The Holy Spirit’s Intercessory Ministry

By Curtis Mitchell, Th.M., Th.D.

Chafer Theological Seminary

Mitchell earned his B.A. at Biola University, B.D. at Talbot School of Theology, Th.M. at Western Seminary, and Th.D. at Grace Theological Seminary. He taught for nearly 25 years at Biola University and is now Professor of Biblical Studies at Chafer Theological Seminary. NB: Dallas Theological Seminary granted permission to print Dr. Mitchell’s article, which one may also find in Bibliotheca Sacra, “The Holy Spirit’s Intercessory Ministry” (vol. 139, #555; July 1982; 230–240).

Of all the chapters in the Book of Romans, none has been more cherished by God’s people than chapter 8. Yet, of the many wonderful promises we find in the chapter, perhaps none is less understood and appreciated than the promise of the Spirit’s help in relation to believers’ praying.

Likewise the Spirit also helps in our weaknesses. For we do not know what we should pray for as we ought, but the Spirit Himself makes intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered. Now He who searches the hearts knows what the mind of the Spirit is, because He makes intercession for the saints according to the will of God (Romans 8:26–27).

No serious textual problems exist in the passage, but exegetical difficulties abound. The problems begin with the first word “likewise” (hosautos). It is a rather common adverb of comparison used quite frequently by Paul when he desires to show a close connection with the context.

Scholars hold three views on the relationship of these verses to the context. Most feel that “likewise” refers to the broad context in verses 19–25 (on “groaning”). [1] Others tie “likewise” in with the broader context of the Spirit’s ministry begun back in verse 14. [2] Some consider such attempts to tie the passage into the broad context as “rather fanciful.” [3]

They prefer to view the connection with the immediate context: as hope supports believers during suffering and enables them to wait patiently (8:25), so (῾Ωσαύτως) the Spirit helps them in their weakness.4 Strange as it may seem, the contextual considerations have little or no bearing on the actual interpretation of the verses themselves.

The Need for the Spirit’s Intercession

The obvious fact of the passage is the blessed assurance that “the Spirit helps our weakness.” [5] Indeed, a primary ministry of the Spirit in this present era is to be a “Helper” (παράκλητος, John 16:7). Paul uses “helps” (συναντιλαμβάνεται), a rich word, to convey the idea of help. It pictures a man struggling with a heavy load beyond his ability to carry it alone. [6] Fortunately another person comes along and agrees to take hold of one end of the load. So instead of the man having to carry the burden himself, it is now shared and the two men carry the load that was too much for the one man alone.

The Holy Spirit does not take over Christians’ responsibilities and give them automatic deliverance without effort on their part. That would certainly not be envisioned in the word “helps.” Paul does not teach a doctrine of passivity here. Clearly the Holy Spirit did not come to do His work and the believers’ too; rather, He came to help them with theirs. [7] The personal involvement of the Holy Spirit in helping is seen not only by the use of the articulated noun “the Spirit” (τὸ πνεῦμα), but also by the middle voice of the verb “helps.” The Holy Spirit is personally involved in helping the saints. The present tense of this same verb indicates that this blessed Holy Spirit is always ready to come to their aid and assistance. [8]

The Holy Spirit helps “our weakness” (τῇ ἀσθενείᾳ ἡμῶν). The word “weakness” occurs many times in the New Testament. The word is rarely used of purely physical weakness, but is frequently used in a comprehensive sense of human frailty in general. [9] The vast majority understand “weakness” in this passage as man’s fundamental ineptness as a result of the Fall. [10] Evidently the “weakness” has no moral connotations. No rebuke is suggested toward saints who have “weakness.” Even Christ in His incarnate state was said to be “beset with weakness.” Most certainly the Lord God could well have been pleased to deliver saints completely from all effects of the Fall at the moment of regeneration, but obviously He has ordained otherwise. [11] Against such a backdrop He can evidently best display His power and bring greater glory to Himself. [12]

Paul next takes up a special manifestation of this “weakness.” The way it shows itself in saints most acutely and perhaps most frequently is in the realm of prayer. Paul states, “for we do not know how to pray as we should.” The word “for” (γὰρ) introduces an explanation and proof of the believers’ great weakness, and in addition it states the reason for the Spirit’s help. The nature of that weakness with regard to prayer is in the realm of knowledge. Clearly the main verb of the sentence is “know,” preceded by the negative “not”: “we do not know” (οὐκ οἴδαμεν). As part of their human weakness, Christians are ignorant in the matter of prayer. Some try to have this ignorance refer only to special prayer emergencies of one sort or another. [13] Such a contention, however, cannot be sustained by the language. The expression is not, “we often do not know,” but simply, “we do not know.” In view of the continuing imperfection of even the best Christians, would it not be rather strange if it did not affect them in the matter of their knowledge with regard to prayer? Unless they are praying in exact concurrence with the clearly revealed will of God as set forth in Scripture, they simply do not know. Even when praying in exact conformity to Scripture, it is because God has revealed the matter, not because of Christians’ knowledge. All praying by all Christians insofar as it is their praying remains under the “not knowing,” set forth in verse 26. [14]

Amazingly Paul includes himself in this “not knowingness.” The first person plural “we know” includes the great apostle. An editorial “we” is not indicated, because of the manner in which Paul consistently uses the first person plural in the chapter. Was not Paul filled with the Spirit? Did not Paul have the mind of Christ? Was not Paul a spiritual man? Was not Paul mightily used of God in missionary endeavor? Was not Paul ardent in his love for souls? Yet Paul says “we” really do not know what to pray. Hendriksen has rightly observed, “with the exception of the prayers of Jesus Christ, is there anything in the line of prayer more thought-filled, fervent and sublime than the Apostle’s prayer recorded in Eph. 3:14–19?” [15] Yet Paul says, “We do not know how to pray as we ought.”

But what precisely is the nature of this prayer ignorance? Paul addresses himself to this in the words, “what we should pray for as we ought” (τὸ γὰρ τί προσευξώμεθα καθὸ δεῖ). The article τὸ [which one does not see in the English translations], makes the entire clause the object of “we do not know.” [16] Some difference of opinion exists as to whether the aorist subjunctive followed by the indirect question “what we should pray” should be taken as “what to pray” or “what to pray for.” Is Paul referring to the content of prayer, or the object of prayer? Since the object (what to pray for) determines the content (what to pray), the meaning of both is much the same, and the whole question is quite moot. Christians have a general sense of need at times, but they are often not clear on what particular thing they need. So they do not know “what to pray for,” or “what to pray.” Paul’s ignorance regarding his “thorn” (2 Corinthians 12:7) is a case in point. Yet the answer he received shows that God most certainly did know, and the answer God gave Paul on that occasion “shows for what he [Paul] should have prayed.” [17]

But Paul continues by adding the words “as we should” (καθὸ δεῖ). Most concur that “as we should” is to be taken with “what to pray,” rather than with “we do not know.” The latter construction is possible but somewhat forced. [18] The adverb “as” does not refer to one’s manner of praying, but rather to the correspondence between the prayer and what is really needed. [19] Paul himself confessed that he did “not know which to choose” (Philippians 1:22). Broadly speaking, Christians often do know (or so they think) for what they are to pray (e.g., the perfecting of the saints, the glory of God), but they do not know what to pray according to the need of the moment. They may know these ultimate ends, which are common to all prayers, but they may be ignorant as to what is necessary at each crisis in order to attain that desired end. [20]

Augustine was a notoriously wicked man prior to his conversion. His mother Monica, a Christian, was heavily burdened for her wayward son. Hearing that he was leaving home and planning to live in Italy, she prayed earnestly that God would not allow Augustine to go there, because she feared he would fall into deeper sin. But though she prayed sincerely, she really did not know what to pray as she ought because, as it turned out, Augustine did indeed move to Italy, but was gloriously converted there. [21] Monica knew the ultimate end she desired (the conversion of her son), but she was ignorant of what was necessary in the immediate crisis (her son’s move to Italy) to attain that ultimate desired end.

Christians are imperfect, immature, and insufficient. Paul obviously felt that the removal of the thorn would make him a more powerful witness for Christ, but he simply did not know what to pray (for) as he ought! One theologian spoke of this “not knowingness”: “But … even the most sincere, most heroic, most powerful prayers … do not but serve to make clear how little the man of prayer is able to escape from himself … .” [22]

The Nature of the Spirit’s Intercession

The help the Spirit gives in coming to the believers’ aid (συναντιλαμβάνεται) is now clarified. Though Christians pray ignorantly, the Spirit “intercedes” (ὑπερεντυγχάνει) for them. This Greek word, a double compound of the verb ἐντυγχάνω (entugchano), occurs only here in the New Testament. Robertson refers to it as “a picturesque word of rescue.” [23] The root means “to happen along.” The preposition ἐν accents the idea of “on”; thus ἐντυγχάνω means “to happen on.” The preposition, “on” (ὑπερ), emphasizes that the one who “happens on” believers, also acts “on behalf of” them. As a true “advocate,” the Spirit finds them in their weakness, takes their part, and speaks on their behalf. [24]

Thus believers have two intercessors: Christ, who intercedes in heaven at the right hand of the Father, and the Holy Spirit, who intercedes while resident within believers. Christ prays that the merits of His redemptive work may be fully applied to His own, while the Holy Spirit prays that their unrealized needs may be met. [25]

Some would argue that the Holy Spirit’s intercession is involved only in “extreme situations of perplexity” such as is demonstrated by Jesus’ cry, “What shall I say” (John 12:27)? [26] However, as already indicated, the sons of God are ever in a state of weakness, and thus they are always, consciously or unconsciously, ignorant of what to pray in a given situation. Perhaps at times they stumble on the right things to say in their prayers in spite of their ignorance. It may well

be true that at such times their prayers do not need to be “counteracted by the Holy Spirit.” [27] However, in the vast majority of instances, they “do not know how to pray” as they should, and at such times they have the assurance that the Holy Spirit intercedes for them.

But precisely how does the Holy Spirit intercede? Does He do so directly or indirectly? Does He cry out to the Father on behalf of believers, or does He intercede indirectly by “stirring up in our hearts those desires that we ought to entertain”? [28] In support of indirect intercession, some argue that He pleads in believers’ prayers and thus raises them to higher and holier desires. The “groanings too deep for words” are attributed to saints, which the Spirit then uses in making His intercession for them. [29]

Various reasons are given in support of indirect intercession. Most recognize that a strictly literal rendering of the words indicates the Spirit’s direct intercession, but it is argued on theological grounds that “God can’t groan.” [30] But in the words of Hendriksen, “exegetical accuracy is as important as doctrinal purity. Both are needed.” [31] God is not devoid of emotion. If God loves, grieves, and rejoices, why is it inconceivable that He groans. Appeal is made to Galatians 4:6, “and because you are sons, God has sent forth the Spirit of His Son into our hearts, crying Abba! Father!” Some argue that God cannot be the Father of the Holy Spirit, and hence the crying is that of the saints through the Holy Spirit, not the Spirit’s crying. It is also argued that this same indirect intercession is true in Romans 8:26–27. [32] However, a distinct difference exists between Galatians 4:6 and Romans 8:26–27. [33] In the Romans passage, Paul uses the emphatic form “the Spirit Himself” (αὐτὸ τὸ πνεῦμα). Then in order to make the meaning even less ambiguous, he continues in verse 27 by saying that “he who searches the hearts knows what the mind of the Spirit is.” The mind of the Spirit, not the mind of believers, is searched by God.

Also Paul has already discussed the groanings of the saints in verse 23. It seems unlikely that he would return to this subject again in verse 26. Finally, the same word, “makes intercession” (ἐντυγχάνει) that refers to the Spirit’s intercession in verse 27 is used in verse 34 of Christ’s intercession at the right hand of the Father. Does not Christ intercede directly for believers? How then can one contend that the word is used of indirect intercession in verse 27, but of direct intercession in verse 34? [34] Therefore exegetically the natural sense of the language indicates that the Spirit residing within Christians is said to intercede directly for them. His praying is complementary to their sincere but ignorant praying and is necessary to its efficacy. [35]

But why not then permit the Holy Spirit to do all the praying? Why pray at all? (The same type of objection is often voiced with reference to divine sovereignty. If God is sovereign, why pray?) Several facts may be pointed out in response: (a) A Christian needs to pray as part of God’s divinely ordained sanctifying process. (b) The Holy Spirit prays only in the hearts of those who pray. If the believer does not pray, the Spirit does not intercede. (c) God has commanded His people to pray, and in His sovereignty He has conditioned many of His actions on human asking. [36]

Now the Spirit’s intercession is said to be with “groanings too deep for words” (στεναγμοῖς ἀλαλήτοις). The use of the instrumental case indicates that it is by this means that the Holy Spirit intercedes. Are these groanings audible or inaudible? Are they related to the “tongues” (γλῶσσα) spoken of in Acts and in 1 Corinthians?

Many commentators do not discuss these questions. Obviously those who equate these “groanings” with “tongues” contend that they are audible. [37] But others do not equate the two phenomena and yet feel that they are audible sighs or groans. They contend that because of the pain and anguish of soul, expressions not formulated into words arise from the hearts of believers as an audible evidence of the believers’ inadequacy. The Spirit then takes these expressions of grief enabling them to take the form of prayer that will be understood by God the Father. [38]

However, as already noted, the language indicates that believers in their fallen state are ever in the condition of weakness, and therefore every prayer needs the Spirit’s intercessory groanings. Is it not self-evident that believers usually do not audibly groan while praying? Yet Paul says that the intercessory groanings always accompany genuine Christian praying. This would seem to suggest that the groanings are inaudible. They are wrought by the Holy Spirit deep within the Christian’s heart to be searched out by the one who knows the mind of the Spirit. [39]


The context is also suggestive in determining the nature of these groans. The intercessory “groanings” of the Spirit (v. 26) are usually recognized as the consummation of a triad of groanings beginning with the groanings (συστενάζω) of creation (v. 22), and followed by the groanings (στενάζω) of Christians (v. 23). Schneider refers to this sequence of groanings as a “crescendo” and a “triple sighing.” [40] Obviously in Paul’s mind the three groanings are related. In each case Paul selects a variation of the verb στένω in describing the three groanings, [41] and each time he describes the verbal action of these groanings with the present tense. [42]

The nature of the first two groanings (creation’s and Christian’s) may thus shed light on the nature of the third groaning (the Spirit’s). Are the groanings of fallen creation audible? Obviously not! At least such groaning is not audible to human ears. Likewise the groans of the redeemed human spirit are inaudible to human ears. Since the three groanings are related, as most contend, and since the first two are inaudible to human ears, does it not argue rather convincingly that the groanings of the Spirit are likewise inaudible to human ears? It seems that, barring strong exegetical evidence to the contrary, these groanings of the Spirit may be assumed to be inaudible.

Also Paul speaks of the Spirit’s groanings as “unutterable.” And this has led to a continuing dispute as to whether this noun should be translated “unuttered” or “unutterable.” Most contend that the word should be translated “unutterable.” It is usually argued that these groanings are so deep, so profound, so moving, that they defy expression. [43] Cranfield is of the opinion that while the word itself could be translated either way, verse 27 suggests that “unuttered” is more likely since “the Spirit’s groanings are not spoken, because they do not need to be since God knows the Spirit’s intention without being expressed.” [44] Actually, if these groans are inaudible to human ears and are clearly understood by the Father (v. 27), it would seem to make little difference whether they were “unuttered” or “unutterable.” Humans would not hear them in either case!

Käsemann, however, insists that Paul is not dealing with the problem of prayer in general, but is “speaking with reference to certain practices in congregational life which are open to misunderstanding…. What is at issue is the praying in tongues of 1 Cor 14:15.” [45] Therefore Käsemann (and others from as early as Chrysostom and Origen) are quite sure it refers to the “praying in tongues” (προσεύχωμαι γλώσσῃ) of 1 Corinthians 14:14–15. However, as Cranfield has pointed out, neither Käsemann nor others who have tried to equate the unutterable groanings with ecstatic utterances of glossolalia have presented exegetical evidence in support of their view. [46]

Several factors make it clear that the unutterable (or unuttered) groanings of verse 26 cannot be equated with praying in tongues. To begin with, as already demonstrated, these groanings are inaudible to human ears; and yet that certainly was not true of praying in tongues. Next, Paul makes it emphatically clear that it is the Spirit Himself who intercedes with groanings, whereas he makes it just as clear that when a person prayed in tongues it was the believer’s own human spirit praying (τὸ πνεῦμα μου προσεύχεται). The difference between the two phenomena seems obvious.

The Efficacy of the Spirit’s Intercession

The Spirit’s groanings may be inaudible and perhaps even unuttered; and yet they are clearly known and understood by the Father. The Father is identified as “He who searches the hearts.” [47] This title demonstrates the Father’s complete competence to comprehend the Spirit’s groanings. Obviously, if He can search the inscrutable human heart, He is perfectly capable of comprehending the intercessory groanings of His own divine Spirit. [48] The important concept is that the Father, who is fully qualified, perceives completely “what the mind of the Spirit is.” Here “mind,” used only in Romans 8, carries the idea of “aim, aspiration or striving.” [49] In short, God perceives the intent of the Spirit’s intercession that is hidden in those unuttered groans.

What God fully understands about the mind of the Spirit is next specified: “that He intercedes according to God” (ὅτι κατὰ θεὸν ἐντυγχάνει). Most English translations render “that” in the casual sense of “because.” [50] In fact, Käsemann labels this “the accepted view.” [51] Taking “that” this way makes the Spirit’s interceding in accord with divine will, the reason God the Father knows the Spirit’s mind. But such is not necessarily the situation. The Father knows all things, hence no reason for knowing the Spirit’s mind need be given. [52]

The “that” in this context is better taken in the explicative sense, and translated “that.” [53] Paul is explaining several wonderful facts concerning the Spirit’s mind (aim or intention) in His intercessory groanings. First, God knows that the Spirit’s groanings are in the nature of intercessions (ἐντυγχάνει). The object of the Holy Spirit’s groanings is to lay bare all the deep hidden needs of the saints before the Father. Second, the Father knows that they are intercessions for people who are special to Him. He knows that the Spirit intercedes “for the benefit of saints” (ὑπὲρ ἁγίων). Saints are those who have been set apart from the rest of humanity by God’s sovereign choice (Ephesians 1:3). For this reason the Holy Spirit’s intercession for them is of special interest to the Father. Third, He, by knowing the mind of the Spirit, realizes fully that His intercessions are ever “according to God” (κατὰ θεὸν). These words are emphatic by position and indicate the most significant information in the entire explanatory phrase introduced by “that.” [54] The words “according to God” are almost universally recognized as meaning “according to God’s will.” [55] This means that the Spirit’s intercessory groans always coincide completely with the Father’s will.

The fact that the Spirit’s intercessory groanings are in complete accord with the Father’s will is especially significant to Christians. Since the Spirit in His intercession is helping them in their inadequate praying, then their praying (complemented by the Spirit’s praying) is inevitably in harmony with the will of God. All prayer in harmony with the will of God will be answered (1 John 5:14–15). Barth accurately observes that God “makes Himself our advocate with Himself that He utters for us that ineffable groaning, so that He will surely hear what we ourselves could not have told Him, so that He will accept what He Himself has to offer.” [56]

Conclusion

Christians are inadequate when it comes to knowing what to pray. However, they are assured that they never pray alone! The indwelling Spirit helps them in a positive way with their problem of prayer-ignorance, by praying along with them. By supplementing their pitiful prayers, He brings them into complete harmony with the will of God. This takes place every time a Christian prays, even if He is unaware of the Spirit’s intercession.

However, much of what is commonly labeled prayer is not prayer at all. Simply getting out a prayer list and mechanically mouthing pious-sounding generalities absolutely devoid of earnestness or urgency is not prayer, according to the Bible. Simply reciting the Lord’s Prayer in a church service without mental or emotional involvement comes closer to being labeled vain repetitions than true prayer. [57] Such so-called prayer does not have the cooperative intercessory help of the Holy Spirit for the simple reason that it is not really Christian praying.

Hendriksen cites an example of the prayer phenomenon depicted in these verses. A pastor had become seriously ill, and his congregation held almost nightly prayer vigils for his recovery. But he continued to worsen and finally died. At the funeral his friend said, “Perhaps some of you are in danger of arriving at the conclusion that the heavenly Father does not hear prayer. He does indeed hear prayer, however. But in this particular case, two prayers were probably opposing each other. You were praying, ‘Oh God, spare his life, for we need him so badly,’ The Spirit’s unspoken prayer was, ‘Take him away, for the congregation is leaning altogether too heavily upon him and not upon thee,’ and the Father heard that prayer.” [58]

Prayer need not always be correctly formulated to be effective. Indeed, the most inarticulate desires which spring from the right motive have shape and value beyond anything that is present and definable to the believer’s consciousness. [59] All too often the intercessory activity of the Holy Spirit is never taken into account. [60]

The significance of praying is not so much the fact of Christians’ praying, but the assurance that it triggers the Holy Spirit’s intercessory praying. The value of prayer ultimately lies in His intercessory groanings, not the believers’ ignorant praying.

Notes

1. C. E. B. Cranfield, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, 2 vols. (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark. 1977). 1:420; W. Hendriksen, Romans, 2 vols., New Testament Commentary, (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1980), 1:273; Ernst Käsemann, Commentary on Romans, trans. and ed. Geoffrey W. Bromiley (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1980), 240.
2. Everett F. Harrison, “Romans,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1976), 95; D. Martin Lloyd-Jones, Romans: The Final Perseverance of the Saints (8:17–39) (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1975), 121; John Knox, “The Epistle to the Romans,” in The Interpreter’s Bible, ed. George Arthur Buttrick, 12 vols. (New York: Abingdon-Cokesbury Press, 1953), 9:552.
3. R. C. H. Lenski, The Interpretation of St. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans (Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1961), 545.
4. Charles Hodge, A Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1950), 436; Lenski, Romans, 545; Henry C. Thiessen, “The Holy Spirit in the Epistle to the Romans,” (Th.D. diss., Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, Louisville, KY, 1929). 100.
5. All Scripture quotations are from the NASB unless otherwise indicated.
6. Hendriksen, Romans, 275; Lenski, Romans, 545; Lloyd-Jones, Romans, 132; A. T. Robertson, A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research (Nashville: Broadman Press. 1934), 573.
7. Thiessen, “The Holy Spirit,” 102; Lloyd-Jones, Romans, 133.
8. Lloyd-Jones, Romans, 133.
9. Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, s.v. “ἀσθενεῖα” by Gustav Stahlin; 1:490–93.
10. William F. Arndt and F. Wilbur Gingrich, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1957), 115; Donald Grey Barnhouse, God’s Heirs, Exposition of Bible Doctrines, vol. 7 (Romans 8:1–39) (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1963), 141; Lloyd-Jones, Romans, 123; F. A. Philippi, Commentary on St. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1879), 2:25.
11. Abraham Kuyper, The Work of the Holy Spirit (1900: reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., n.d.); 638.
12. Barnhouse, God’s Heirs; 142.
13. F. Tholuck. Cited by J. Lange and F. R. Fay, “The Epistle of Paul to the Romans.” Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, by John Peter Lange, 12 vols. (reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1960). 10:276; Käsemann, Romans, 239; Thiessen, “The Holy Spirit,” 104.
14. Cranfield, Romans, 422.
15. Hendriksen, Romans, 274; Lenski, Romans, 546.
16. E. H. Gifford, The Epistle of Paul to the Romans (London: John Murray, 1886: reprint ed., Minneapolis: James Family Publishers, 1977); Lenski, Romans, 545; William Sanday and Arthur C. Headlam, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, 5th ed. (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1902), 213.
17. Lenski, Romans, 546.
18. Cranfield, Romans, 421.
19. Gifford, Romans, 158: Cranfield, Romans, 421.
20. James Denney, “St. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans,” in The Expositor’s Greek Testament, ed. W. Robertson Nicoll, 5 vols (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1951), 2:651.
21. Alva McClain, Romans: The Gospel of God’s Grace (Chicago: Moody Press, 1973), 168.
22. Karl Barth, The Epistle to the Romans (London: Oxford University Press, 1933), 316.
23. Hendriksen, Romans, 275; A. T. Robertson, Word Pictures in the New Testament, 6 vols. (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1931), 4:377.
24. Lenski, Romans, 546.
25. Hendriksen, Romans, 277; Kuyper, The Holy Spirit, 637.
26. F. Godet, Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1956), 321; The New Scofield Reference Bible (New York: Oxford University Press, 1967), 1221.
27. Hendriksen, Romans, 278.
28. Henry Alford, The Greek Testament, 4 vols. (Chicago: Moody Press, 1958), 2:397; C. K. Barrett, Reading through Romans (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1977), 44; John Calvin, Commentary on the Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Romans (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1948); 213; Harrison, “Romans,” 96; Knox, “Romans,” 523.
29. Lenski, Romans, 548.
30. Lloyd-Jones, Romans, 137; Lenski, Romans, 547.
31. Hendriksen, Romans, 276.
32. Lloyd-Jones, Romans, 137.
33. Cranfield, Romans, 423; Gifford, Romans, 158: Hendriksen, Romans, 275.
34. Hendriksen, Romans, 276; Kuyper, The Holy Spirit, 636–37.
35. Gifford, Romans, 158; Hendriksen, Romans, 276; Kuyper, The Holy Spirit, 638–39.
36. Hendriksen, Romans, 274.
37. Barrett, Romans, 44; Käsemann, Romans, 240; Knox, “Romans,” 523.
38. Barth, Romans, 317; Denney, “Romans,” 651; Philippi, Romans, 27; Robertson, Word Pictures, 377; Shedd, Romans, 261.
39. R. Haldane, Epistle to the Romans (New York: Robert Carter, 1847), 395; Kuyper, The Holy Spirit, 623; Lenski, Romans, 551; H. A. W. Meyer, Critical and Exegetical Handbook to the Epistle to the Romans (New York: Funk & Wagnalls, 1889), 331; F. Tholuck, Exposition of St. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans (Philadelphia: Sorin & Ball, 1844), 268; B. Weiss, A Commentary on the New Testament, 5 vols. (New York: Funk & Wagnalls, 1906), 3:78.
40. Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, s.v. στενάζω by J. Schneider, 7:601.
41. Ibid., 600-601.
42. With creation’s groanings and the Christian’s groanings, the present tense of the verb is self-evident. However. Paul uses a noun στενάγμος in describing the Spirit’s groanings; yet even in this instance, the verbal action describing the groans is in the present tense: ὑπερεντυγχάνω.
43. Alford, The Greek Testament, 397; Lange, Romans, 277; Lenski, Romans, 547; Shedd, Romans, 261; Theissen, “The Holy Spirit,” 107.
44. Cranfield, Romans, 423; Hendriksen, Romans, 275; Lloyd-Jones, Romans, 135.
45. M. Black, Romans, New Century Bible (London: Marshall, Morgan, & Scott, 1973), 123; Godet, Romans, 321; Käsemann, Romans, 240; Knox, “Romans,” 523.
46. Cranfield, Romans, 423.
47. Ibid., 424; Käsemann, Romans, 242; Lenski, Romans, 548.
48. Cranfield, Romans, 424; Käsemann, Romans, 242.
49. Arndt and Gingrich, A Greek-English Lexicon, 866.
50. AV; NASB; NIV; RSV; TEV; Williams; and others.
51. Käsemann, Romans, 242.Sanday and Headlam, Romans, 214.
52. Black, Romans, 124; Cranfield, Romans, 424; Gifford, Romans, 158; Hendriksen, Romans, 278; Lenski, Romans, 548; Sanday and Headlam, Romans, 214.
53. Gifford, Romans, 158.
54. Cranfield, Romans, 424; Hendriksen, Romans, 278; Sanday and Headlam, Romans, 214.
55. Karl Barth, A Shorter Commentary on Romans (London: Oxford University Press, 1959), 102.
56. See the author’s book, Praying Jesus’ Way (Old Tappan, NJ: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1977), 119–29.
57. Hendriksen, Romans, 274.
58. Sanday and Headlam, Romans, 213.
59. Murray, Romans, 314.