., letter). Paul has used the “letter”/“Spirit” contrast earlier in Romans (2:29), where, as we argued, grammarefers to the Mosaic law in contrast to the Holy Spirit. A few commentators want to give grammaa more nuanced meaning here, referring to the misuse of the law.6 But the context shows that it must refer to the same thing that nomosrefers to. Paul shifts to grammabecause it more clearly connotes the “outward” nature of the Mosaic law. Written on stone tablets, the law of God cannot change the human heart; only God’s Spirit can do that. Paul will develop this ministry of the Spirit in chapter 8.
Douglas J. Moo, Romans, The NIV Application Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 2000), 220.


저작자표시 변경금지

'성경묵상 > 로마서' 카테고리의 다른 글

롬 7:13-20 하나님의 사람에게 율법의 위치  (0) 2018.04.23
롬 7:7-12 율법과 죄의 관계  (0) 2018.04.20
롬 6:20-23 그러나 이제는  (0) 2018.04.18
롬 6:15-19 의의 종인가 죄의 종인가  (0) 2018.04.16
롬 6:12-14 너의 몸을 의의 무기로 하나님께 드리라  (0) 2018.04.12
728x90
20 vFor when you were slaves of sin, you were free in regard to righteousness. 21 wBut what fruit were you getting at that time from the things xof which you are now ashamed? yFor the end of those things is death. 22 But now that you zhave been set free from sin and ahave become slaves of God, bthe fruit you get leads to sanctification and cits end, eternal life. 23 dFor the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. 
The Holy Bible: English Standard Version(Wheaton: Standard Bible Society, 2016), 롬 6:20–23.

자유는 우리가 섬길 것인가 아닌가의 문제가 아니라 어떤 주인을 섬길 것을 선택하느냐의 문제이다. 의는 거룩함으로 이끌고 죄를 주인으로 섬기는 것은 악으로 이끈다. 의는 죄에 의에 영향을 받은 도덕적 방향을 바꾸어 성화로 이끕니다. 이 두 경우 모두 과정이 진행중입니다. 죄를 즐기는 그리스도인들은 그들 자신이 윤리적 줄다리기로 실패할게 될 것입니다. 이 갈등의 대답은 실제적입니다. 너의 몸을 썩을 것에 드리지 말고 선하고 순결한 행동들에 드리십시오. 
- Freedom is not a question of whether or not we would like to serve but the choice of which master we will serve. Righteousness leads to holiness; sin as a master promotes wickedness. Righteousness reverses the moral direction taken by sin and leads to sanctification. In both cases a process is under way. Christians who entertain sin find themselves in an ethical tug-of-war they are bound to lose. The answer to this conflict is practical; surrender your body to those activities that are good and pure rather than to those that defile.
When sin was our master, we were free from the control of righteousness (v. 20). And what benefit did we reap from that lifestyle (v. 21)?56 (We are now ashamed of how we lived.) We received no benefit at all, unless of course we consider the negative reward of death!57 But now we are set free from sin’s bondage (v. 22).58 We have become slaves of God. And is there benefit in this? Most certainly! The reward for serving God is growth in holiness and, in the end, eternal life.59 In fact, apart from holiness there is no eternal life. The author to Hebrews counseled a holy life because “without holiness no one will see the Lord” (Heb 12:14). Slavery to sin results in death. Slavery to righteousness leads to eternal fellowship with God. Or, in the words of Jesus, the broad road (the path of sin) leads to destruction, but the narrow road (the way of righteousness) leads to life (Matt 7:13–14).
Robert H. Mounce, Romans, vol. 27, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1995), 158.

본문은 19절의 명령에 기반한다. 20절 초반에 '가르'라는 접속사가 사용된다. 이는 그러므로라는 의미이다. 바울은 우리가 그리스도인이 되기 이전의 '때'와 그리스도인이 되고 나서' 이제'를 대조한다. 
20-22절) 우리가 죄의 종이었을 때는 의에 대해서 자유로웠다. 하지만 우리가 지금 부끄러워하는 그 것으로부터 우리가 얻을 수 있는 열매는 무엇입니까? 그 일의 끝은 사망입니다. 하지만 이제 우리는 죄로부터 자유페 되어 하나님의 종이 되었습니다. 그 열매는 거룩함이고 그것의 마침은 영생입니다. 
21절과 22절은 완벽하게 대조를 이룬다. 
불신자가 죄의 노예의 상태에 있을 때 부끄러움의 열매를 맺게 되고 이것으리 결국은 사망이다. 반면에 신자들은 죄로부터 해방되어 하나님의 종이 됨으로 거룩함의 열매를 맺게 되고 이것의 결국은 영생이다. 
- The transfer from the realm of sin and death to the realm of righteousness and life (vv. 20–23) is the ground for the command in verse 19. (Verse 20 begins with a gar[“for”], not translated in the niv.) Paul again contrasts the “when” of our pre-Christian past (vv. 20–21) with the “now” of our Christian present (vv. 22–23). Non-Christians often pride themselves on being free, in contrast to Christians, who in their estimation have lost their human autonomy by bowing the knee to Christ. Paul notes that non-Christians do, indeed, have a freedom—the freedom not to be able to lead righteous lives. Genuine autonomy is not an option. If one is not serving God, then, whether knowingly or not, one is serving sin.
To bring to our minds even more forcibly the negative side of our pre-Christian past, Paul reminds us of the shame we feel for what we used to do. Just how he makes this point in verse 21 is debated. The niv suggests that Paul asks a rhetorical question implying the answer “none.”5 But it is preferable to follow here the punctuation adopted in, for instance, the njb: “What did you gain from living like that? Experiences of which you are now ashamed, for that sort of behaviour ends in death.”6 The verse then matches the structure of verse 22 almost exactly:



StatusResultOutcome
Before we were Christians (v. 21):slaves of sin, free from righteousnessfruit bringing shamedeath
Now that we are Christians (v. 22):free from sin, slaves of Godfruit bringing sanctificationlife
Douglas J. Moo, Romans, The NIV Application Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 2000), 212.

23절) 죄의 삯은 사망이지만 하나님의 거저 주시는 은사는 그리스도 예수 우리 주 안에 있는 영생이다. 
우리가 쌓은 죄로 인해 그 삯으로 지불된 것은 바로 사망이다. 본문을 통해서 우리는 사망과 영생, 얻는 것과 주는 것의 대조를 볼 수 있다. 죄인들은 죄의 충동에 순종함으로 죄의 댓가를 쌓고 있는데 그것은 바로 하나님과의 영원한 분리이자 사망이다. 반대로 의의 충동에 복종하는 것으로 신자가 얻는 것은 아무것도 없다. 그러나 그들은 영원한 생명, 영생을 선물로 받는다. 의의 행동을 통해서  하나님께서 그리스도를 믿는 믿음으 통해서 선물로 주시는 것이다. 의에 대한 순종이 이것을 보장하는 것은 아니다. 
- It all comes down to this: the wages paid by sin are death,60   p 159  but the gift God gives is eternal life (v. 23).61 Not only is the contrast between death and life but also between earning and giving. Sinners earn what they receive. By obeying the impulses of sin, they are storing up the reward for sinning. Their severance check is death—eternal separation from God, who alone is life. By yielding to the impulses of righteousness, believers do not earn anything. They do, however, receive a gift—the gift of eternal life, which comes by faith through Jesus Christ their Lord.
Robert H. Mounce, Romans, vol. 27, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1995), 158–159.

우리는 본문에서 군대와 추수의 이미지를 볼 수 있다. 추수때에 일군이 받는 삯, 혹은 군인이 참전의 대가로 받는 삯을 떠올릴 수 있다. 군인이 나라에 충성함으로 대가를 받는 것이다. 그런데 죄의 대가는 바로 영원한 사망이다. 죄의 마지막 삯은 바로 죽음이다. 그 이전에 받는 삯은 부끄러움이다. 여기서 죽음은 육체적, 영적 죽음으로 모두 포괄한다. 본문에서 우리가 주목해야할 것은 죄는 삯이고 영생은 선물이라는 것이다. 이러한 대조는 의도적인 것이다 사람들은 반드시 그들의 행위로 심판을 받게 될 것이다. 하지만 이것을 기초로 해서 영원한 생명을 얻을 수는 없다. 영원한 생명은 하나님의 은혜로운 선물이기 때문이다. 게다가 이것은 오직 우리 주 예수 그리스도안에서만이 가능하다. 
- Paul concludes the chapter as well as verses 20–22 in verse 23, the justly well-known for the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.With the image of wages, Paul adds another metaphor to those he has already used—baptism, the transfer from one kingdom to another, the old self, rendering a force powerless, joining an army, slavery, and harvest imagery. This is close to the harvest theme, for it denotes payment for services rendered. In fact, we again have a military image (Käsemann 1980; Schreiner 1998) denoting the wagespaid soldiers for serving their country. So sin is a ruler giving to his army what they have earned, namely eternal death (as in v. 21). This is certainly the worst wagesever paid anyone, but it is also true that this is earned by a lifetime of rejecting God and deliberately choosing sin. As Dunn says (1988a:349), death is “sin’s final payoff” (shame, 6:21, could be called an earlier payoff). In fact, deathhere is both the physical death that ends this earthly life and the eternal death that follows, though the latter is primary. While death is typified as wages,eternal life is seen as a gift.The contrast is deliberate (see also 5:21). One is judged by works (Rev 20:12–14) but cannot earn eternal life on the basis of works (see 3:20, 27–28; 4:2–5, 14; Eph 2:8–9; 2 Tim 1:9; Tit 3:5). Eternal life is God’s gracious gift. Moreover, this is all possible only in Christ Jesus our Lord,a formal title stressing his lordship that appears also in 1:4, 7; 5:1, 11, 21; 7:25; 8:39; 13:14; 15:6, 30. Here it says that the gift of eternal life is only possible in Christand his lordship over salvation.
Grant R. Osborne, Romans, The IVP New Testament Commentary Series (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2004), 166.

- Verse 23 not only explains the contrasting “outcomes” of death and life, but also brings the chapter to a fitting conclusion. That sin leads to death has been a background motif since 5:12. Only by remembering the dark side of life outside of Christ can we truly appreciate God’s “gift” to us, the gift of his grace that brings “eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.” As Lloyd-Jones points out, this verse makes three contrasts basic to Paul’s teaching in this part of the letter:
    the master that is served—sin versus God
    the outcome of that service—death versus eternal life
    how that outcome is reached—a “wage” earned versus a “gift” received.
Douglas J. Moo, Romans, The NIV Application Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 2000), 212.


저작자표시 변경금지

'성경묵상 > 로마서' 카테고리의 다른 글

롬 7:7-12 율법과 죄의 관계  (0) 2018.04.20
롬 7:1-6 얽매였던 것에 대하여 죽음  (0) 2018.04.19
롬 6:15-19 의의 종인가 죄의 종인가  (0) 2018.04.16
롬 6:12-14 너의 몸을 의의 무기로 하나님께 드리라  (0) 2018.04.12
롬 6:9-11 주님의 죽음과 부활의 의미  (0) 2018.04.11

+ Recent posts

티스토리툴바