Explanation:

Paul writes that the gospel is the power of God for salvation. We can understand what he means by seeing how he associates God’s power and the gospel in other passages.³ For example, in 1 Corinthians 2:1–5 he explains that when he preached to the Corinthians, he did not use lofty speech but decided to know nothing except Jesus Christ crucified. In other words, he did not prioritize rhetorical or philosophical argumentation, but simply presented the gospel. He then says he took this approach so that the Corinthians’ faith would rest on the power of God. In other words, Paul is saying that the gospel is the power of God, which means that it has the power to transform lives. As such, he did not need to use lofty words of wisdom for his preaching to be effective, but he simply preached the gospel, itself the power of God. Paul says something similar in 1 Thessalonians 1:5, where he writes that the gospel came to the Thessalonians not only in word but also in power.⁴ Likewise, in Romans 1:16, Paul says that the gospel is the power of God.

Counterargument:

While it is true that Paul sometimes associates the gospel with the power of God, we have to decide on the meaning of a verse based on context. In the case of Romans 1:16, we notice that a few verses earlier, Paul had explained that Jesus was declared Son of God in power, by the resurrection from the dead (Romans 1:4). Now Paul is saying that the gospel is the power of God. Given that Jesus was declared Son of God in power by the resurrection, and the gospel is the power of God, Paul likely has in mind that the gospel displays or demonstrates the power of God.⁵

Response to counterargument:

The problem here is that the immediate context is more influential than the broader context, and Romans 1:4 arguably falls outside the immediate context. When we focus on the immediate context, we notice that Paul is saying he is eager to preach in Rome (Romans 1:15). He then points out that he is not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God. In other words, the reason Paul points out that the gospel is the power of God is to explain why he is not ashamed of it. And the reason he wants to explain that he is not ashamed of the gospel is because he is bringing the gospel to Rome, where people would have found the notion of a crucified Lord embarrassing. Paul is saying that he is not embarrassed by the gospel, because it is God’s power to save. Given that Romans 1:4 falls outside the immediate context, we ought to allow Romans 1:15 to indicate Paul’s meaning. And Romans 1:15 suggests that Paul is saying the gospel is God’s power to save, not a demonstration of God’s power.

Explanation:

We can understand what Paul means when he says the gospel is the power of God by considering the grammar of Romans 1:16. First, when he writes for it is the power of God, the antecedent of is is the gospel. So Paul is saying that the gospel is the power of God. Now, the term power has to do with God’s power in the sense of God’s action, or operation. Still, not only does power denote power in the sense of action or operation, but the noun also carries a sense of factuality, or source.⁶ Thus, Paul is saying that the gospel is a source of God’s power.

Counterargument:

The problem with this argument is that it does not make sense to say that the gospel is the source of God’s power. God is all-powerful in and of himself and does not need something outside himself to be the source of his power. He would be as powerful as he is whether he sent Christ into the world to die for our sins or not. Thus, the gospel cannot be the source of God’s power.

Response to counterargument:

Paul is saying not that the gospel provides God with power but that it is a source of God’s power. In other words, God’s power is active and effective, and the gospel itself is an active and effective vehicle of God’s power. Thus, through the gospel, people’s lives are transformed as they come into contact with an effective source of God’s power. The gospel is a source of God’s power in the sense that God’s power is distributed through it, not in the sense that the gospel distributes to God his power.

The weakness of this view is that if the gospel is the power of God in the sense described, we might expect Paul to be more specific. That is, we might expect him to say specifically that the gospel is God’s power to transform or his power in the world.

Explanation:

Paul says that the gospel is the power of God. We can detect what Paul means by considering the content of the gospel. The gospel is the fact that Jesus Christ was sent into the world to die for our sins, was crucified on a cross, and God raised him from the dead. By raising Jesus from the dead, Jesus is declared Son of God (Romans 1:4) in a glorious display of God’s power. Thus, the gospel is the power of God in the sense that it demonstrates God’s power.⁹

Counterargument:

The problem with this argument is that it overlooks the meaning of the verb is. That is, Paul does not say that the gospel displays God’s power, as this view holds, but he says that the gospel is God’s power. The verb is is a verb of identity, which means that Paul is saying the gospel is identified as a source of God’s power.

Explanation:

We can detect what Paul means when he says the gospel is the power of God by considering the immediate context. For according to the immediate context, Paul is saying that he is not ashamed of the gospel (Romans 1:16). He then uses the particle for, which signals that he is about to indicate the reason he is not ashamed of the gospel. That is, he is not ashamed of the gospel because it is the power of God. In other words, the gospel displays God’s power by the resurrection, and Paul is not ashamed of this power.¹⁰

Counterargument:

The problem here is that it is the gospel Paul is not ashamed of, not the power of God demonstrated through the resurrection. The gospel involves not only the resurrection but also the life and crucifixion of Jesus Christ. Given the Romans' emphasis on social status, the crucifixion would have been the aspect of the gospel they found shameful, not the resurrection. Still, Paul is saying that he is not ashamed of the gospel, which includes the crucifixion, because it is the power of God.

Response to counterargument:

That God’s power is displayed in the resurrection implies that the Lord was killed and therefore had to be raised. Further, we know from Acts that Paul was mocked for preaching the resurrection (Acts 17:32). Thus, some were embarrassed by the notion that God could raise the dead, while Paul was not ashamed. For by raising the dead, God demonstrates his power.

The weakness of this view is that it does not capture the surprising fact that the gospel, which has to do with Jesus’ death on the cross, is the power of God. That God raised Jesus from the dead is an obvious display of God’s power, so Paul does not need to point out that he is not ashamed of the fact that God can raise the dead. Still, the fact that the gospel, which has to do with the Lord dying on the cross for the sins of those who hate him, is the power of God, is surprising. This is why Paul says he is not ashamed of it.