Romans 8:28 should be rendered, “God works all things together with those who love him”.
N.T. Wright says Romans 8:28 has often been mistranslated. And it’s silly to use it as a platitude to mollify those who are suffering.
We know that in everything God works for good for with those who love Him, who are called according to His purpose.
N.T. Wright on the Bible’s Most Misunderstood Verse, time mark 32:47-34:30 (emphasis mine):
I was really helped by Brian Walsh and Sylvia Keesmatt who wrote a book called “Romans Disarmed” where they had taken the Greek really seriously and had pointed out that Paul uses the word ‘to work with’ and it’s about God working WITH those who love Him. It’s not ‘for’ those who love Him.
And who are those who love Him? He has just described them in the previous verses as the people who are groaning in prayer with the wordless groaning of the spirit in their hearts. That’s the description of loving God and being prepared to be caught up in His purposes.
The point of Romans 8:28 is that this is part of the key means by which God is putting the world right. So it’s not a sort of stoic, “oh well, it’ll all work out”, or “what doesn’t kill you make you stronger”. …
I was greatly helped by one of my own research students, Haley Goranson Jacob, who’s now published her book “Conformed to the Image of the Son” where she argues a very similar case. We know that God is working all things for good WITH those who love Him who are called according to His purpose, and the ‘called according to His purpose’ [means that] we are called to be like little small working models of Jesus Himself, conformed to the image of the Son, so that we have a responsibility for what’s going on in the world, and that responsibility starts with the prayer of lament for the awful things that happen in the world. So it certainly shouldn’t be used as a way of saying, “Oh well, experience is what you get when you don’t get what you want,” or something silly like that.
The RSV translated Romans 8:28 correctly: it used ‘with’, not ‘for’.
But the NRSV changed it back to ‘for’.
Could it be that the evildoers who’ve infiltrated the church wanted to keep using the bad translation as a platitude to confuse and shame victims of maltreatment, and to clamp down on all the prophetic voices which are lamenting and exposing the evils that the false church is enabling?
There are SO many people who use and abuse Romans 8:28 as a Pious Platitude. And so many victims / survivors who get “Bible thumped” with it … and even secular and New Age people use variations on it.
The ones who love God are the people who are groaning in pain for the plight of the world and the wickedness that is being wreaked by evildoers in this world.
A Cry For Justice 
I’m so glad my eye caught your email as I scanned through. This does not only make more sense logically but also reminds me that I suppressed my thoughts of the disjointedness at this verse. It doesn’t flow the way Paul authored his epistle to the churches in Rome. I hope it won’t be long before I can tuck into the Greek manuscripts and some of the work others have done in comprehending chapter eight.
Thank you, dear sister Barbara, for a reminder to reengage with the epistle to the churches in Rome with the guidance of the Holy Spirit and not ignore our own spirit’s nudge for the sake of accepting what we are told to believe.
Hi krg4j, welcome to the blog! 🙂 (As far as I can tell this is your first comment, and I try to welcome new commenters.)
To “not ignore our own spirit’s nudge for the sake of accepting what we are told to believe” — well said! That’s been the tortuous journey of my life ever since I started going to church. It’s been difficult to say the least. The masses believe what they are told to believe. In my view, ‘the masses’ in that sentence includes most people in the Western Church. So, if one is going to heed and believe the nudges from the Spirit (which happen when one’s own spirit is being nudged by the Holy Spirit) one is going to have to face down the masses who say “You are wrong! You are deluded! You are off your rocker!”
Not just silly. It can retraumatize.
Yes indeed, Shirley, it can retraumatise!
Good stuff. I think that some who wish to practice a faith without works like to excuse themselves of all personal responsibility before God and man as they take the sovereignty of God out of context. Scripture also teaches the responsibility of man.
I do not believe that we are all impotent vessels in the hand of God with no responsibility for our actions and choices but potent vessels in the hand of God who have responsibility for our actions and choices. I think no professed believer in their right mind would walk past a car crash or home on fire shouting at those who are trapped in the burning home or those who are injured and trapped in the car something like Romans 8:28 in a wrong context while they refuse to phone the emergency services and do what they can to help those who are hurt and in danger. Please do not tell these trapped people that “it’s the will of God for them to suffer this” and “let’s just leave them to the sovereign rule of God”.
I live in the United Kingdom and as figurehead the New King is sovereign of the land. But I feel all would agree that we can not hold him responsible and accountable for all crime or suffering in our land.
There are other attributes of God and you cannot take one Bible doctrine and one attribute to comfort yourself in your pet doctrine while you ignore all the rest. “Let’s simply cut out the rest of the counsel of God and build our faith on this one foundation.” This is not a right division of the word of truth, and I fear that in other cases that those who wish to justify their sin and neglect deceitfully handle the word of truth as they hide behind one doctrine and one attribute at the expense of all the rest to attempt to teach others that it is the will of God for them to suffer whatever the suffering is or [suffer] the evil acts of abuse, some so-called men of God are simply empowering abusers with [a way] to justify and continue in these crimes and sins all the while offering false hope and comfort to the victims of the Satanic and sinful acts of the devil’s children, but call themselves Christians.
I ask all one question. Is God the Father, Son and Holy Ghost sinless and Holy or not?
Stop hiding behind your grace-perversion Gospel like all good antinomian false prophets do to justify the sufferings that God has called the church to call others to peace from, and the sins you and others are guilty of, all under your false understanding of the sovereignty of God. Jude 3-5 describes these people.
Now I am not saying there is no suffering in this life or in the faith, but stop this out of context teaching about the sufferings of this world. Goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life [Psalm 23:6] and every good and perfect gift comes from above [James 1:17]. There is nothing good about suffering abuse. Yes, God can work good out of this but is not the author and approver of these sins or sufferings. The good He wants to work is to safe-guard, provide for and call to peace from these evils, not misquote Romans 8:28 to bring the victims of abuse some form of false hope and comfort while He wills them to continue suffering this abuse. Only your sadistic false God taught you that you are a sadistic sinner who needs to repent.
Good for you, sister, stand up to these abusers who call themselves Christians.
[Some paragraph breaks added to enhance readability. Editors.]
Hi Paul,
I found your comment very encouraging. You get it! 🙂 Thank you for saying these things —
When you wrote “Stop hiding behind your grace-perversion Gospel… stop this out of context teaching about the sufferings of this world”, I took your words as you forcefully rebuking the man who spiritually abused you. him. Am I right? Maybe there has been more than one man. My memory is sometimes loose at the margins, due to PTSD. You would relate, I’m sure, since you have PTSD also. 🙂
I’m pretty sure you won’t mind that I added some punctuation and a few clarifying words when I quoted you.
So, you’re in the UK! Nice. I’ll be visiting my daughter in England this year, and we plan a road trip to the north of Scotland. I’ll email you. If you and your wife live anywhere near where I’ll be going, maybe we could all meet for a cuppa.
Barb,
In your post, you wrote:
(The bold is in Barb’s post.)
That.
From the quote in your post:
(The word “all” in brackets was added by me.)
That.
In your post, you wrote:
(The word “who” in brackets was added by me.)
Yes.
In your post, you wrote:
That.
This post has been on my mind constantly since I read it a few days ago. It has caused a shift in my thinking. Thank you, Barbara! The “with” makes so much more sense than the “for”.
One word. One simple word. Mis-translated, and why? Ignorance. Or intentionality? I wonder if the Gatekeepers really are that wicked?
One word changed — “for” to “with” — yet it’s a world of difference.
“For” — keeps us weak, pitiful underlings reaching up to an untouchable magnanimous diety….and perfect targets for predators.
“With” — means we are co-laborers with the most powerful, loving, just Being in the universe. (Co-laborers = relationship. Wasn’t that His intent from the Beginning?)
What a difference!
The first makes me want to lay down and wait for Him to work, to rescue me.
The second makes me feel honored to get up beside Him in the yoke and do the hard work to learn and heal and grow, and rescue the weak and those heading for destruction.
Makes me feel resourced and empowered. And, contrary to popular church opinion, I am not a worthless worm, but made in His image — valued and valuable and uniquely essenced to be able to work in synchronism with Him.
The first is disheartening and can be debilitating. The second is winsome and delightful.
Hi Encourager,
You mightn’t have seen my earlier reply to your earlier comment. 😊 For your safety and protection, I changed the screen name you submitted with your comment to Encourager, the screen name you used most recently on the blog.
Encourager,
You wrote (9th March 2024):
I suspect it’s probably both….done in ignorance by some people, and done intentionally by other people.
You wrote:
That.
Finding Answers, I agree that it was probably done in ignorance by some people, and done intentionally by other people.