The apostle Paul was in his prime when he wrote his letter to the Romans. He was at the top of his game and Romans should be called his “magnum opus.” It’s the longest and most theologically significant letter that Paul wrote. With that said, Romans is perhaps the least controversial, yet most important book in the New Testament. Paul’s desire—yet inability to visit is that Rome—created one of the most magnificent pieces of literature of all time. If I was to describe the book of Romans with one word it would be “saving.”
In his commentary on Romans, Ben Witherington reveals, “Embarking on a study of Romans is rather like beginning a long journey – it requires a certain amount of preparation, patience, and faith, as the goal of understanding this formidable discourse is not reached for a considerable period of time.”[1] My hope and prayer is that this document can help you as you begin your long journey of study from Romans.
KEY VERSE IN ROMANS. “For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith; as it is written, “BUT THE RIGHTEOUS man SHALL LIVE BY FAITH” (Romans 1:16–17, NASB).[2]
THE PURPOSE OF ROMANS.[3] The first and most clear reason Paul wrote Romans was sin preparation for his travels to Spain (Rom 1:11–13; 15:22–25). We should not be surprised at Paul’s desire to go to Spain because it had not yet been evangelized[4] and evangelization was always Paul’s goal.
Second, the letter was meant also to show that Paul wanted Rome to be a base of operation in his desire to reach west of Rome which did not have the gospel. An extensive letter like this would have shown what teaching he provides and it would invite them to participate financially in his mission.
A third reason Paul possibly wrote Romans was to lay out a clear teaching of the gospel in case he never made it to Rome. In this way, his doctrine could go to Rome and extend beyond it if he never was able to travel to Rome or beyond Rome.
A fourth and often overlooked reason for writing this letter was the constant need to guide and encourage new believers of the Christian faith. Paul’s first letter, Galatians, provides evidence for the doctrinal drift and confusion that could occur just a few years into the life of a new church. While the church in Rome was in a healthy position (Rom 15:14-16), the need to keep churches doctrinally sound among potential threats (as described in Romans 15:1-8 and Romans 16:17-20) was always needed.
A fifth reason Paul writes Romans was to correct any misunderstandings of Paul’s message or motivations in ministry. Paul regularly received slander and verbal attacks to his message and motivations in ministry (Gal 1:1, 10–24; 2:1–2, 7; 1 Cor 3; 2 Cor 10—12). It seems likely that Paul wanted this letter to clarify both his message and motivations in ministry.
A sixth reason the letter was written was to resolve potential divisions that had occurred or were occurring within the church.
“People usually consider Paul’s letter to the Romans a deeply theological book, and it is. But it’s so much more than that. The book of Romans addresses a problem that faces every church: the problem of cultural, and even ethnic, division.”[5] One prominent New Testament scholar states, “This is an ambassadorial letter of sorts, intended not only to help mend fences in Rome but to promote the larger agenda of the gospel which is represented by the collection—namely Jew and Gentile united in Christ. As such it is largely an example of deliberative rhetoric, the rhetoric of advice and consent.”[6]
Joseph Fitzmyer summarizes the purpose of Romans this way, “Paul writes Romans for ad hoc purposes: a letter to introduce himself to the Roman community, to seek support and aid from it for his projected trip to Spain, to ask for prayers and perhaps intercession of the Roman Christians with their colleagues in Jerusalem, so that, when he goes there with the collection, he will be rightly welcomed.”[7]
Ben Witherington summarizes Romans this way, “Paul is not writing to correct problems or misunderstandings his own ministry with the audience has created (unlike the Corinthian letters), nor is this a progress-oriented letter to those wlong since converted by Paul (unlike Philippians). Paul must pick and chose his words here in Romans very carefully, knowing that first impressions are important. This document is more like an ambassadorial sort of document than a letter-essay to friends or understudies.”[8]
BIG IDEA. The apostle Paul teaches both Jews and gentiles about their inherited sin nature, God’s gracious gift of salvation obtained by faith in Jesus Christ, and that God’s grace that has been extended to all people.
AUTHORSHIP OF ROMANS. The book of Romans is part of what’s called the hauptbriefe, which is a list of letters in the New Testament that almost all scholars accepted as written by Paul. The book of Romans, 1 Thessalonians, Galatians, 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians, Philippians, and Philemon are all seen as authentic letters written by Paul (even liberal scholars admit this).
I agree with Craig Keener who writes, “Churches naturally preserved letters of Paul; It would have been unnatural for anyone to have forged letters in his name during his lifetime or until long after his genuine letters had become widely known and circulated as authoritative.”[9] A. T. Robertson sings the same song, “The genuineness of the Epistle is so generally admitted by scholars that it is unnecessary to prove it.”[10]
Ben Witherington also agrees, “About the authorship of this document there is little or no debate. Paul wrote it.”[11]
Internal Evidence. Paul calls himself a bond servant of Christ (Rom 1:1), an apostle (Rom 1:1), he is an apostle to the gentiles (Rom 11:13; 15:15–20). He says that he wants to come see the people he is writing to (Rom 1:10b–12), but has been prevented from doing that (Rom 1:13–15). He was prevented from coming to them (Rom 15:22), but he hopes to visit them soon when he goes to Spain (Rom 15:23–24). He’s going to Jerusalem to deliver a gift (Rom 15:25–27), but when done he will go to Rome (Rom 15:28–29).
Paul likely was born at the same time as Jesus in the city of Tarsus (Acts 9:11), an important city in the Roman province of Cilicia within Asia Minor. This “Paul” is an Israelite, descendant of Abraham, from the tribe of Benjamin (Rom 3:9; 4:1; 9:24), has a strong desire to win the lost (Rom 9:1–5; 10:1–4), and has preached the gospel where it has not been preached (Rom 15:20) from Jerusalem to Illyricum (Rom 15:18–19).
We could identify Paul as the author of the book of Romans by his name directly (Rom 1:1), family background (Rom 11:1), travels (Rom 15:25–27), and relationships (Rom 16:1–24).
External Evidence. No one from church history ever raised a voice to challenge the authorship of Romans. There was no serious challenge to the claim that Paul wrote Romans.[12]
Various ancient writers include Romans in their lists of authentic documents: Marcion, the Muratorian fragment, as well as a steady stream of patristic writers starting with Ignatius, Polycarp, Justin Martyr, and Irenaeus all say Paul wrote Romans.
Similarly, here’s a list of apostolic Fathers that echo phrases from Romans: Clement in 1 Clement 32.1 (Rom 9:5); 35.5 (Rom 1:29–32); Ignatius in The Epistle of Ignatius to the Ephesians 19.3 (Rom 6:4); The Epistle of Ignatius to the Magnesians 6.2 (Rom 6:17); The Epistle of Ignatius to the Trallians 9.2; The Epistle of Ignatius to the Symrnaeans 1.1 (Rom 1:3–4).
Amanuensis. According to Romans 16:22, Tertius was Paul’s amanuensis for the book of Romans. One Bible dictionary I often use defines an amanuensis as, “A secretary who assisted an employer by taking direct verbal dictation, copying, or writing on their behalf.”[13]
Amanuenses often performed a broad range of work. An amanuensis might “dictate” what an authored wanted to write or might “write” on behalf of the author. “The use of amanuenses in some biblical texts raises questions about the extent to which amanuenses aided in writing and editing these texts, which ultimately touches on the nature of biblical inspiration. In such discussions, it is important to remember that final responsibility for the amanuensis’ work fell to the employer or sender.”[14]
“Amanuenses may have been involved in other New Testament writings as well: • Tradition holds that Mark copied the Gospel of Mark from Peter’s recollections of Jesus’ life and ministry. • Luke, who is attributed with writing the book of Acts and the Gospel of Luke, may have functioned as Paul’s amanuensis. • Peter may have used Silvanus as an amanuensis in writing 1 Peter (1 Pet 5:12), although it could be argued that Silvanus acted as letter carrier rather than secretary (Richards, “Silvanus.”). Silvanus may be a primary point of contact between Peter and Paul (compare Acts 15:22; 2 Cor 1:19; 1 Thess 1:1; 2 Thess 1:1).”[15]
DATE AND OCCASION. Paul’s letter to the Romans was meant to provide an introduction to him as an apostle and garner support for him on his future journey to Spain. (If the believers in Rome knew Paul and his teachings, he hoped they would support him.)
Paul likely wrote the book of Romans from Corinth in AD 57 during the three months he spent in that city as recorded in Acts 20:1–3 (with three months of leisure time we could expect a massive letter such as Romans to be composed). This was part of Paul’s third missionary journey. Romans 15:26 mentions he received contributions from Macedonia and Acaia for the poor in Jerusalem and Acts 20:3–6 mentions that he was preparing to return to Jerusalem with this love offering. Romans 15:28–29 reveals Paul’s plans to stop in Rome on his way to Spain after he delivers a contribution to the poor in Jerusalem (see Rom 15:25–28; Acts 20—21). Paul wanted to go to Rome (Rom 1:13; 15:22–23). Acts 20:3 and 2 Cor 13:1, 10 tell us he spent three months in Corinth in winter or spring of AD 57. Most scholars conclude that Paul wrote Romans in AD 57, from Corinth, during the last part of his third missionary journey.
Additional support for this view that Paul wrote from the city of Corinth is based on Paul commending Phoebe (who carried this letter according to Rom 16:2) and resided in Cenchrea (a neighboring town of Corinth, see Rom 16:1–2). When “Gaius” sends his greetings in the letter (Rom 16:23) it may be the same Gaius who was Paul’s host and that Paul baptized in Corinth (1 Cor 1:14). The “Erastus” in Romans 16:23 might be the same man mentioned in 2 Timothy 4:20 that Paul has left in Corinth and might match an inscription mentioned in Corinth.[16] In Rom 16:21 Paul mentions “Timothy” and “Sosipater” who also accompanied Paul on his travels to Jerusalem (Acts 20:4).
Ben Witherington summarizes the discussion of the date of Romans this way, “No time better suits the composition of this letter than the three-month winter stay in Corinth Paul had prior to his trip to Jerusalem in spring 57.”[17]
THEMES. The themes of Romans consist of contrasts. These contrasts are prominent and reiterated in almost every chapter either by using the word, a synonym, or a reference to the concept. The themes are contrasts between:
- Jew and Gentile. This theme is emphasized in that the gospel—good news—can save both Jew and Gentile.
- Sin and Grace. “No account can be given of God’s grace until full appreciation has been made of man’s sin, and this is well illustrated in this Epistle.”[18]
- Law and Faith
- Death and Life
AUDIENCE. Paul’s letter is addressed to the Christians living in Rome (Rom 1:7). The audience of Paul’s letter to the Romans included both Jews (Rom 1:13; 4:1; 9:1—11:36) and gentiles (Rom 1:5, 12–14; 11:13).[19] Yet, I believe it was written to gentile Christians to rehearse and teach them about their roots of their Christian faith. Gentile Christians were probably the majority; Jewish Christians were probably the minority.[20]
We cannot ignore the list of names Paul mentions in Romans 16:1–23. If Paul had never been there and the church did not know him, why and how could he include this list of names? Ben Witherington explains, “Paul has a specific rhetorical strategy for including these names in a letter to a congregation he does not have an apostolic relationship with – namely he wishes to establish credibility and rapport and make the audience more receptive to his coming and sharing with them. The names and the various greetings improve his honor rating with at least a part of the audience. The rhetorical effect at the end of the letter is to cement the fact that he already has some relationship with some Christians in Rome, so that his words need to be taken seriously and respected. He is drawing on his existing social networks to establish a basis for Rome being his own future launching bad for missions in the west.”[21]
Suetonius, in his Life of Claudias, says that the Roman emperor Claudias expelled Jews from Rome in AD 49 because of rioting due to debates about who Christ was (25.2, 4). The Roman government was normally tolerant of different religions, but emperor Claudius (AD 41 to 54) prohibited proselytizing. Most scholars believe Claudius expelled Jews from Rome (Acts 18:2) in AD 49 because of unrest in the Jewish community about Christianity.[22]
This would have happened in AD 49. This was verified by Luke when he writes that Priscilla and Acquila, residents of Rome, were in Corinth because of that edict (Acts 18:2). Whatever the context, the letter is written to those in Christ (Rom 1:6) in Rome (Rom 1:7) who have a strong and mature faith (Rom 1:11–12; 15:14; 16:19).
The letter was meant to encourage mature believers, likely Gentiles that have spent years living as Christians in Rome, who were also welcoming back Jews who had been expelled from the city but now are returning after the edict of Claudias had lifted. (Most scholars believe the edict would not have been in place for very long, especially since Claudias died in AD 54.)[23] The expulsion of Jews from Rome was not a permanent decree. [24]Thus, Jews would be returning to Rome to find a strong Gentile Christian church, to which Paul is teaching the Gentile Christians how to welcome back these Jewish Christians.[25]
It’s important to remember that Paul’s audience was likely a group he didn’t know well. Because of this, Paul’s persuasion was different than how he approached other believers who had been under his guidance and teachings for a considerable time.[26]
I agree with Ben Witherington who states, “Paul as the apostle to the Gentile Christians in Rome, although he is happy for Jewish Christians to overhear this conversation. It is Gentile Christians in Rome that he feels mainly need exhorting, and it is Gentile Christians in Rome he feels he has some claim on, since he is the apostle to the Gentiles.”[27]
THEOLOGICAL TREATISE. Various scholars regard Romans as a theological “treatise.” Let’s define that word, “a systematic exposition or argument in writing including a methodical discussion of the facts and principles involved and conclusions reached.”[28]
I agree with Donald Guthrie who writes that Romans “provides a well-reasoned presentation of some of his most dominant concepts, and it may well be that it was Paul’s intention to inform the Roman church of these so that when he visited them the Christians would be intelligently acquainted with his teaching.”[29]
I also believe Guthrie is correct to state, “a clear distinction must be made between the basic use that Christians have made of this Epistle and the purpose for which Paul originally intended it. It cannot be maintained that he envisaged laying the foundations of Pauline theology in this way. Moreover, there are some aspects of this theology which find no part in the argument of this Epistle, such as eschatology and the doctrine of the church. It is not possible, therefore, to regard this Epistle as a full statement of Paul’s doctrine.”[30]
The Life Application Commentary further explains, “Because Paul was introducing himself to the Romans, he carefully outlined his beliefs. And because Paul was writing to help strengthen the faith of these young Christians, he was careful to build his case slowly, starting with the basics. The result was a concise, logical, and well-ordered presentation of Christian theology.”[31]
While some people claim Romans is a systematic theology or theological treaty, the letter does not address several important theological topics. Ecclesiology is not explained in the letter. While the word, “ekklesia” occurs in Romans 16:1, 4, 5, 16, 23, it describes a local house church and does not provide instructions about the church. Romans 12:3–8 mentions “the body of Christ” but doesn’t describe the community as a church. Eschatology is only referenced within the context of God’s judgment (Rom 2:5–11) and the need for vigilance before the end time. There is no teaching on the “parousia” and the Eucharist is not even hinted at in this letter.
THE CITY OF ROME. When Paul wrote to the Christians living in Rome, it was the capital city of the vast and massive Roman Empire. Rome was, at that time, “the diplomatic and trade center of the world.”[32] Many people believe the population of Rome was 1,000,000 residents at the time Paul wrote his letter.[33] It’s also estimated that about 40 percent of those 1,000,000 residents were slaves or had been slaves. It was the largest and most influential city of the first-century. It was an economic hub and vast commercial empire that had enjoyed worldly prominence for more than a century. The phrase, “All Roads Lead to Rome” was true because of the network of highways built to connect it to many other cities.
In the mid-fifties AD, Nero was the emperor of Rome. Historians tell us that the first five years of Nero’s rule went very well. Later, in the 60s, Nero becomes a persecuting monster against the Christians. Nero was tutored by the philosopher Seneca and was guided by Burrus. But after each of these men’s death Nero appears to have gone mad. In AD 59 Nero killed his mother and his wrath later would be famously directed against Christians. Yet all of this occurs after Paul writes Romans in AD 57.
We know from acts that Paul had a habit of traveling to large economic metropolitan influential cities to conduct his missionary work. “Rome was the hub of the ever-expanding empire. Anyone like Paul with an urban ministry strategy and desire to reach the West could not possibly ignore this city of vital importance. It was the empire’s largest city.”[34] Traveling to and through Rome would match that same pattern of ministry that we read about in the book of acts from Paul.
Rome was a wonderful place to live for the rich, but a hard place if you were poor like most people. The divide between rich and poor meant the poor were never far from rioting. Street crime was common, most people lived in “high rise” six-story apartments, and sanitation/water was only available on the first floor. This scenario meant that people have to fend for themselves. Often this was done by the people gathering in neighborhoods according to ethnicity. (Some people have compared this element in Rome to New York City in the 19th century and 20th century.) Charles Swindoll writes, “Life was hard for everyone, but being a Christian in that environment made it even worse. For both Jewish and gentile Christians, the price of discipleship meant the loss of family and clan, including the safety of these provided. They must have felt like squirrels living among angry giants, anyone whom might decide to crush them on a whim.”[35] In this context, emperor Augustus (27 BC – AD 14) added an urban police force (called cohorts urbane) to keep order in the city.
The city of Rome was also a melting pot of cultures and languages. There were many Jews[36] living there, most of which were poor, although there were some groups of Jews that were better educated and wealthier.[37] The Jews lived as different groups of segregated parts of the city and had their own leaders in those smaller communities. Ancient literature we’ve discovered indicates the Romans looked down on Jews because of circumcision (Rom 2:25–29; 4:9–12), Sabbath-keeping (Rom 14:5–6), and food customs (Rom 14:2–23). The city was polytheistic with worship of many foreign deities alongside emperor worship.
“During the period of the Roman Republic (509–527 b.c), the Romans adopted and ‘Romanized’ Greek gods. Thus Zeus, the king of the gods, became Jupiter, Hera became Juno, Poseidon became Neptune, Hermes became Mercury, and Aphrodite became Venus. Emperor worship also was encouraged. This worship was enforced in varying degrees, depending on the emperor’s disposition. Devout Jews had very different worship patterns and would never worship the emperor, so the Jewish community was often persecuted and was expelled from Rome several times.”[38]
Rome was a very religious city. It’s pagan religion focused on Jupiter, other gods, and many superstitions. Various gods, idols, and superstitions from other territories were often brought to Rome when those colonies were conquered. We read about many of these pagan religious practices on Paul’s missionary journeys (Acts 13:6–12; 14:11–18; 16:16–18; 17:16–23; 19:23–41). “Rome was filled with gods, and the prevailing thought was that all the gods were real. Thus, Jews and Christians who insisted on one God were viewed as atheists because they denied the existence of all the other deities.”[39]
THE BEGINNING OF THE CHURCH OF ROME. There are three traditions about who founded the church in Rome. I’ll start with the least likely option and end with the most likely option.
Peter. According to the Catalogus Liberianus 25.4(AD 354) the church was founded by Peter and Peter was its first bishop. Additionally, Irenaeus writes in about AD 180 that Peter and Paul both founded the church in Rome (Haer 3.1.2; 3.3.1).
However, it seems unlikely because Peter was still in Jerusalem for the Jerusalem Council in AD 50, and we know that Claudias kicked Jews out of the city of Rome because of rioting caused by Christ which occurred in AD 49. (How could Christians be in Rome as a result of Peter’s ministry if he had not yet been to Rome?)
This also seems unlikely because Paul probably would not have invested time and energy into a city which had already been evangelized (see Rom 15:20 where Paul writes that he won’t build on another man’s foundation). “The question of Peter’s connection with Rome cannot be answered with any conciseness, although any claims that Peter was founder of the church there may at once be dismissed.”[40] Additionally, if Peter had founded the church in Rome, it’s hard to believe Paul would not mention this details somewhere in his letter.
Jewish Converts from Feast of Pentecost. A possible view is that Jews from the city of Rome, who were converted on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:10), could have brought their faith in Jesus as Messiah back to the city of Rome. In this way, the Gospel would have started in Jewish synagogues and spread from there. However, it seems unlikely a group of new believers like that would establish such an influential church. With that said, this is perhaps the most common view today.
Associates of Paul. Another possible origin of the church in Rome was that associates of the apostle Paul had taken the gospel to the city and began the church there. I think this view is most likely for several reasons.
First, this is a pattern seen in other areas of the New Testament (Acts 19:10; Col 1:6–7).
Second, Paul seems to have had a long list of friends and associates in the city (he lists twenty-six by name in Rom 16:3–16 in a way that suggests they had shared a gospel-centered ministry on other occasions).
Third, the letter does not attempt to defend Paul’s apostolic authority. The readers seem to assume and know he’s an apostle appointed by Christ.
Fourth, Paul’s first-missionary journey was in AD 47–48 and Romans was written in AD 57, thus leaving a ten-year span in which some of his earliest converts of his missionary trip could have taken the gospel “further” to Rome on his behalf.
Fifth, the Roman commercial empire spanned many countries and thousands of miles. It should not surprise us that the gospel reached Rome without Paul going there. Maybe someone traveling to a city in which Paul was conducting his first missionary journey (AD 47–48) or second missionary journey (AD 49–52) heard the gospel while traveling there and then returned back to Rome with it. This could have occurred not as just something on “one occasion” or by “one person” but by several different groups at different times, presenting a “composite” founding of the church by different groups at different times.[41]
Some scholars believe Christianity in Rome consisted of a group of house churches. While Paul sometimes gave greeting to a church (1 Cor 1:2; 2 Cor 1:1), but in his letter to the Romans he greets the Roman Christians as “to all who are beloved of God in Rome, called as saints” (Rom 1:7a).[42]
THE CHURCH THAT EXISTED IN ROME. Based on the list of Christians in Romans 16, it’s clear there was a significant presence of Christians in Rome. There must have been some Christians who had a significant social status and economic affluence that allowed them a home with a large enough space to gather a group of believers.
Most people in Rome lived in what was called an insula which was an apartment house.[43] In Rome “patrons” were wealthy persons who were benefactors and protectors of other people. These patrons likely were those who hosted gatherings of Christians in Rome.
Thus, groups of different house churches in one city likely caused dissension and conflict. It is interesting that in the chapter that mentions the many individuals also contains a strong exhortation against division and dissension (Rom 16:17–19).
Various house churches scattered throughout Rome have been because no apostolic roots or authority present in the church.
ROMANS AND THE NEW PERSPECTIVE ON PAUL. The book of Romans has been at the center of the teaching known as the “New Perspective on Paul.” By “new” this is a teaching that developed in the late twentieth-century and was popularized by E.P. Sanders, James Dunn, and N.T. Wright.
The New Perspective on Paul has sought a correct understanding of Judaism in Paul’s day. In their opinion, Martin Luther and other Protestant reformers incorrectly taught that the “law” Paul denounced in Romans was a legalistic system of earning salvation through a merit system of good works. The New Perspective on Paul believes the Reformers were wrong to believe Paul taught in Romans that Judaism offered no forgiveness or grace from God.
Instead, the New Perspective on Paul believes that when Paul references “law” in Romans, he’s thinking of the maintenance of the Jews’ status as God’s chosen people (not as a means of salvation). I must admit, this shift is subtle, but significant.
As we conclude our brief look at the New Perspective on Paul I believe Craig Keener rightly observes, “the emerging ‘new perspective’ has yielded a conglomeration of different solutions rather than a new unified understanding of Paul.”[44]
ROMANS UNIQUENESS.[45] Paul’s letter to the Romans is in a class of its own. As we compare Romans with Paul’s other twelve letters as well as other Greco-Roman epistles, Romans is unique in many ways.
Among Paul’s Letters. Romans is unique among Paul’s writings because he did not have a deep personal connection with these people. Romans is similar to Colossians in which Paul had never been to the city in which he was writing a letter to its church.
Romans is unique among Paul’s writings in that he shares a theological presentation more than a personal correspondence. The book of Romans reads more like a formal lecture or an attorney’s defense than it does a personal letter. Most scholars see Romans 1:18—11:36 as a “treatise” or “essay” embedded within a letter.
Romans is unique among Paul’s letters in that it is the longest of his letters. The book of Romans contains 7114 words in Greek. It’s first in our listing of Paul’s letters because of its length, but also because of its importance. At this point I believe it’s important for us to recognize how Paul’s letters have been arranged into our Bibles. As you might know, Paul wrote letters to churches (Romans-2 Thessalonians) and he wrote letters to individuals (1 Timothy-Philemon). Within these two groupings, the order is arranged according to length.
AUDIENCE OF ROMANS.
FALSE TEACHINGS CORRECTED IN ROMANS
THE GENRE OF ROMANS. Twenty-one of the twenty-seven New Testament books are letters. Of those twenty-one letters, thirteen of those letters were written by Paul. Paul’s letters make up about one quarter of the New Testament. Only Luke wrote more.
Letters were occasionally used in Israel and the ancient Near East (see 2 Sam 11:14-15 and Ezra 4—5), but it wasn’t until the Greco-Roman world that letters became a popular and established method of communication.[46]
In summary, Greco-Roman letters normally included an address and greeting, a body, and conclusion. Christian letters followed the same pattern but added a doxology or benediction after the conclusion.
It’s important to note that some scholars make a distinction between “letters” and “epistles.” First-century letters were normally private writings that were not meant to be published. First-century epistles were public pieces of literature that were carefully composed and expected to be widely read. If we place each of those categories as opposite ends of an extreme, most of Paul’s writings appear in the middle of those two extremes. “Although the Pauline writings form a corpus today, which have often been given the title ‘epistles,’ it is far from certain that they were originally intended as such by their author, and this title for Romans in particular has often been queried.”[47]
As I shared earlier, letters were not a typical method of religious communication in Israel and Judaism. The Greco-Roman letter communication was adopted into the first-century Christian Church for several reasons.[48] One, the Christian church was growing quickly and spreading to new distant places, so Christian leaders needed a way to communicate with new leaders and churches from a distance. Two, the Christian leaders were able to use this style of communication to develop and maintain personal relationships and trust with those same people who were often located hundreds of miles away.
With that said, I believe J. R. Daniel Kirk is correct when he writes, “Paul wrote Romans to address a specific situation. Let me say this differently. Romans is not Paul’s systematic theology. It’s not a timeless bit of reflection on all the awesome stuff God that has done. Romans has often been read like this, especially because Paul had never been to Rome, and there is no indication he had received any specific communication about the situation on the ground.”[49]
PAUL’S EVENTUAL VISIT TO ROME.[50] Paul makes it clear in this letter that he wants to visit Rome (Rom 1:8-15; 15:14-33). But did he ever get to travel there?
The book of Acts reveals that Paul arrived in Rome in AD 60. Paul likely wrote Romans in AD 57, then faced an arrest, trial, two years of languishing in prison (see Acts 24:27), and a shipwreck endured a shipwreck between Paul’s letter to the Romans and his visit to them.
Paul probably arrived in Rome in AD 60 (see Acts 28:14-16) to stand trial before one of Nero’s representatives (likely the Praetorian Prefect). At this time the emperor Nero was transitioning from a stable leader to a crazy madman. When Paul arrived in Rome in AD 60 Nero had murdered his mother, his trusted adviser Burrus had died, and the famous teacher Seneca had retired.
Most scholars believe that Paul was freed from this “first” trial in Rome. Clement writes that Paul “reached the limits of the West” (1 Clement 5:7). Some believe this means he was able to travel to Spain as Paul had intended (Rom 15:24).
Paul likely was arrested again and imprisoned in Rome. He was then executed there. Several extra-biblical testimonies bear witness to this. Clement said that Paul (and Peter) both died in Rome under suffering instigated by Nero (1 Clement 5:2-5). The Mamertine Prison—Rome’s state prison in the first-century—contains a carving of Paul and Peter baptizing their jailers.
We do not have specific details of Paul’s second trial or his martyrdom. Church tradition tells us he was beheaded on the Ostian Way near the same place and at approximately the same time as Peter (see Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, 2.25.7-8).
MY FAVORITE QUOTES FROM ROMANS
“Romans may not be the best biblical book to put in the hands of most unsafe people to lead them to salvation. John is better for that purpose. However, Romans is the best book to put in the hands of a saved person to lead him or her to understand and appreciate their salvation.”[51]
“Romans is the constitution of the church”[52]
“It has been said that Romans will delight the greatest logician and captivate the mind of the consummate genius, yet it will bring tears to the humblest soul and refreshment to the simplest mind. It will knock you down and then lift you up. It will strip you naked and then clothe you with eternal elegance.”[53]
“Paul and Romans: an unbeatable combination that delivers the knockout punch to any works-oriented righteousness before God; a soothing remedy for the soul that longs for peace with God; and a hopeful proclamation that God has begun to put the world to rights with himself.”[54]
“The book of Romans, more than almost any other biblical book, has dramatically shaped church history.”[55]
“Romans offers so much wisdom to us—if we let it unfurl itself rather than conforming it to our own agendas. Our biggest problem in reading the letter is that we come to it already knowing what it says.”[56]
“Romans has probably been the object of more intense study by more highly intelligent and motivated individuals than any document in human history.”[57]
“Christianity has been the most powerful, transforming force in human history—and the book of Romans is the most basic, most comprehensive statement of true Christianity.”[58]
“Paul wrote to introduce himself to the Romans and to strengthen the faith of these young Christians. The result is a concise, logical, and well-ordered presentation of Christian theology.”[59]
An Outline of ROMANS
I. INTRODUCTION (1:1–17). Romans 1:1-17 is Paul’s longest introduction among any of his letters. In a sense, we could summarize Romans 1—11 as “what to believe.”
A. Greeting (vv. 1-7)
1. The Promise of God Seen in Jesus (vv. 1-4)
2. The Peace of God Seen in Christian (vv. 5-7)
B. Gratitude and Thanksgiving (vv. 8-15)
1. Paul’s Concern for the Romans (vv. 8-12)
2. Paul’s Cause for Writing to the Romans (vv. 13-15)
C. Gospel and Theme (vv. 16-17)
II. SIN (1:18—3:20) – Why am I this way?
A. The Sin and Guilt of the Gentiles (1:18-32)
1. How They Reject God and Reasons for Condemnation (vv. 18-23)
God’s Revelation Through Nature (vv. 18-20)
Gentiles Rejection of God (vv. 21-23)
2. What Their Consequences Will Be and Results from Condemnation (vv. 24-32)
They get what they want and they worship the creation (vv. 24-25).
They have sex with who they want (vv. 26-27)
They are worthy of death (vv. 28-32).
B. The Sin and Guilt of the Jews (2:1—3:8)
1. God’s Impartial Judgment (2:1-16)[60]
God’s judgment is for the unrepentant (vv. 1-5). In these verses God tells the Jews that they are guilty just as the gentiles are guilty, that God is the one who defines evil, and that God’s judgment will be impartial.
God’s judgment is according to works (vv. 6-11). In these verses God tells the Jews that they will receive judgment just as the gentiles receive judgment, that God is not partial, and that God will impart judgment on all who deserve it.
God’s judgment is by a fair standard (vv. 12-16). In these verses God tells the Jews that the Jews will be judged righteous if they do righteousness, that he will reward those who deserve a good reward, and that he will impart rewards to all who deserve it.
2. God’s Religious Standards (2:17-29)
Jews have broken God’s revealed Law (vv. 17-24).[61] This is a condemnation because of the Jews’ hypocrisy.
Jews have trusted circumcision, not God (vv. 25-29).[62] This is a condemnation because of the Jew’s trust in rites.
3. God’s Determined Faithfulness (3:1-8)
God is still good even when Israel does not believe (vv. 1-4).
God’s word is still binding even when his people reject it (vv. 5-8).
C. The Sin and Guilt of All People (3:9-20)
III. SALVATION (3:21—5:21) – How am I saved?
IV. SANCTIFICATION (6:1—8:39) – How do I grow?
V. SOVERIGNTY (9:1—11:36) – Who’s in charge?
VI. SERVICE (12:1—15:13) – What do I do? Just as we have summarized Romans 1—11 as “what to believe” we could summarize Romans 12—16 as “how to behave.” In Romans 12:1—16:27 we have a combination of both personal responsibility and personal notes from Paul.
VII. CONCLUSION (15:14—16:27)
APPLICATIONS FROM ROMANS
“Most, if not all, of the great revivals and reformations in the history of the church have been directly related to the book of Romans.”[63]
“Romans speaks to us today just as powerfully as it spoke to men of the first century. It speaks morally, about adultery, fornication, homosexuality, hating, murder, lying, and civil disobedience. It speaks intellectually, telling us that the natural man is confused because he has a reprobate mind. It speaks socially, telling us how we are to relate to one another. It speaks psychologically, telling us where true freedom comes to deliver men from the burden of guilt. It speaks nationally, telling us our responsibility to human government. It speaks internationally, telling us the ultimate destiny of the earth and especially the future of Israel. It speaks spiritually, answering man’s despair by offering hope for the future. It speaks theologically, teaching us the relationship between the flesh and the spirit between law and grace, between works and faith. But most of all, it profoundly brings God himself to us.”[64]
“Is Romans relevant today? It is—as long as people of every race, culture and nationality are estranged from God because of sin.”[65]
“What was it like to be a Christian in Rome? The answer—very similar to what it is like today. Of course we don’t have to deal with a Nero, a maniacal dictator breathing threats and carrying them out. But still, real Christians are a distinct minority in society. And we stand out if we stand for Christ. It is possible, of course, to be a secret believer, hiding our faith to avoid trouble. But that reaction is tantamount to denying our Savior. He died for us—we can live for him.”[66]
SERMONS FROM ROMAS – “Just Live by Faith” or “Salvation for Those Who Believe” or “How the Just Live by Faith” or “Righteous Salvation”
- When a God Plan Comes Together (Rom 1:1-4)
- God Calls Rome (Rom 1:5-7)
- When Faith Becomes Famous (Rom 1:8-12)
- The Whole Gospel for the Whole World (Rom 1:13-15)
- The One Thing that Changes Everything (Rom 1:16-17)
VARIOUS SERMONS ON ROMANS
- Adam, Me, and the Fruit of the Tree (Rom 5:12-14) [Part of my series on the doctrine of creation]
- The Gift for Sin (Rom 5:15-17) [Part of my series on the doctrine of creation]
- When Grace Wins (Rom 5:18-21) [Part of my series on the doctrine of creation]
- God’s God This (Rom 8:26-30)
[1] Ben Witherington III with Darlene Hyatt, Paul’s Letter to the Romans: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans, 2004), 1.
[2] Scripture taken from the New American Standard Bible, Copyright The Lockman Foundation 1960, 1962, 1963, 1968, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1975, 1977, 1995. Used by permission.
[3] The following four reasons are adapted from Constable, pp. 3-5.
[4] Joseph A. Fitzmyer S.J., Romans: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, vol. 33, Anchor Yale Bible (New Haven; London: Yale University Press, 2008), 70.
[5] Glenn Kreider, Michael Svigel, and Mark Yarbrough, ed., Exploring Christian Scripture (Brentwood, TN: B & H Academic, 2024), 277.
[6] Witherington, Paul’s Letter to the Romans, 16.
[7] Fitzmyer, Romans, 79.
[8] Witherington, Paul’s Letter to the Romans, 2–3.
[9] Craig S. Keener, Bible Background Commentary, 2nd ed. [Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2014], 422
[10] A.T. Robertson, Word Pictures in the New Testament (Nashville, TN: Broadman Press, 1933).
[11] Witherington, Paul’s Letter to the Romans, 4.
[12] As a result of this external evidence, some New Testament introduction books don’t even address “authorship” as a category in their chapters on Romans.
[13] S. M. Kraeger, “Amanuensis,” in The Lexham Bible Dictionary, ed. John D. Barry et al. (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2016). np.
[14] Kraeger, “Amanuensis,” in The Lexham Bible Dictionary, np.
[15] Kraeger, “Amanuensis,” in The Lexham Bible Dictionary, np.
[16] See David W. J. Gill, “Erastus the Aedile,” TynD 40 (1989): 293–302. Cited in D. A. Carson and Douglas Moo, An Introduction to the New Testament, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Academic, 2005), 394.
[17] Witherington, Paul’s Letter to the Romans, 7.
[18] D. Guthrie, “Romans, Epistle to The,” in New Bible Dictionary, ed. D. R. W. Wood et al. (Leicester, England; Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1996), 1027.
[19] “Paul is apparently dealing with a overwhelmingly Gentile group of Christians in Rome who are more well established than the Jewish Christians there (another reason to mention some Jewish Christians by name in ch. 16 and give them a higher honor rating), since at least the leaders among the Jewish Christians are probably only recently back in Rome and getting reestablished. While one of Paul’s purposes in writing this letter is to begin to garner support for his future mission work in the west, another is that he clearly wants the Roman Christians to recognize, endorse, and embody the vision of Jew and Gentile united in Christ which is manifested by the collection and the response Paul is hoping it will receive in Jerusalem.” Witherington, Paul’s Letter to the Romans, 6.
[20] Douglas Moo, Romans, 2nd ed., NICNT (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2018), 12.
[21] Witherington, Paul’s Letter to the Romans, 5.
[22] M. Reasoner, “Rome and Roman Christianity,” Dictionary of Paul and His Letters, 854.
[23] Carson and Moo, New Testament Introduction, 395–96.
[24] M. Reasoner, “Rome and Roman Christianity,” Dictionary of Paul and His Letters, 853.
[25] Douglas Moo, Romans, 4–5.
[26] Ben Witherington explains, “It will not do to judge Romans and its rhetoric in the same sort of way one would judge Galatians or 1 Corinthians. While this letter is partially and attempt to establish rapport with and authority over the Roman gentile Christians, it is not an example of exercise of the authority we would see where Paul already had a power relationship.” Witherington, Paul’s Letter to the Romans, 2.
[27] Witherington, Paul’s Letter to the Romans, 8.
[28] Inc Merriam-Webster, Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary. (Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster, Inc., 2003).
[29] Guthrie, “Romans, Epistle to The,” in New Bible Dictionary, 1025.
[30] Guthrie, “Romans, Epistle to The,” in New Bible Dictionary, 1025.
[31] Bruce B. Barton, David Veerman, and Neil S. Wilson, Romans, Life Application Bible Commentary (Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, 1992), xx.
[32] Barton, Veerman, and Wilson, Romans, xv.
[33] Reasoner, “Rome and Roman Christianity,” 851.
[34] Witherington, Paul’s Letter to the Romans, 11.
[35] Charles Swindoll, Insights on Romans, (Carol Stream, IL: Tyndale, ), 8.
[36] One resource suggests that 20,000–50,000 Jews were living in the city, which was about 5 percent of the population (Craig S. Keener, Bible Background Commentary, 2nd ed. [Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2014], 422). Another resource suggests 50,000 (Fitzmyer, Romans, 27.
[37] Keener, Bible Background Commentary, 422.
[38] Barton, Veerman, and Wilson, Romans, xvi.
[39] Barton, Veerman, and Wilson, Romans, xvi.
[40] Guthrie, “Romans, Epistle to The,” in New Bible Dictionary, 1024.
[41] Kenneth Hanna, From Gospels to Glory, 162–63
[42] M. Reasoner, “Rome and Roman Christianity,” Dictionary of Paul and His Leaders, 853.
[43] Witherington, Paul’s Letter to the Romans, 9.
[44] Keener, Bible Background Commentary, 423.
[45] Parts of this section have been adapted from Constable, pp. 6-7.
[46] Carson and Moo, New Testament Introduction, p. 332 (double check page number).
[47] Fitzmyer, Romans, 68.
[48] The following two reasons are adapted from Constable, p. 6.
[49] J. R. Daniel Kirk, Romans for Normal People (Perkiomenville, PA: The Bible for Normal People, 2022), 7.
[50] Various parts of this section are adapted from M. Reasoner, “Rome and Roman Christianity,” Dictionary of Paul and His Letters, 854-55.
[51] Constable, 15.
[52] Tony Evans, Evans Bible Commentary, p. .
[53] John MacArthur, Romans 1—8, The MacArthur New Testament Commentary (Chicago, IL: Moody Press, 1991), xi.
[54] C. Marvin Pate, Romans, Teach the Text Commentary Series (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2013), 1.
[55] Pate, Romans, 6.
[56] Kirk, Romans for Normal People, p. 15.
[57] Boice, Romans, vol 1: Justificatin by Faith, 9.
[58] Boice, Romans, vol. 1, 13, italics original.
[59] Barton, Veerman, and Wilson, Romans, xxvi.
[60] Outline of Romans 2:1-16 is adapted from Schriener, p. 30.
[61] Hanna, From Gospels to Glory, 179.
[62] Hanna, From Gospels to Glory, 179.
[63] MacArthur, Romans 1—8, ix.
[64] MacArthur, Romans 1—8, xii.
[65] Boice, Romans, vol. 1, 17.
[66] Barton, Veerman, and Wilson, Romans, xvii.