“concerning his Son, who was descended from David according to the flesh and was declared to be the Son of God in power according to the Spirit of holiness by his resurrection from the dead, Jesus Christ our Lord.”
| Greek Term | Transliteration | Parsing | Theological Significance |
|---|---|---|---|
| ὁρισθέντος | horisthentos | Aor. pass. ptc., gen. masc. sg. (horizō) | Appointed, declared, marked out with power. Not ‘made’ Son but ‘designated’ publicly as what He always was. |
| εν δυνάμει | en dynamei | Prep. + dat. fem. sg. | In/with power. Modifies ‘Son of God,’ indicating a new mode of existence—the Son in resurrection power. |
| κατΰ πνεῦμα ἁγιωσύνης | kata pneuma hagiōsynēs | Prep. + acc. neut. sg. + gen. fem. sg. | According to the Spirit of holiness. Contrasts with ‘kata sarka.’ Refers to the Holy Spirit or Christ’s divine nature. |
| εξ αναστάσεως νεκρῶν | ex anastaseōs nekrōn | Prep. + gen. fem. sg. + gen. masc. pl. | Out of/by the resurrection of the dead. The historical, bodily resurrection is the instrument of this declaration. |
Paul begins his christological confession with Christ’s human lineage: He “was descended from David according to the flesh.” Charles Hodge notes that this clause grounds the messianic identity of Jesus in the Davidic covenant promises of 2 Samuel 7. The phrase kata sarka (“according to the flesh”) does not imply a deficiency but marks out the sphere of Christ’s human nature. John Murray emphasizes that kata sarka and kata pneuma in verse 4 are not a contrast between two ‘parts’ of Christ but two perspectives on the one undivided person—His human and His divine aspects respectively.
The critical verb is horisthentos (from horizō), meaning “to appoint, determine, or mark out with boundaries.” John Murray argues at length that this verb does not mean “made” or “constituted,” as if Christ became something He was not. Rather, the resurrection was the public, powerful declaration of what was eternally true—that Jesus is the Son of God. Calvin likewise insists that Christ was “declared” rather than “made” Son of God; the resurrection did not alter His ontological status but manifested it with irresistible evidence.
The phrase en dynamei (“in power”) is understood by Murray, Hodge, and Schreiner as modifying “Son of God” rather than the verb. That is, Christ was declared to be the Son-of-God-in-power—a new phase of His messianic reign. Before the resurrection, He was the Son of God in weakness, humiliation, and suffering; after it, He is the Son of God in power, exaltation, and glory. R.C. Sproul describes this as the transition from the state of humiliation to the state of exaltation, a standard category in Reformed Christology.
The phrase kata pneuma hagiōsynēs (“according to the Spirit of holiness”) is debated. Murray understands this as a reference to the Holy Spirit, the divine agent who raised Christ (cf. Rom. 8:11). D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones similarly takes it as a reference to the Third Person of the Trinity. Thomas Schreiner allows that it may refer either to the Holy Spirit or to Christ’s own divine nature—His “spirit of holiness” in contrast to His “flesh.” In either case, the resurrection is the work of God, accomplished in the sphere of the Spirit.
The prepositional phrase ex anastaseōs nekrōn (“by the resurrection from the dead”) provides the temporal and instrumental ground of this declaration. Douglas Moo notes that nekrōn is plural (“of dead ones”), which may indicate not merely Christ’s own resurrection but the eschatological resurrection that His rising inaugurates. Leon Morris agrees, suggesting that Christ’s resurrection is the “first-fruits” (cf. 1 Cor. 15:20) and thus implicates the entire resurrection harvest.
Theological Summary: Romans 1:3–4
The resurrection is God’s public verdict on the identity of Jesus. It does not make Him the Son of God but declares Him to be so ‘in power.’ This passage establishes the resurrection as foundational to Paul’s Christology and to the entire epistle. Reformed theology has consistently read horisthentos as ‘appointed/declared’ rather than ‘made,’ preserving the eternal Sonship of Christ against adoptionist readings. The resurrection thus marks the transition from humiliation to exaltation—the glorified Christ now reigns as Son of God in power.