The phrase ὁ ὢν ἐπὶ πάντων θεὸς (ho ōn epi pantōn theos, “who
is over all, God”) is most naturally understood as modifying the nearest
antecedent, ὁ Χριστός (ho Christos, “Christ”). Greek grammar heavily
favors the attribution of a relative clause to the nearest antecedent unless
specific indicators suggest otherwise. Breaking the sentence after τὸ κατὰ
σάρκα (to kata sarka, “according to the flesh”) requires inserting a
pause not demanded by the Greek text. Such a construction introduces an
unnatural division in the sentence, making it less coherent.
The broader context of Romans 9:1–5 is Paul enumerating the privileges of
Israel, culminating in the greatest privilege: that the Messiah, Jesus Christ,
came from their lineage. Transitioning abruptly to a doxology about God the
Father after mentioning Christ disrupts this rhetorical flow and detracts from
the climactic point about Christ’s divine identity.
Early Church Fathers, such as Irenaeus, Tertullian, and Athanasius,
unanimously understood this verse as affirming Christ’s divinity.
- Irenaeus: “Paul
declares that Christ is God.” (Against Heresies, 3.16.3).
- Tertullian: “The
apostle speaks of Christ as ‘God over all.’” (Against Praxeas, 13).
These interpretations predate later theological disputes, demonstrating the
natural reading of the text as affirming Christ’s deity.
While Paul does not frequently use the term theos for Christ, his
writings unmistakably affirm Christ’s divinity in other ways:
- Philippians 2:6: Christ,
"existing in the form of God" (μορφῇ θεοῦ, morphē theou), did
not regard equality with God as something to exploit.
- Colossians 2:9: “In Him
dwells all the fullness of deity (θεότητος, theotētos) bodily.”
- 1 Corinthians 8:6: Paul
places Christ alongside God the Father in a reworking of the Shema, attributing
divine functions to Christ as the agent of creation.
Romans 9:5 fits within Paul’s broader Christological framework, in which
Christ is depicted as divine, worthy of worship, and coequal with God. While
infrequent, Paul's application of divine titles to Christ is not unheard of:
- Titus 2:13: “Our great
God and Savior, Jesus Christ” (τοῦ μεγάλου θεοῦ καὶ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ
Χριστοῦ).
- Romans 10:13: Paul
applies Joel 2:32 (“Everyone who calls on the name of Yahweh will be saved”) to
Christ.
The rarity of theos for Christ underscores its significance in
Romans 9:5, emphasizing Christ’s unparalleled divine status.
Critics propose that ὁ ὢν (the one who is) could be a scribal
addition and suggest a hypothetical original reading: ὧν ὁ (of whom).
However, this claim is speculative and unsupported by manuscript evidence. All
extant Greek manuscripts unanimously support the reading ὁ ὢν ἐπὶ πάντων
θεὸς without any variants suggesting ὧν ὁ. Introducing such a change
reflects conjecture rather than textual evidence. Metzger himself acknowledges
that “there is no evidence in the manuscripts to support such a correction.” The
hypothetical reading (ὧν ὁ ἐπὶ πάντων θεὸς) proposed by Fitzmyer lacks
parallels in Greek syntax and would create an awkward and unnatural phrase.
Some modern translations (e.g., Goodspeed, Moffatt) reflect theological
biases rather than the natural reading of the Greek text. By introducing
ambiguity, these translations attempt to avoid the clear attribution of
divinity to Christ. The traditional rendering (“Christ, who is over all, God
blessed forever”) is supported by numerous major translations, including the KJV,
ESV, NASB, NIV, and Catholic NAB.
Critics argue that Paul typically directs doxologies to God the Father.
However, this general pattern does not preclude exceptions, especially in
passages emphasizing Christ’s unique status. Romans 9:5 is consistent with
other Pauline texts where worship and exaltation are directed to Christ (e.g.,
Philippians 2:10–11, Colossians 1:15–20).
Raymond Brown is cited as acknowledging the ambiguity of Romans 9:5.
Critics argue that ambiguous texts should not be used to establish doctrine. However
the doctrine of Christ’s divinity is not derived from a single verse but is
supported by the broader testimony of Scripture, including John 1:1, John
20:28, Philippians 2:6, Colossians 2:9, and Hebrews 1:3,8. Romans 9:5
complements this broader witness, providing additional evidence rather than
standing alone as definitive proof. While Raymond Brown acknowledges
interpretive challenges, he does not deny the plausibility of the traditional
reading. Ambiguity in translation does not negate the validity of the text as
part of the cumulative biblical witness.
In conclusion, the traditional reading of Romans 9:5, identifying Christ as
“God over all, blessed forever,” is strongly supported by grammar, context, and
the broader Pauline corpus. Arguments against this interpretation rely on
speculative textual reconstructions, modern theological biases, and an
inconsistent application of interpretive principles. While Romans 9:5 is not
the sole foundation of Christ’s divinity, it remains a clear and powerful
affirmation of His divine status within the overarching testimony of Scripture.
