The Book of Romans has the phrase, “and declared to be the son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead”, which I find difficult to comprehend, because I fail to see the meaning of “according to the spirit of holiness”, and what it modifies.
The concordance seems to indicate that “according” or “according to” – I do not recall which – can mean “concerning”. And, as I read in a commentary, it can modify “declared”, “son of God with power”, or “power”. So, if it modifies “power”, then the phrase signifies that Christ’s resurrection stated that Christ is the son of God with power, and that that power pertains to the spirit of holiness, and that that power has to do with making people holy -- I do not recall if this is in the commentary. If the word “according” modifies “son of God with power”, then the phrase, in my mind, signifies that Christ’s resurrection stated that He is the Son of God with power, and that that He is the Son concerning the Spirit of Holiness, which I cannot comprehend. If the word “according” modifies “declared”, then in my mind, the phrase signifies that Christ’s resurrection stated that He is the Son of God with power, and that that resurrection has to do with the spirit of holiness. This makes no sense to me as well.
I do not recall if most of this is in the commentary, which is by Zane Hodges, whose teachings I no longer follow, but it seems to me that the first interpretation is correct, that the resurrection of Christ declared that He is the Son of God with power, and that this power has to do with the Holy Spirit, with emphasis upon holiness, meaning that this power has to do with righteousness, and Christ’s work of justification or sanctification. I have no perfect recollection of what the commentary says, except for the statement that the word “holiness” may be emphasized. But in my mind, what I have gathered from the commentary, and what I have understood in the Book of Romans, has led me to the conclusion that this first interpretation is correct.
The concordance seems to indicate that “according” or “according to” – I do not recall which – can mean “concerning”. And, as I read in a commentary, it can modify “declared”, “son of God with power”, or “power”. So, if it modifies “power”, then the phrase signifies that Christ’s resurrection stated that Christ is the son of God with power, and that that power pertains to the spirit of holiness, and that that power has to do with making people holy -- I do not recall if this is in the commentary. If the word “according” modifies “son of God with power”, then the phrase, in my mind, signifies that Christ’s resurrection stated that He is the Son of God with power, and that that He is the Son concerning the Spirit of Holiness, which I cannot comprehend. If the word “according” modifies “declared”, then in my mind, the phrase signifies that Christ’s resurrection stated that He is the Son of God with power, and that that resurrection has to do with the spirit of holiness. This makes no sense to me as well.
I do not recall if most of this is in the commentary, which is by Zane Hodges, whose teachings I no longer follow, but it seems to me that the first interpretation is correct, that the resurrection of Christ declared that He is the Son of God with power, and that this power has to do with the Holy Spirit, with emphasis upon holiness, meaning that this power has to do with righteousness, and Christ’s work of justification or sanctification. I have no perfect recollection of what the commentary says, except for the statement that the word “holiness” may be emphasized. But in my mind, what I have gathered from the commentary, and what I have understood in the Book of Romans, has led me to the conclusion that this first interpretation is correct.
Last edited: