https://youtu.be/xMGfwpb4n1o
In our verse by verse study of Romans last time we finished our expanded translation of Rom 8:30; "And whom he (predestined through the decree), the same ones he also called (elected): and whom he called, the same ones he also justified: and whom he justified, the same ones he also glorified."
This verse explains that blessing in time and in eternity are part of God's decree for the spiritually mature believer. Therefore God's plan for blessing and glorification of the believer existed long before any person ever lived on the earth.
Omniscience knew those who would attain spiritual maturity prior to anyone actually doing it. Therefore God's omniscience regarding reality became the basis for the information that His decree would contain.
Since the God's decree alone establishes reality nothing could be foreknown until it was first decreed. Acts 2:23. That means that foreknowledge, election and predestination are predicated on God's decree and the action on the objects in the decree is coincident.
This explains that verse 30 does not express chronological order of events it simply reveals the individuals who are the objects in God's decree so it reveals that spiritually mature believers are God's objects for His blessing from foreknowledge, election, and predestination because they are in His decree.
Rom 8:31; starts a new paragraph: the new life and its challenges. There are five challenges in this area. The first challenge is opposition. All of this truth that we have received is going to receive opposition from the devil's cosmic system.
The verse begins with the Greek idiom that is literally translated "What then shall we say to these things?" But the literal translation does not accurately represent the idiom.
It begins with the nominative neuter singular from the interrogative pronoun "tis" (what), followed by the inferential conjunction "oun" (then) that is used in the formula question in an idiom of conclusion that sets up a debater's format.
Next is the future active indicative of "lego" (will we say). The future tense is a deliberative future that presents a rhetorical question. A rhetorical question is a debater's way of making a direct assertion without appearing to do so.
The active voice: Paul uses rhetorical debater's technique in order to force a correct conclusion. The interrogative indicative is used as an indicative to make an assumption that there is an actual fact that may be stated in answer to the question.
The idiom is translated, "Therefore face to face with these things to what conclusion are we forced?"
This is a specific reference to Rom 8:28-30; and the principle that God's the plan is greater than any adverse problem, adversity, or opposition in life in the devil's world because God's plan is far more powerful than any of its opponents.
"Face to face" has to do with the preposition "pros" (face to face or toward) that is translated (to) plus the accusative neuter plural from the demonstrative "houtos"(these)"face to face, toward, or in view of these things."
"If the God is for us, who can be against us?" The question is elliptical so the verb (is) not in the original text. The conditional conjunction "ei" (if) that introduces a first class condition (if and it is assumed to be true) is a conclusion from the previous verses.
The first class condition recognizes that every believer is in God's plan and that means that God has made provision for every believer, including all opposition, disaster, or difficulty, but especially opposition that the believer may face in the devil's world.
Then the subject, the nominative singular from "Theos" (God) with the definite article "ho" (the) that refers specifically to God the Father so we have "(If the God."
This is the generic use of the definite article "ho" that makes it monadic to refer specifically to God the Father who has been the subject in the preceding verses.
Then a prepositional phrase, "huper" (for on behalf of) with the ablative of "heimon" (us). In the context the plural refers to all mature believers and in effect for all believers, but this prepositional phrase in its context applies specifically to mature believers because they are generally filled with the spirit.
"If the God is for us?" is a first class condition, "and he is." Then the nominative singular from the interrogative pronoun "tis"(who is). The final prepositional phrase is "kata" (against) plus the genitive plural of "heimon" (us) who is against us?"
Expanded Translation Rom 8:31; "Therefore face to face with these things, to what conclusion are we forced? If the God is for us, who is against us?"
We see from this that God's plan is greater than any opposition the believer will ever face. No one is God's equal because no one has more power and ability than God.
The two judicial imputations at salvation indicate that God is for us. The first judicial imputation: All of our personal sins were imputed to Jesus Christ on the cross. The second judicial imputation: God's righteousness is imputed to the believer at the moment of salvation.
Obviously God has to be for us for Him to do these things.
Rom 8:32; the first half of the verse demonstrates that God is for us by means of the first judicial imputation. The last half of the verse demonstrates that God will freely give us all things because and He is free to do so because of the second judicial imputation.
So the second challenge is blessing and this verse sets up that second challenge. If the first challenge is opposition, the second challenge is encouragement. The encouragement that comes through a fortiori that is the motivation for spiritual advance, the glorification of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the imputation of blessing in time.
"He who did not spare His own Son" begins with the nominative singular from the relative pronoun "hos" (who). When a verse is started with "hos" you must look at what was said previously, because what came before becomes the subject.
In this verse the antecedent is " ho Theos" (The God) that is found in the previous verse. So we translate it, "The God who." Then the enclitic particle "ge" for emphasis that means (even or indeed).
The verb is the aorist middle indicative of "pheidomai" (spare) with the negative "ou" (not). So we have "The God who did not even spare."
It is a dramatic aorist tense that states the present reality that God actually sacrificed Jesus Christ on the cross.
This brings the first judicial imputation into focus. This is a Greek idiom that is emphatic. Our sins were imputed to Jesus Christ for the purpose of judgment. God judged Him for the personal sins of the entire human race.
This also a culminative aorist tense that views the judicial imputation of all personal sins to Christ on the cross in their entirety but in the Church Age it emphasizes the existing results as the heavy side of an a fortiori.
This is a deponent verb in the middle voice so it is active in meaning. So "the God" (God the Father) produces the action of the verb by means of the first judicial imputation of all personal sins to Jesus Christ on the cross.
The indicative mood of "pheidomai" (spare) is declarative so it represents a verbal idea from the viewpoint of reality with the negative "ou" (not). The indicative plus the negative states the dogmatic fact that God the Father did impute the sins of the entire human race to Jesus Christ on the cross and judged them all on Him. He was not spared.
Next is the object of the verb, the objective genitive singular from the adjective "idiouj" (unique or one and only) so it is correctly translated "his own."
This describes the unique relationship between God the Father and God the Son from eternity past.
Plus the objective genitive singular of the noun "huios" (Son) that describes the Lord Jesus Christ in hypostatic union. "The God who did not even spare his own or His unique Son."
"but delivered him over for us all" the adversative conjunction "alla" (but) sets up a contrast with what precedes, plus the aorist active indicative of the verb "paradidomi " (deliver) so it means to deliver over to judgment from the function of God's justice.
The prepositional phrase "huper" (on behalf of) plus the genitive plural of both the adjective "pas" (all) and the pronoun means substitutionary atonement, and "hemon" (us) so we have "on behalf of all of us."
The accusative singular direct object from the intensive pronoun "autos" (Him) " so we have "but on behalf of us he delivered Him over to judgment."
"Paradidomi" (deliver) is in the constantive aorist tense that views the action of the judicial imputation of our sins to Jesus Christ on the cross in its entirety. The active voice: God the Father produced the action of the verb. The indicative mood is declarative for a statement of doctrinal fact.
"how will he not also with Him" the interrogative pronoun "pos" (how) is used to start a question to determine how the a fortiori came to be.
With it is an unusual negative, "ouchi" (not), that is an interrogative word in a question that anticipates an answer of yes. Then the adjunctive use of the conjunction "kai" (also) "how will he not also."
The prepositional phrase is "syn" (with) with the dative of person from the intensive pronoun "autos" (Him) so we have "with Him." "Autos" (Him) is used as a third person personal pronoun to describe association.
In other words, our association with the Lord Jesus Christ begins with our salvation adjustment to God's justice that occurs when we believe in Jesus Christ because we are dead or unknown to Jesus until we are spiritually alive.
The second judicial imputation when God's justice imputes God's righteousness to us starts that association with Jesus and establishes the grace pipeline from God's imputed righteousness to God's justice.
All blessings from God will come from God's justice to God's righteousness that was imputed to us when we believed in Jesus Christ.