Giving Romans 8:26,27 a "Go"

I was talking to Hannah last night, and some of our discussion was about Romans 8:26,27, an admittedly difficult passage. It's been a challenging text to me for some time, but I think have a few observations to make about it that might help us read it decently . . .

Here's what it says: “Now in the same way the Spirit also helps our weakness; for we do not know what to pray for as we should, but the Spirit Himself intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words; and He who searches the hearts knows what the mind of the Spirit is, because He intercedes for the saints according to the will of God.”

First, I think that there are some incorrect views on this passage . . .

Some – maybe even most? – have read this passage to mean the Holy Spirit has to “relay” information about us back to God, as if He didn't know such information – in addition to Matthew 6:8, which is Jesus' remark that “your Father knows what you need before you ask Him,” there's also the difficulty about how this makes sense philosophically – if the information is unknown to God, what gives us the idea that “His Spirit” could know or do any better. For a “Divine” character, a deficiency in knowledge would be severe.

Another view – the one of Frank Camp – wants us to read this passage as if it concerns the miraculous inspiration of the apostles as they had “truth” revealed to them from God's Spirit in order to pen the holy scriptures. The biggest problem with this view is that is doesn't at all fit the context or argument that Paul is making. It's true that some can and have tried to twist Romans 8 into a discussion about “the Holy Spirit,” but while there is much said about Him, that's/He's really not the focus of the unit. Paul doesn't get to Romans 8 and feel the need, now, for telling the saints at Rome about “the Holy Spirit” as if it is detached from his prior argumentation; everything that he's saying in Romans 8 and particularly 8:26,27 has – at least! – been fronted by Romans 5-7, if not Romans 1-7, and, so, when we reach Romans 8 and then 8:26,27, we need to be raising the question, “Why would Paul start talking about the role of the Holy Spirit? How does this discussion fit into his actual argument that he's trying to make?” I think that reading Romans 8 as a discussion about the inspiration of scripture or as a discussion about a curiosity of things pertaining to the Holy Spirit is completely foreign to what Paul has actually been arguing or saying up to this point.

So, where does this bring us?

I think that Tom Wright is probably correct to see an “Exodus” theme as driving Romans 5-8, as a unit. The problem for “humanity” (as discussed in Romans 5) is the conflict that needs resolve, resolution; and, so, by the end of the unit (so, Romans 8), we'd naturally expect this particular problem to have been confronted and handled – that is, the “enslavement” of all “humanity” (in Romans 5) is what needs addressed and Romans 8 will talk about the “liberation” or “freedom” of “humanity” from such an enslavement. Following Romans 5, it's not hard to see Romans 6's “baptism” as being a “new” kind of crossing of the Red Sea; Romans 7 talks about the “Law” (Torah) quite a bit, which might recall the giving at Sinai; and, Romans 8 has enough in it to let us know that the “analogy” to “the Exodus” is at least quite plausible.

Romans 8 mentions “freedom” a number of times (8:2; cf. 6:16-18), mentions an “adoption as sons” (8:15), which is directly set over against a “fearful spirit of slavery” (8:15), mentions a “dwelling” of the Spirit of God (8:9-11) and mentions being “led” by the Spirit of God (8:16). All of this, in my estimation, calls our attention back to “the Exodus” – and, it's difficult for me to think that a serious Old Testament reader wouldn't have picked up these connections. A Jew could hardly read about freedom, sonship, slavery, dwellings of God and leadings by God without thinking of “the Exodus” – it really was that monumental of an event to them! And, so, when we read “the Exodus” and hear of God's “liberating” His people from slavery (Exo. 13:14; 14:13), making His people His “son” (Exo. 4:22,23), dwelling among His people, as by the “shekinah” glory (Exo. 40:34-38; Lev. 26:11,12), and leading them by cloud and fire (Exo. 13:21,22), I think it becomes clear enough that Paul is drawing on that particular event to tell the saints that a “new Exodus” is occurring/has occurred in Jesus as Messiah; Jesus, now, takes on the role of a new covenant mediator (cf. Gal. 3:19), a new liberator (cf. Acts 7:17-42) and offers to bring the saints home to a promised land, a rest, that surpasses that of Moses. (This connection of a “new Exodus” really is all over the gospels as they draw on the prophets, which also speak of deliverance from the exile in “Exodus” terminology.)

In short, Paul wants us to read “the Exodus” as “happening again.” As Moses worked with God's enslaved people to liberate them, enable them to become God's “son,” have God dwell in their midst and be led by Him through a wilderness to the promised land, Paul, now, wishes to show that Jesus, as the Messiah, has led an enslaved people to liberty from sin, makes them God's children, has God dwelling in the midst and is bringing this people through the wilderness to a new rest and promised land (cf. Heb. 3,4). In short, it's a “new Exodus” that is “happening again,” but this time, it's bigger-and-better.

Now, is all of this necessary for our reading of Romans 8:26,27? I think so . . . and, I think that if we don't try to see Paul's bigger argument, it's easy to approach these passages without serious consideration for the real context and argument and walk away with a shallow understanding of the passage(s), maybe even holding incorrect views of what the passage is actually trying to say.

If we keep an “Exodus” kind of theme/template/model in view, Paul, who has just talked about “full redemption” – the “full” reversal of “the curse” (introduced by Adam upon creation, so, Romans 5) – well, Paul is now telling us that it is “in the same way that the Spirit helps our weakness.” We could speculate about what this “weakness” might be, but the next line clears it up a bit: “for we do not know what to pray for as we should.” In some way, this “weakness” is linked to the content of our “prayers,” and it's clear that the Spirit helps such “weakness” in some way.

Here's what I think (for whatever that's worth) . . .

First, the Spirit, now, “replaces” the personal Jesus and indwells the church. This is NOT a physical point; it's not a spatial point. Jim McGuiggan is right: the “indwelling” of the Holy Spirit is a relational reality and not a spatial one. But, how does this fit, here?

When Jesus was on earth, He was “with” us (humanity); a casual reading of Matthew 8,9 emphasizes this point – He was “with” us in our sicknesses, our infirmities, our demonic possessions, etc., etc., etc. (Doesn't Matthew employ Isaiah 53 [cf. Mat. 8:16,17] right in the middle of this unit in order to emphasize the “with-ness” of Jesus with “humanity”?) In fact, doesn't the whole book of “Matthew” emphasize the “with-ness” of Jesus with humanity; doesn't he “wrap” the entire book with an “inclusio” argument about “God with us” (1:22,23) and Jesus' being “with us always” (28:20)? Doesn't even the middle of the book let us know that He is “with us” when we resolve our difficulties with others (18:20)? And, doesn't the middle of the book let us know that Jesus was “with us” in those human difficulties (Mat. 8,9 [esp. 8:16,17])? Yes, I think that Jesus was “with” humanity in His personal ministry, and this “with-ness” was a “bearing with” and carrying and caring for us, as the human family.

Now, with that in view, Jesus, of course, is no longer “with” us, the human family, in this way. But, we mustn't get the idea of “abandonment.” In fact, He insisted to the twelve that He would not leave behind “orphans” but would come by medium of the Holy Spirit (John 14:18 esp. in John 14-16 as a unit). If we take the text seriously, Jesus sends the Holy Spirit as a “replacement” (not the right word but something like it conveys the idea); once Jesus is gone personally, physically, He's still “with us” but the sense is different . . . but He's still “with us” in our weakness(es).

So, here's what I'm saying . . . the Spirit's “presence” is a reality, but it's a relational reality, not a spatial one; it's a theological reality (and whoever decided that a “theological” reality is only pretend or unreal anyway?!); this means something major . . .

I think that there is an ontological connection, an inseparable connection, between Jesus and His people, between the bridegroom and the bride, between the King and His kingdom, between the Head and His body . . . The four Gospels show Divine ministry in Jesus of Nazareth (as bridegroom, king, head); the book of Acts follows those four Gospel accounts to show Divine ministry in us (as bride, kingdom, body); it's the SAME MINISTRY, the SAME DIVINE MINISTRY, but, now, Jesus' ministry is not being worked by Him personally but through His people, who are inseparably linked to Him. Now, through/in/via the Holy Spirit's “indwelling,” we are the new temple/tabernacle of God, called to do precisely the same thing that the Messiah Jesus had done for the world: “love.” And, maybe – just maybe? – this might even involve our selfless, sacrificial, suffering (and even dying?) for the world.

So, is the Godhead “with” us? That's the point, I think . . . We're not “abandoned” but instead God is banking on people like you and me, who are part of the Spirit-anointed people and thus are anticipating our full glorification just like Jesus experienced, to bear His light to the world, to bear the same “with-ness” that Jesus had done personally; now, Jesus' ministry is to be carried out by people like us, as we “recycle” or “duplicate” His ministry to the world.

So, let's find our way back to Romans 8:26 . . . How does the Spirit help our weakness or intercede for us when we pray?

I think we need to see that God has a “big picture” for the world, and I think that we often are too shallow, naive, near-sighted to see it. We often pray selfishly, don't we? We ask God for luxury, financial stability, good health, accumulation of friends and family, material needs, etc., etc., etc. – look, there's nothing wrong with these requests, but our selfishness often ends here; this is often where our focus, our prayers, end. And, what's worse is that we often do get many of these things, and then we forget to thank God for our blessings?! How'd you feel as a parent if you gave your child everything, meeting even some of those immature and shallow requests, only to hear no thankfulness or gratitude and to hear more requests for more shallow things?!

There's a major point in Paul's texts – and Romans 8 is one of those texts (see 8:17-25 [esp. vs. 17,18]) – where Paul talks about our perspective on suffering. We have this knack for seeing anything that resembles “suffering” as being “bad.” Don't misunderstand me: I don't mean to say that financial difficulty, cancer, heart disease, chronic illness, loss of a loved one, car wrecks or anything else like that is to be taken lightly or that they aren't to be despised – I'm saying that these things have more purposes than perhaps we've realized. Didn't God cause Job's suffering for a purpose; didn't God bank on Job to bear a godly example and didn't Job learn a thing or two about God in the affair (Job 42:10,11)? Didn't Paul see suffering as a duplication of being like the Messiah (2 Cor. 1:3-11; 4:7-12; 6:3-10; 11:22-33; 12:1-11)? Didn't Paul tell the Philippians that suffering was a “grant” or a “gift” from God (Phil. 1:29; cf. Acts 5:40-42)? Didn't Paul learn to see suffering as a humbling experience (2 Cor. 1:8-10; 12:7)? Didn't Paul see suffering as a transformative thing that was actually, then, for his own good (2 Cor. 1:9; 12:7)? And, if Paul were given an option to have all of his suffering taken away, would he?! Ah, you know he wouldn't . . . after the fact, he had gained a new perspective on suffering and also on what it had done to him; now, he had changed (for the best); now, he was a different person.

What's the point?

We, like the Israelites, often pray “in this wilderness” selfishly . . . We ask that God get us out of the wilderness, grant us luxury like leeks and melons, forget to thank God for the manna and quails and we bellyache about getting water from rocks instead of having it “on the rocks.” The Israelites failed not only to be grateful for what all God had done but they also missed the very purpose of the wilderness and what it was from God – it was a lesson for them, a chance, an opportunity to transform! And, just as the selfish Israelites couldn't see past their own circumstances to see God's “big picture,” neither do we, at times, see past our own selfish perspective to see that God might just have something bigger – like “saving a world”! – in view and need our aid in such a task!

Let me say one more thing here . . . We often pray with us (as individuals) in mind rather than with the world (collectively) in view; our prayers focus on us, as individuals, and we often do forget to pray for the bigger scope of the world, the scope of “the kingdom/reign” of God, the scope of our enemies and all those “outside” who still need rescue.

So, when we lay our heads down at night, we pray . . . and we forget to thank God for our blessings, forget to see our suffering (however much) in the right perspective, selfishly request from God for more “stuff” from a material angle and forget to ask about His will, His kingdom, His big agenda for the world, and we forget to offer ourselves to Him, that He might use us, if there's any way possible, in making this happen. (Do see Matthew 6 and James 5 on “prayer.”)

I think this is all packed into Romans 8:26,27.

So, who was still leading this naive, block-headed, selfish, murmuring Israelites? Wasn't it God? (Do see Psalm 78.) It was God! There, in the cloud, the fire, the tent – it was still God that was leading them to their real home, even when their requests were “off” and they couldn't see it for having the wrong perspective on the whole deal!

And, now, who's leading us? Isn't it God? Isn't His “big picture” still to “intercede” for us, even when our prayers about “life” are “off” and when we only ask for our health and wealth?! I think this is exactly what Paul is saying! Even when our approach to life (and, so, our prayers to God even reflect this) is completely “shallow” or “off,” we're still “headed” by God (His Spirit) which is often “too deep for words.” Have you ever prayed for a thing and not been granted it? Have you ever suffered and wondered how it all made sense? Maybe, this is Paul's point – I'm sure that it is – we mustn't think that God has abandoned us, but rather, these events, if we'll commit to trusting Him as the One to lead us through this “Exodus,” are exactly how God is being present with us maximally and is actually trying His best (like an omniscient parent) to transform us and even use us (as the older siblings) to help transform the younger children of His that need rescue, too. No, God hasn't abandoned us; He's still with us and expecting us to show to His other children exactly how He is present. Like the cloud, fire and tent, He's still with us, leading us, even when it evades our perception, our understanding, even when it is “too deep for words.”

So, what does verse 27 mean? It means that God (cf. Jer. 17:10) and His Spirit are “colleagues” with the suffering, slain and now-risen-and-glorified Jesus in this bigger picture of redeeming the world, and They're calling us into that work. Here, we have a “triune” God, the Godhead, and They've all made the commitment to redeem fallen humanity, to lead us through the exile to a real promised land. And, does that fit with Romans 8:28? I think this is the only way to read Paul's argument correctly . . . There's a “big picture,” a “big purpose,” a “big agenda” of God . . . and it's so much bigger than the pettiness that we often focus upon.

God's not all that concerned with food, clothes and houses (do see Matthew 6:24ff.), since those things have a tendency of “just handling themselves” – I don't mean to be trite or diminish serious life problems! – but God's concerned with a whole trajectory of “saving a world,” saving a fallen human race, and that's what His whole picture is “geared” towards – it all works together for God's big purpose and He's calling us to participate in it.

Let me conclude with three things now . . .

First, I will try to summarize Paul's argument. Second, I'll give a very loose paraphrase of Romans 8:26-28 in this argument. Third, I'll leave behind a few big points.

First things first . . .

Paul's argument sees “humanity” in a fallen state, but He sees God as leading us (the human family) out of such a state as a “new Exodus” event. (This is the real concern of Romans 8; Paul isn't just deciding to tell us a bit about “the Holy Spirit” – He's very much telling us about God's work [through His Spirit] to lead and redeem the world.) I think that the proposed reading of Romans 8:26-28, here, fits this actual argument and context the best.

Second, I'm reading Romans 8:26-28 as something like this: “[26] Just as the collective world is still fallen, chaotic –weak! – and needs full redemption, liberation [see vs. 18-25], which began with the Messiah's work on the cross and awaits full consummation at His second coming, God is still through His Spirit helping us with our own, personal – individual! – human weaknesses; don't we often pray shallowly, asking God for individual and selfish desires that don't really sit well with His big agenda? Don't sweat it too much; even when we live and “pray” about life poorly, individually and selfishly, God/the Spirit is still the One doing the “leading” through this wilderness called “life,” and His “big picture” often evades our perception since we're too thoughtless to see it – and He's not only “leading” the world, He really is leading us, as individuals, too, for our best, even when we can't see that! [27] See, God, the heart-searcher and One who is fully in unison with His Spirit, He's driving everything for the saints and for His big purpose according to His ultimate and ideal will; He's still aiming in it all to redeem fallen humanity. [28] You just need to know this: God is working it all out for good – well, it's all working out for the real “good” of humanity, if you love God, that is – if you don't love God, then you'll not much like the outcome of it all, I suppose – but everything that God's doing in His part to redeem the world fits into His big, wonderful, loving picture – and that portrait has a caption above it that wears the title “God's Big Picture: Redeeming Fallen Humanity.”

Third, this is best way that I can read Romans 8:26-28 (in view of the argument that Paul is making) as of now; so, here are two points that I think that this text is actually stressing . . .

First, God is committed to a “big picture” to redeem the world, and He's trying to lead us “with” Him in this big “Exodus” event; God's actually leading us – no, He hasn't abandoned us! – even when we can't perceive it as such, God's providential hand really is at work in ways that might just be too difficult to express in words . . . He's committed to humanity and working at redeeming the world; we just need to know that, Paul's saying; the mechanics/details may evade us, but just know that He's omniscient and doing His part, all that He can, to redeem.

Second, God's “leading” us should push us to rearrange our focus and priorities; we're often “weak” and pray as such, but God is wanting us to discern His big agenda and refit our lives into that focus; what would our prayers look like if we had that driving us?

A difficult text? For sure. I think that staying in touch with Paul's wider argument and context maybe helps us make sense of it though. Agree? Disagree? I'd be happy to hear your thoughts . . .

Contact me at drewleonard@live.com.