Man’s Ruin: Romans 1:1-32

por Donald Barnhouse

Editorial:

Eerdmans

, 1952

Overview

“Why have I chosen to direct your attention to that epistle of Paul’s which was sent originally to the Roman church? It is because the epistle to the Romans has the most complete diagnosis of the plague of man’s sin, and the most glorious setting forth of the simple remedy of justification by faith apart from the works of the law.” Thus begins Part One of Barnhouse’s massive commentary on Romans. Entitled Man’s Ruin, Part One covers Romans 1:1–32. With the deft eye of a master exegete, Barnhouse preaches on a number of issues in messages which include “The Trinity,” “The Communion of the Saints,” “God’s Righteousness” and 24 others.

Through a discussion of mankind’s fallenness may be difficult for many to stomach, Barnhouse’s meditation on man’s separation from God is a necessary component to any study of Romans. As Barnhouse expresses himself, “It is not pleasant to set forth these truths in the ears of men who do not wish to hear the truth, but it is in faithfulness to God that we thus speak.”

Contents

Top Highlights

“I am convinced that the ministry which seeks to exalt mankind can, in the end, do no good for mankind. On the contrary, the ministry which will reach the truths of man’s complete ruin in sin and God’s perfect remedy in Christ, can best reach the heart of the need of the human race and can bring the only remedy that can heal the heart which God has declared to be humanly incurable (Jer. 17:9).” (Page 1)

“It is because the epistle to the Romans has the most complete diagnosis of the plague of man’s sin, and the most glorious setting forth of the simple remedy of justification by faith apart from the works of the law.” (Pages 1–2)

“There are seven things said about the gospel in this chapter: One, it is the gospel of God; two, it was promised in the Old Testament; three, it concerns the Lord Jesus Christ, being, indeed, the gospel of God’s Son; four, it must be preached; five, it is the power of God unto salvation; six, it was to the Jew first and then to the Gentile; and seven, it is the revelation of the righteousness of God.” (Page 22)

“The secret of Paul’s greatness is indicated in the order of these two words. He was first a bondslave, utterly surrendered to the Lord, and then he was a sent one.” (Page 13)

“‘The Reformation was certainly the work of the epistle to the Romans and that to the Galatians, and it is probable that every great spiritual renovation in the Church will always be linked, both in cause and in effect, to a deeper knowledge of this book.’” (Page 2)

Product Details

• Title: Man’s Ruin: Romans 1:1–32
• Author: Donald Grey Barnhouse
• Publisher: Eerdmans
• Publication Date: 1952
• Pages: 301

About Donald Grey Barnhouse

Donald Grey Barnhouse (1895-1960). Probably the best known and most widely followed American Bible teacher during the early middle decades of this century. Born in Watsonville, California, he gained his training in a broad variety of institutions including Biola, Princeton Seminary, Eastern Seminary, and the University of Pennsylvania. In 1927 Barnhouse accepted the pulpit of Tenth Presbyterian Church in downtown Philadelphia, and it was from this church, where he continued the rest of his life, that he built his national and international empire. As early as 1928 and continuing through most of his career he spoke over radio networks of up to 455 stations, using the Bible expository method of teaching. The popularity of these broadcasts and later telecasts led to many invitations to conduct Bible conferences, and the increasing demand of these conferences led him, after 1940, to be absent from his pulpit six months a year. Also serving as an outlet for his sermons, Bible studies, essays, and editorials were the two magazines which he founded and edited, Revelation (1931–49) and Eternity, which continues to the present.

Barnhouse’s theology was an eclectic yet independent mix of dispensationalism, Calvinism, and fundamentalism. As a dispensationalist he developed elaborate eschatological schemes, yet he departed significantly from much dispensationalist teaching. His fearless and brusque attacks upon liberal Presbyterian clergymen led the Philadelphia Presbytery to censure him in 1932, yet he opposed the fundamentalist concept of separation, and in his later years gradually grew more mellow in his relations with the Presbyterian Church and the National Council of Churches.