Posted by: proregno | July 6, 2017

Reformasie 500: Kom ons lees Romeine saam met Luther en Calvyn – Romeine 1:1-4

Reformasie 500

Kom ons lees Romeine saam met Luther en Calvyn

Image result for die boek romeine

– Romeine 1:1-4 –

PAULUS, ’n dienskneg van Jesus Christus, ’n geroepe apostel, afgesonder tot die evangelie van God —
2 wat Hy tevore beloof het deur sy profete in die heilige Skrifte,
3 aangaande sy Seun wat gebore is na die vlees uit die geslag van Dawid
4 en na die Gees van heiligheid met krag verklaar is as die Seun van God deur die opstanding uit die dode, Jesus Christus, onse Here (Rom. 1:1-4 A53)

Notas:

1 Sien die inleiding op die leesreeks hier, en die res van die reeks hier.

2 Die doel van die reeks is nie om ‘n eie verklaring te gee van die boek Romeine nie, of om vir u die leeswerk en verklaarwerk te doen nie. Die doel is soos dit sê, om ‘saam’ met Luther en Calvyn Romeine deur te lees, deur hul kommentare/lesings daarop te raadpleeg, om te sien hoe hul met hierdie boek omgegaan het wat wesentlik sentraal gestaan het in die Protestantse Reformasie van die 16/17de eeu.

3. Ek gee wel hier en daar ‘n raamwerk of opmerkings, en gee ‘n paar aanhalings uit Luther en Calvyn se kommentare, maar net hier en daar wat my opval en wat ek met julle wil deel. So die vertrekpunt is altyd: ad fontes! = terug na die bronne, d.w.s. lees die Skrif (Romeine) en Luther en Calvyn se kommentare self.

4. Enige opmerkings oor ons Romeine lees saam Luther en Calvyn (RLC), kan hier onder of by die facebook inskrywing geplaas word.

5. Hier is Luther en Calvyn se kommentare gratis aanlyn:

Luther

Calvyn 

_____________________

LUTHER OOR ROMEINE 1:1-4

1 Oorsigtelik skryf Luther by vers 1: Die wese van die boek Romeine is om enige vertroue in of op onsself en ons ‘eie geregtigheid’ te vernietig, en ‘n geregtigheid buite onsself te soek om ons te red, ‘n ‘vreemde geregtigheid’ wat alleen te vind is in Jesus Christus.

The sum and substance of this letter is: to pull down, to pluck up, and to destroy all wisdom and righteousness of the flesh (i.e.,of whatever importance they may be in the sight of men and even in our own eyes), no matter how heartily and sincerely they may be practiced, and to implant, establish, and make large the reality of sin (however unconscious we may be of its existence).

Hence, Blessed Augustine says in the seventh chapter of his book On the Spirit and the Letter: The apostle Paul “contends with the proud and arrogant and with those who are presumptuous on account of their works’ etc.; “moreover, in the letter to the Romans, this theme is almost his sole concern and he discusses it so persistently and with such complexity as to weary the reader’s attention, yet it is a useful and wholesome wearying. …

For God does not want to save us by our own but by an extraneous
righteousness which does not originate in ourselves but comes to us from beyond ourselves, which does not arise on our earth but comes from heaven. Therefore, we must come to know this righteousness which is utterly external and foreign to us. That is why our own personal righteousness must be uprooted—according to Ps. 45 (where we read): “Forget also thine own people and thy father’s house” (Ps. 45:10)—just as also Abraham was told to leave his own country. …

But now Christ wants all our feeling to be so bare that, on the one hand, we are not afraid to be cast into confusion on account of our faults, nor delight in praise and vain joy on account of our virtue, yet, on the other hand, we do not glory before men in that external righteousness which, coming from Christ, is in us, nor suffer defeat because of those sufferings and evils which befall us for his sake. …

Certainly there are many who, like the Jews and the heretics, for God’s sake disregard and willingly give up all goods at their left hand, namely, the temporal ones; but there are few who for the sake of obtaining Christ’s righteousness regard as nothing the goods at their right hand, namely, spiritual goods and righteous works. Certainly the Jews and the heretics are unable to do this. And yet, without this, no one can be saved. For we all hope and wish our own achievements to be accepted by God and rewarded by him. But it remains forever true: “It is not of him that wills, nor of him that runs, but of God that has mercy” (Rom. 9:16).

2 “Paulus, ‘n dienskneg van Jesus Christus” (v.1)

‘n Dienskneg van die Here moet nie sy gesag in hoogmoed misbruik nie maar tot diens van sy naaste aanwend, hy moet waak teen “twee monsters” = te sag wees of te hard wees.

If we are to specify these two faults, we say that they are: softness and austerity. Of the first we read in Zech. 11:17: “Woe to the worthless shepherd that leaves the flock!” And of the second, Ezekiel says (Ezek. 34:4): “With force and with rigor have you ruled over them.” These are the two main faults from which all the faults of clergymen arise. And no wonder! For softness is rooted in concupiscence, and austerity in irascibility. These are the source of all evil, as we well know. Therefore, it is very perilous to assume an office unless these two beasts have been slain, for they will do the more harm the more power to do harm is available. …

Hence, the apostle says: “a servant of Jesus Christ” In this word, there is majesty as well as humility: there is humility in it in so far as he does not consider himself lord and creator according to the manner of proud tyrants who use their power in such a way that they appear to think of nothing else but their own power as if they had produced it and as if they had not received it from someone else. Therefore, they do not find joy in the fruit of power but merely enjoy power itself.

3 “n geroepe apostel” (vers 1) Hier skryf Luther oor sake wat mens sal help om te besin oor mens se roeping as leraar. Hy vermeld ook 3 soorte verdraaiings van die apostelamp wat vermy moet word.

By this term he more definitely specifies the nature of his service and his ministry. For many are servants and ministers of Jesus Christ but not all are apostles. But all apostles are also servants, i.e., ministers, i.e., such as perform the work of the Lord toward and in others as his representatives.

With the first word (“called”), he strikes down three kinds of men who are not called to offices of honor.

First, the pseudo apostles, who at that time could be found everywhere and whom the devil sowed like tares among the wheat, sending them from the north like the boiling caldron of Jeremiah.

Secondly, those who assume an office because of ambition. They may not be false apostles or false servants, inasmuch as they teach what is right and true and lead others in a catholic way, yet because they are not called to this office, they are indicted by this word “called.” They may not be “thieves and robbers” like the false apostles, but still they are mercenaries who seek their own advantage and not the cause of Jesus Christ; they show concern for their sheep only in so far as they expect to reap a profit of honor, gold, or pleasure. Today a significant number of these is to be found in the church. To be sure, the Scripture does not indict and condemn them in the same way as it does the false prophets and the false apostles (i.e., the heretics and schismatics and the unbelievers) of whom it is written that they run although they are not sent and speak without being authorized to do so, and seek after lying (Ps. 4:2), etc. Yet God finds them wanting, because it is not from free love but from grasping cupidity that they assume and seek honor for themselves.

Thirdly, similar to these are those who force themselves upon their charges or let themselves be forced upon them. These are worse than those of the second group but not so bad as those who belong to the first one. But because the holy offices are so sublime, no danger in this world and the next is more to be feared; indeed, there is no greater danger than to assume such an office without a call of God. But, alas, many are today completely insensitive to all this and do not give it the slightest thought. How will they be spared if not even those are secure whom God has called! Judas, the apostle, came to ruin; Saul fell; and David, the chosen one, fell—and yet they were sublimely called and anointed! Woe, then, to these wretched ones here.

4 “afgesonder tot die evangelie van God” (vers 1) Predikante moet voltyds in die bediening besig wees, en nie deur allerlei ‘sekulêre ondernemings’ besig gehou word nie.

Therefore, to say “separated unto the gospel of God” is the same as to say: Relieved from all other tasks, I am dedicated, introduced, and consecrated to this single office to teach the gospel, as a priest is set apart and separated in order to offer the sacrifice.

This meaning is more acceptable than the one I mentioned first. In short, with this word he rebukes those who, though they are set apart to the ministry of God and are therefore in the business of the Lord, are yet involved in other and secular undertakings as if they were of the world. Indeed, the apostle directs our attention to the fact that he is not set apart for any kind of work but solely for the gospel; he says: My chief work is to spread the gospel, as in I Cor. 1:17: “Christ sent me not to baptize but to preach the gospel”; the other apostles may be set apart for other kinds of work, but I am set apart for the gospel.

5 “wat Hy tevore beloof het” (vers 2) Die Evangelie wat Paulus verkondig is niks nuuts nie, dit kom uit die OT geskrifte, en nog verder terug is dit deel van die verordineerde plan van God.

This he says in order that one should not think that the strongest and most telling proof of the truth of the gospel, namely, that its coming is testified to by the Law and the Prophets, is the fruit of our merits and the invention of human wisdom.

For the gospel proclaims what according to prophecy it should proclaim. This
proves that before it became what it is, it was foreordained in God’s counsel to be what it has become. Thus the glory of this teaching belongs to God alone and not to us and our merits and achievements.

Before we came into being, it was ordained—as it says itself:

“I was set up from everlasting and of old” (i.e., in the form of the law), “before the earth was” (i.e., the church) which was made through me [scil., wisdom] (Prov. 8:23).

It is the gospel, the wisdom and power of God, which has established the
church and does all that wisdom says of itself in its own praise. So it is written in Amos 3:7: “Surely the Lord God will do nothing except he reveal his secret unto his servants the prophets.”

And so also in Isa. 48:5 f.: “I have declared it to you from of old” (i.e., in the old law): “before it came to pass I showed it to you, lest you should say, Mine idol” (i.e., the imagination of my wisdom) “has done them and my molten image has commanded them.

You have heard it” (at the time of the Law and the Prophets); “behold all this” (namely, now in the time of grace), etc.

He says this in order to indicate the difference of the gospel from the promise given before the times, about which Titus (Titus 1:2) says: “which God, who cannot lie, promised before times eternal.”

For this promise is the foreordination from eternity of all things to come. But the promise through the prophets happens in time and in human words. It is a wonderful sign of God’s condescension that, over and above his eternal promise, he gives this pledge in human words, and not only in oral but also in written ones. All this is done in order that, as the promise is fulfilled, they will serve as the evidence that he had planned it so, so that one may recognize that Christianity did not originate by accident or in the fate of the stars (as many empty-headed people presume), but that it became what it was to be by the certain counsel and premeditated ordination of God.

And, for another reason, he rightly adds: “in the Holy Scriptures.” For if he had merely said: “through his prophets,” the calumny would be possible that he was adducing the dead who, together with their words, no longer exist. But now he refers and points to their writings which are available to this day.

6 “aangaande sy Seun … Jesus Christus onse Here” (vers 3,4) In hierdie twee verse word beide die mensheid en Godheid van Jesus Christus bely en moet ons daaraan vashou, soos die Heilige Skrif dit openbaar.

Note how very appropriately the apostle chooses his words: he does not say: “who was the Son of God in power’ in the same way in which he says: “who was made according to the flesh.” For from the very moment of Christ’s conception it was correct to say, in view of the union of the two natures: This Son is the son of David and this man is the Son of God.

The first is true because his divinity is emptied and hidden in the flesh. The second is true because his humanity is fulfilled and translated into divinity. And though he was not born as the Son of God but as a human son, he was nevertheless always the Son and is even now the Son of God. But men did not recognize his designation and appointment as the Son of God.

Though he was endowed with power over all and was indeed the Son of God, he did not yet exercise it and was not acknowledged as the Son of God. This happened only through the spirit of sanctification. For the Spirit was not yet given because Jesus was not yet glorified. “He shall glorify me” (John 16:14), he said. Through the apostles, the Holy Spirit designated and declared him to be the Son of God with power over all, to whom everything should be subject because God the Father had made him Lord and Christ. …

In the gospel, Christ is by the Holy Spirit declared and manifested to be the Son of God in power over all things. Before the resurrection this was not revealed and manifested but was, rather, hidden in the flesh of Christ.

7 Die evangelie is ‘n eenheid, hetsy dit wat beskryf word in een van die vier Evangelies, of in Paulus se briewe

“The gospel” is not only what Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John have written. This is made plain enough in this passage. For it states specifically that the gospel is the word of the Son of God, who became flesh, suffered, and was glorified.

Therefore, it makes no difference whether Matthew or Thomas wrote it down and taught it and in what words and in what language: the gospel of God is the same. It does not matter how many books and authors teach it, for what they all teach is one and the same thing. When, therefore, the apostle says of a certain brother: “whose praise is in the gospel through all the churches,” this is not necessarily to be understood to refer to the Gospel of Luke but, rather, to the fact that it was his praise and distinction that he could teach the gospel, i.e., the word of God. So also Apollos and others had similar praise because they knew how to preach Christ well and richly.

Also the passage which says: “according to my gospel” (Rom.2:16) does not need to be interpreted with reference to the Gospel of Luke, as if Luke had written down what Paul preached or as if what the former had written down the latter had preached. But he says “my” gospel because he himself preached the word of God “concerning his Son,” as the passage we are dealing with puts it.

CALVYN OOR ROMEINE 1:1-4

(nota: waar Luther reeds sake genoem het wat Calvyn ook aanspreek, gaan ek dit nie noodwendig herhaal nie, maar wel byvoeg ‘n ander insig is of bydrae tot die saak)

1 Die gesag van ‘n dienskneg en apostel

A servant of Jesus Christ, etc. — He signalizes himself with these distinctions for the purpose of securing more authority to his doctrine; and this he seeks to secure by two things — first, by asserting his call to the Apostleship; [14] and secondly, by showing that his call was not unconnected with the Church of Rome: for it was of great importance that he should be deemed an Apostle through God’s call, and that he should be known as one destined for the Roman Church. He therefore says, that he was a servant of Christ, and called to the office of an Apostle, thereby intimating that he had not presumptuously intruded into that office. He then adds, that he was chosen, (selectum — selected, [15] ) by which he more fully confirms the fact, that he was not one of the people, but a particular Apostle of the Lord. 

2 Daar is nie meer vandag Apostels nie, dus geen opeenvolging nie

We must here observe, that all are not fitted for the ministry of the word; for a special call is necessary: and even those who seem particularly fitted ought to take heed lest they thrust themselves in without a call. But as to the character of the Apostolic and of the Episcopal call, we shall consider it in another place. We must further observe, that the office of an Apostle is the preaching of the gospel. It hence appears what just objects of ridicule are those dumb dogs, who render themselves conspicuous only by their mitre and their crook, and boast themselves to be the successors of the Apostles!

The word, servant, imports nothing else but a minister, for it refers to what is official. I mention this to remove the mistake of those who too much refine on this expression and think that there is here to be understood a contrast between the service of Moses and that of Christ.

3 Vers 3 en 4 verduidelik die ganse Evangelie in ‘n neutedop: Jesus Christus

3. Concerning his own Son, etc. — This is a remarkable passage, by which we are taught that the whole gospel is included in Christ, so that if any removes one step from Christ, he withdraws himself from the gospel. For since he is the living and express image of the Father, it is no wonder, that he alone is set before us as one to whom our whole faith is to be directed and in whom it is to center.

It is then a definition of the gospel, by which Paul expresses what is summarily comprehended in it. I have rendered the words which follow, Jesus Christ our Lord, in the same case; which seems to me to be most agreeable with the context. We hence learn, that he who has made a due proficiency in the knowledge of Christ, has acquired every thing which can be learned from the gospel; and, on the other hand, that they who seek to be wise without Christ, are not only foolish, but even completely insane.

4 Jesus Christus is een Persoon met twee nature, dit moet gehandhaaf word teen ketters soos Servet

Who was made, etc. — Two things must be found in Christ, in order that we may obtain salvation in him, even divinity and humanity. His divinity possesses power, righteousness, life, which by his humanity are conveyed to us. Hence the Apostle has expressly mentioned both in the Summary he gives of the gospel, that Christ was manifested in the flesh — and that in it he declared himself to be the Son of God. So John says; after having declared that the Word was made flesh, he adds, that in that flesh there was a glory as of the only-begotten Son of God. (John 1:14.) That he specially notices the descent and lineage of Christ from his ancestor David, is not superfluous; for by this he calls back our attention to the promise, that we may not doubt but that he is the very person who had been formerly promised. So well known was the promise made to David, that it appears to have been a common thing among the Jews to call the Messiah the Son of David. This then — that Christ did spring from David — was said for the purpose of confirming our faith.

He adds, according to the flesh; and he adds this, that we may understand that he had something more excellent than flesh, which he brought from heaven, and did not take from David, even that which he afterwards mentions, the glory of the divine nature. Paul does further by these words not only declare that Christ had real flesh, but he also clearly distinguishes his human from his divine nature; and thus he refutes the impious raving of Servetus, who assigned flesh to Christ, composed of three untreated elements.

_________________

Die hele reeks is hier beskikbaar: Reformasie 500: LRLC


Responses

  1. Par 4: U kommentaar mbt Tentmaker-bediening?

    • Het die kwessie nog nie in diepte bestudeer nie. Hier is ‘n artikel wat lyk my daarteen is:

      http://www.enigstetroos.org/pdf/tentmaker.pdf

      Ek is nog oop vir oortuiging na enige kant, maar as die kalf in die put is, kan dit nie anders nie, maar dit moet dan kan ‘werk’ vir beide die tentmaker en hulle wie hy bedien.

      Die beste is seker 2 Tim.2:4 beginsel, maar partykeer is voltydse bediening nie moontlik nie.

      Mens moet ook in ag neem, dat net soos ons nie alles doen wat Jesus gedoen het nie, so beteken dit ook dat ons nie noodwendig alles doen wat Paulus gedoen het nie.

      Baie of die meerderheid bedienaars van die Woord is getroud met ‘n gesin, en daarom sal daar meer vaste voltydse versorging wees. Verder is daar ook ‘n groter verskil van Paulus wat ‘n rondreisende sendeling was, teenoor meer gevestigde bedienaars wat later ontwikkel het.

      So paar gedagtes van my kant, as jy meer insigte het daaroor leer ek saam jou.

      Groete
      Slabbert

  2. Halo Ds, Ek die vraag geva nav Luther se komm: “Relieved from all other tasks, I am dedicated, introduced, and consecrated to this single office to teach the gospel”.

    Ek het Ds Attie se artikel gelees, baie dankie, en stem heelhartig met hom saam. Ons predikante het tog eintlik meer werk as wat daar tyd voor is, Ek is hoofsaaklik bekommerd oor hulle eie huishoudings of ons leraars genoeg tyd het om ook nie net sy familie verpligtinge na te kom nie, maar ook darem tyd met sy kinders te kan speel, wat op sig self ‘n verpligting is in my boek ! (Jyself met ‘n geseende pragtige groot gesin)
    So as jy dan hou nog moet gaan tente maak …. sallie lekke uitwerkie.
    (Ek kom terug mbt ‘n ander bron wat ek moet soek!)

    Ek glo ook dat Ouderlinge baie meer kan doen om die las van die Predikante te verlig. Daar is tog gawes wat God ook aan hulle gegee het.

    Laastens 1 vragie: Die 72 Apostels in Lukas 10? is hierdie bron korrek? = https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seventy_disciples

    Goeienag
    Fanie

    • Stem saam Fanie, ons moet ons bes probeer om voltydse predikante te gebruik, maar soos genoem, as die kalf in die put is, doen ons die volgende beste opsie, tentmaker bediening. Ook belangrik om as predikant/ampsdraers met jou gesin om te gaan elke dag, dit is een groot voordeel van klein gemeentes, ons het nie kerkkantore en groot admin sake nie, so ek leef elke dag saam en in die midde van my gesin en gemeente, wat ek dink goed is.

      Wat die apostel – dissipelskap saak betref: alle apostels is ook dissipels, maar alle dissipels is nie apostels nie. Ek het vinnig gekyk, in Luk.10 gaan dit oor die groter groep, die dissipels, waarvan die apostels deel is, maar dit maak nie van almal apostels nie. Daar was 12 oorspronlike apostels/dissipels, toe het Mattias en Paulus later bygekom, en moontlik Barnabas, maar daar is nie sekerheid oor hom nie, sien Hand.14:14

      Sien hierdie 2 artikels wat die onderskeid tussen apostels en dissipels help verduidelik:

      http://www.cprf.co.uk/languages/afrikaans_apostlesprophets.htm#.WV_p0IiGPIU

      http://www.patheos.com/blogs/christiancrier/2015/08/21/what-are-the-differences-between-a-disciple-and-an-apostle-in-the-bible/

  3. Slabbert,
    Net ‘n vraag t.o.v. die “leesrooster”. Het jy ‘n beplanning van watter hoofstukke in watter weke gelees word?
    Ek wil net ‘n aanduiding kry van min of meer hoeveel tyd (dae) om aan ‘n gedeelte te spandeer? Dit help nou nie ek haak in Rom 1 vas en jou leiding trek al by Rom 4 nie.
    Groetnis
    Marelize

    • Hallo Marelize, ek kan nie vooruit sê hoeveel tyd ek aan sekere gedeeltes gaan spandeer nie, omdat die aandag wat Luther en Calvyn aan sekere tekste gee meer is as aan ander. My plan was om voor 31 Oktober deur die hele boek te werk, maar nou dat ek hul kommentare begin lees het, besef ek dit is vir my glad nie moontlik nie. Ek wil nie oorhaastig daardeur gaan nie, hul kommentare is diepsinnig en verg tyd om oor te besin. So ek gaan soos die tyd my toelaat stuk vir stuk daarddeur werk, en soos ek daar deurgaan dit plaas op my blog. Groetnis.

      • 🙂 Ditto.
        Dit was my waarneming en hoekom ek die vraag gestel het. Want teen my tempo (‘n uur miskien 1,5 uur per dag) gaan ek beslis nie teen 31 Okt klaar wees nie…
        Dankie, dan kan ek rustig deur beide werk.

  4. Wanneer Calvyn sê die werk vd geroep apostel (dienskneg – predikant) is om die Woord te verkondig… is die verwagting van gereelde huisbesoek, die oplos van interne probleme (huwelik, gesin, bure, ens) wat ook op predikante gelaai word, dan reg?

    • Ek lees dat Paulus nie net op die markpleine, sinagoges en orals die Woord verkondig het nie, maar ook in die huise, wat ek neem aan ook pastorale sorg insluit (bv. Hand.20:20), maar dan is dit belangrik dat hy die Woord se lig daar laat skyn, en nie die ‘interne sake’ van almal probeer reël nie, dus nie al die detail nie of wil oorneem nie. Natuurlik is die leraar ook ‘n ‘mede-ouderling’ en daarom moet hy saam hulle die pastorale en kerkregtelike take doen, 1 Pe.5:1-3


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Categories

%d bloggers like this: