Albert Barnes Commentary Romans 1:3

"concerning his Son, who was born of the seed of David according to the flesh," — Romans 1:3 (ASV)

Concerning his Son. This is connected with the first verse, with the word gospel. The gospel of God concerns His Son. The purpose of the gospel was to communicate information about His Son, Jesus Christ. This is the whole of it. There is no good news for humanity regarding salvation except that which comes through Jesus Christ.

Which was made. The word translated was made usually means to be, or to become. It is used, however, in the sense of being born. Thus, Galatians 4:4 says, God sent forth his Son made of a woman, meaning born of a woman. In John 8:58, Before Abraham was [born], I am. It seems to be used in this sense here—meaning He was born, or descended, from the seed of David.

Of the seed of David. Of the posterity or lineage of David. He was a descendant of David. David was perhaps the most illustrious of the kings of Israel. The promise to him was that a man would not fail to sit on his throne (1 Kings 2:4; 1 Kings 8:25; 1 Kings 9:5; 2 Chronicles 6:16).

This ancient promise was understood as referring to the Messiah. Therefore, in the New Testament, He is called the descendant of David, and much care is taken to show that He was of his lineage (Luke 1:27; Matthew 9:27; Matthew 15:22; Matthew 12:23).

Matthew 21:9, 15; Matthew 22:42, 45; John 7:42; 2 Timothy 2:8.

Since the Jews universally believed that the Messiah would be descended from David (John 7:42), it was very important for the sacred writers to clearly establish that Jesus of Nazareth was of that line and family. Consequently, although our Savior was humble, poor, and obscure, He nevertheless possessed what a significant part of the world has typically prided itself on—an illustrious ancestry. For a Jew, there could hardly be any honor higher than being descended from the best of their kings. This demonstrates how little the Lord Jesus valued the honors of this world, as He consistently showed deep humility in circumstances where people are usually proud. Furthermore, when He spoke of worldly honors and their insignificance, He was not condemning something that was beyond His own reach.

According to the flesh. The word flesh—Greek sarx—is used in the Scriptures with a great variety of meanings:

1. It denotes, as it does for us, the literal flesh of any living being. For example, Luke 24:39 states, A spirit hath not flesh and bones, etc.
2. The animal system, the body, including flesh and bones—the visible part of a human being, as distinct from the invisible part, or the soul. For instance, Acts 2:31 says, Neither did his flesh see corruption (his body). (See also 1 Corinthians 5:5; 1 Corinthians 15:39).
3. The human being, the whole animated system, body and soul. For example, Romans 8:3: In the likeness of sinful flesh. (See also 1 Corinthians 15:50; Matthew 16:17; Luke 3:6).
4. Human nature. As a man. Thus, in Acts 2:30: God had sworn with an oath that of the fruit of his loins according to the flesh, [i.e., in his human nature,] he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne. And Romans 9:5: Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever.

This is its meaning here. He was a descendant of David in His human nature, or as a man. This implies, of course, that He had another nature besides His human one; or that, while He was a man, He was also something else—that there was a nature in which He was not descended from David. That this is its meaning will become even clearer from the following observations:

1. The apostle expressly makes a contrast between His condition according to the flesh and His condition according to the spirit of holiness.
2. The expression, according to the flesh, is applied to no one else in the New Testament but Jesus Christ. Although the word flesh often occurs and is often used to denote a human being, the peculiar expression according to the flesh occurs in no other connection.

Nor is such an expression ever used anywhere else. If it were applied to a mere man, we would instantly ask, in what other way could he come than in the flesh? Does he have a higher nature? Is he an angel or a seraph? The expression would be meaningless. Therefore, when it is applied to Jesus Christ, it implies, if language has any meaning, that there was a sense in which Jesus was not descended from David. What that was appears in the next verse.