The Greek epistolary greeting was normally short: sender, recipients, greeting (Acts 15:23; 23:26; 1 Thess. 1:1). Verses 1 and 7 would constitute this usual greeting, but Paul freely modifies epistolary conventions. He expands the prescript to include a profile of his credentials as a divinely called apostle and a concise summary of the gospel he preaches. Though Timothy is identified as the co-sender in other letters (2 Cor. 1:1; Phil. 1:1; Col. 1:1; 1 Thess. 1:1; 2 Thess. 1:1) and is mentioned as Paul’s co-worker who sends greetings in 16:21, he is not identified as the co-sender of Romans. The focus falls solely on Paul, his divine call as an apostle, his divine message, and his divine commission to bring the gospel to the Gentiles. He does not introduce this information because he is on the defensive, as he was in Galatians with its extended greeting (Gal. 1:1–5). Paul had never visited Rome but knows some of the letter’s recipients (16:3–15). He is confident that he will receive a sympathetic hearing for his message and that they will support his mission to Spain (15:23–29). This sender formula, which is ten times longer than is typically found in Paul’s other letter openings, reveals his concern to present his credentials for writing this letter to the Christians in Rome. They were not converted by him and may have heard negative rumours about him (cf. 3:8; 6:1, 15), but he wants them to view with favour both him and the gospel he presents in this letter.
The Greek word translated as ‘gospel’ (euangelion) frames the entire letter. It appears three times in the letter opening (1:1–17; in 1:1, 9, 16) and three times in the letter closing (15:13 – 16:27; in 15:16, 19; 16:25), six out of the nine occurrences in the letter (cf. 2:16; 10:16; 11:28). The gospel proclaims what God has done in keeping the promises to Israel and in raising Jesus from ‘the domain of death’ (Keck, p. 46). The gospel about God’s ‘Son, who was descended from David according to the flesh’ (1:3) is not only good news for Israel. That he was ‘declared to be Son of God with power according to the spirit of holiness by resurrection from the dead’ (1:4) means that he is more than Israel’s Messiah; he is Lord over all. In fulfilling the promises to Israel and raising Jesus from the dead God reveals ‘the riches of his glory for the objects of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory’, and these include those ‘whom he has called, not from the Jews only but also from the Gentiles’ (9:23–24). The letter unfolds the gospel’s implications for Israel and for the Gentile world.
1. In identifying himself to his recipients, Paul cites three credentials rather than limiting them to just one as he usually does in his greetings. First, he is a servant [‘slave’, doulos] of Jesus Christ. In the Greek, Paul refers to him as ‘Christ Jesus’ rather than Jesus Christ, which makes it clear that he does not understand Christ to be part of a double name but a title. He is Messiah Jesus, anointed by God. Rendering it ‘servant of Christ Jesus’ is conducive for hearing an echo of the title ‘the servant of the LORD’ that is used of Abraham (Ps. 105:42), Moses (2 Kgs 18:12; Ps. 105:26; Dan. 9:11), Joshua (Josh. 24:30 [LXX]; Judg. 2:8), Jonah (Jon. 1:9 [LXX]), David (2 Sam. 7:5; Ps. 78:70; 89:3), the prophets (2 Kgs 17:23; Amos 3:7; Zech. 1:6) and even Israel (Isa. 41:8–9). Paul would use this term to represent his ministry in terms of the Isaianic ‘servant of the LORD’ as the herald of salvation to the nations (Isa. 42:1–6; 52:7, 10; 61:1).1 It is estimated that one in five persons in Rome was a slave,2 so it is more likely that Paul intends to conjure up for the original audience images from their familiarity with slavery (6:6–22; cf. Matt. 6:24; 1 Cor. 7:21) rather than from their knowledge of the term’s use in Scripture. He does not intend to exalt himself with this title since he uses the language of slavery also to speak of all believers who have been acquired by Christ (1 Cor. 6:20; 7:22–23; Eph. 6.6; Col. 4:12). A slave is under the complete authority of the master who bought him or her and has no right to self-determination (Schnabel, I, p. 83). Paul understands himself to be in bondage to Christ, wholly owned by him and no more than his tool (Wolter, I, p. 80; cf. Luke 17:7–10), which raises the spectre of dishonour. He reminds the Philippians that Christ took the form of a slave, humbling himself and dying the slave’s death on the cross. To read this
metaphor in the context of political or social advancement is to misunderstand Paul’s humility in subordinating himself to one who has already lowered himself to the point of dying a slave’s death. As Jesus embraced dishonour, so Paul, in calling himself a slave of Christ, embraces dishonour.3
Being Christ’s slave is not analogous to being Caesar’s slave, with its lofty status and privileges. As the slave of Christ who ‘did not please himself’ (15:3), Paul understands himself to be the ‘slave of all’ (1 Cor. 9:19; 2 Cor. 4:5; cf. Mark 10:44; Gal. 5:13), indebted to Greeks and barbarians and to the wise and foolish (1:14).
Second, Paul introduces himself as a called . . . apostle, an ambassadorial agent. The unspoken agent in this calling is God, not others. Paul did not volunteer for this role or arrogate this title to himself, nor did he rise in the ranks to be elected an apostle by others. Nor did God invite him to consider becoming an apostle. He is an apostle by ‘God’s sovereign action, God’s deliberate choice’ (Keck, p. 40).
Third, Paul underscores that God chose him for this special task. He was set apart for the gospel of God, which draws on imagery used by the prophets Isaiah (Isa. 49:1) and Jeremiah (Jer. 1:5) to imply that he could not resist God’s sovereign choice in conscripting him (cf. Gal. 1:15–16). Similarly, in 2 Corinthians 5:14, he asserts that the love of Christ constrains and sustains him in this call.
The gospel also receives a threefold qualification in these opening verses. Paul identifies it first as the gospel of God, which may imply both that it has been initiated and sent by God and that it is about God. Cranfield contends that most of the inhabitants of the Roman Empire would have associated ‘gospel’ with Roman imperial propaganda and the announcements of such events as the birth of an heir to the emperor, his coming of age and his accession to the throne, as glad tidings or gospels with the emperor cult (Cranfield, I, p. 55).4 The emperor cult, however, was promoted in the provinces and not in the city of Rome, and the Greek noun for ‘gospel’ (euangelion) and its verb form were also used for good tidings in everyday life and need have no political overtones (Wolter, I, p. 83). Paul distinguishes the one gospel from everyday good news or imperial good news by asserting that it is the gospel from the one God about ‘Messiah Jesus’. It is true that the gospel proclaims that Jesus is Lord and King, not Caesar, but it is universally true that the gospel is far more than word of something pleasant, fortunate or otherwise positive. It is news about God’s reign that brings eternal salvation.
2. Second, Paul affirms that this gospel was promised beforehand through his prophets in the holy scriptures (3:21; 4:3, 6–8; 16:26; cf. Gal. 3:8). Three inferences may be drawn from this assertion. (1) God has been faithful to fulfil the promises of old (4:13–25; 15:8). The term ‘gospel’, as Paul understands it, germinates from the soil of Isaiah (cf. 10:14–16 where Paul cites Isa. 52:7) where the verb form is associated with announcing the good news that God has come (Isa. 40:9), reigns (Isa. 52:7) and brings liberation (Isa. 61:1), and that the nations will proclaim the praise of the Lord (Isa. 60:6). (2) The Scriptures are read correctly only when it is recognized that ‘the gospel is the fulfilment, not the negation, of God’s word to Israel’.5 The gospel neither nullifies the law (3:31) nor negates the promises but celebrates their fulfilment. (3) The gospel is not the contrivance of a new religion but the good news heralding that God’s promises to Israel and engagement in their history have reached their climax, quite surprisingly, in the crucifixion and resurrection of the Messiah.6 The message of the cross and resurrection must be understood through the Old Testament ‘categories of sacrifice, atonement, suffering, vindication’ (cf. 1 Cor. 15:3–4).7
3–4. Third, the gospel reveals that God’s plan for humanity’s salvation centres on his Son, Jesus Christ. Paul’s summary of the basic content of the gospel reflects the consensus among believers. Whether Paul adopts or adapts an existing Christian confession, as many contend, is immaterial.8 Breytenbach asserts: ‘Paul cites or alludes to tradition because he agrees to it.’ 9 Moo therefore is correct: ‘The meaning of these verses . . . is to be determined against the background of Paul and his letters, not against a necessarily hypothetical traditions-history’ (Moo, pp. 43–44).
The phrase descended from David according to the flesh refers to Jesus’ genealogical descent as an actual man. The flesh in this context has a neutral (cf. 4:1; 9:3, 5; 11:14; 1 Cor. 10:18), not a negative, meaning. In the incarnation, Jesus met the Jewish expectation that the Messiah would be David’s descendant (cf. 9:5; 15:12, ‘the root of Jesse’; 2 Tim. 2:8). His Davidic ancestry confirms God’s fidelity in fulfilling the covenant with David (2 Sam. 22:51; Ps. 18:50)10 and substantiates the fact that the gospel is firmly anchored in Israel’s history.
That he was declared to be Son of God does not mean that Jesus became the Son of God for the first time at his resurrection. The phrase with power modifies the title Son of God and not the verb declared. Before his resurrection he was the Son of God in weakness. The incarnation that reached its climax in the crucifixion veiled his all-powerful lordship (2 Cor. 13:4, ‘For he was crucified in weakness’; cf. Acts 2:31–36). The resurrection manifested Jesus’ glory and demonstrated that he was the Son of God with power.11 It revealed him to be ‘the power of God and the wisdom of God’ (1 Cor. 1:24) to whom ‘all things’ are subjected (1 Cor. 15:20–28). Paul does not understand the gospel to be limited to Jesus’ birth and resurrection, which is what many nominal church attenders might assume from making their appearance only at Christmas and Easter. For the sake of brevity, Paul uses a literary device (synecdoche) in which a part of something is substituted for the whole. Jesus’ entire life and ministry is encapsulated with the reference to its beginning, birth, and its end, resurrection. On ‘two axes’ of ‘flesh’ and ‘Spirit’, Paul ‘captures the whole of the Son through his parts’.12 The middle part of Jesus’ life, his ministry and crucifixion, is assumed also to be part of the gospel.
The phrase spirit of holiness appears only here in the New Testament and reflects a Hebraic idiom, an adjectival genitive that means ‘the Holy Spirit’.13 Paul is not talking about Jesus’ nature or essence but events in his life. The spirit of holiness refers to the Holy Spirit ‘who raised Christ from the dead’ (8:11) after the ‘spirit of Satan’ killed him with the complicity of the Jewish leaders and the Roman imperial system.
5–6. Since Paul does not mention a co-sender, the plural pronoun we refers only to himself as he highlights his singular calling. He understands himself to be especially entrusted with the duty of bringing the gospel to the Gentiles (15:16, 18; Acts 9:15; Gal. 2:7–9). Grace and apostleship is a turn of phrase in which the two words express more emphatically the same notion (a hendiadys). As the phrase ‘sound and fury’ more compellingly expresses the meaning ‘furious sound’, grace and apostleship means ‘the grace [or gift] of apostleship’. It more compellingly conveys his conviction that he was set apart by God solely because of God’s grace (cf. 1 Cor. 15:9–10; Eph. 3:2, 7–8). God’s grace gave him the power and authority that he did not possess on his own to carry out his apostolic ministry. This divine grace is also the authority behind this letter: ‘I have written to you rather boldly by way of reminder, because of the grace given me by God’ (15:15; cf. 12:3; 1 Cor. 3:10; Gal. 2:9).
The goal of his ministry is to engender the obedience of faith among the Gentiles (15:18–20; 16:25–26).14 This phrase may refer to ‘faith’ that produces ‘obedience’ (subjective genitive), but it more likely means ‘faith that consists in obedience’ as an epexegetical genitive (Cranfield, I, p. 66). It refers to the obedient response to the gospel’s call to believe in Christ since faith is only sufficiently evidenced through obedience. Paul believes that God has commissioned him and others to evangelize the whole known world. Obedience is also a vital issue for Paul because, unlike many other religions at the time, the Christian faith is intent on guiding daily behaviour. Therefore, he wants to bring converts to obey from the heart the gospel (6:17, ‘the pattern of teaching’ they received [NIV]; 10:16–17); the truth (2:8; cf. Gal. 5:7); righteousness (6:16–19); Christ (2 Cor. 10:5); and God (11:30–32). If they obey, it means that they are in a right relationship with God. If they do not, they are destined to experience divine vengeance with fiery flames (2 Thess. 1:8).
Another goal of Paul’s preaching to the Gentiles is for the sake of his name, for them to ‘glorify God for his mercy’ (15:9). God intends for his name to be proclaimed ‘in all the earth’ (9:17), but unfaithful Jews have caused it to be ‘blasphemed’ among the Gentiles (2:24). He hopes that the obedience of the Gentiles who now receive mercy from God (11:31) will provoke the Jews to jealousy (11:11, 14) and cause them to obey the gospel, receive God’s mercy and bring glory to God (11:31–36).
The phrase ‘among whom you also are’ (NASB) could mean that the audience resides in a city that is a vast, multi-ethnic melting pot. It is more likely that it means that they are predominantly Gentiles (1:13; 11:13).15 His point is that as he is an apostle to the Gentiles, the Romans fall under the scope of his commission since they belong to all the Gentiles to whom he has been sent (11:13–14; Gal. 2:8–9). Jervis comments, ‘They are part of his mission not because Paul has chosen them but because God has chosen them for Paul.’16 Though he had not founded the church, he does not overstep any bounds in writing to them (cf. 15:20–21; 2 Cor. 10:13–16) since they too belong to the nations that he has been graced by God to bring to the obedience of faith.
7. Paul does not identify the recipients as ‘the church in Rome’ (cf. 16:5; 1 Cor. 1:2; 2 Cor. 1:1; Gal. 1:2; 1 Thess. 1:1) but as all . . . in Rome who are differentiated from others as God’s beloved. He does not identify them as ‘Romans’ but as those in Rome because his audience comprises people from a variety of ethnic and national backgrounds. Identifying them as beloved is significant since ‘as regards election’ Israel is ‘beloved, for the sake of their ancestors’ (11:28; cf. Deut. 10:15). Regardless of their ethnic heritage, all those who are ‘called to belong to Jesus Christ’ (1:6) are also beloved by God because of their trusting response to what God has done in Christ. The designation beloved points forward to the citation of Hosea 2:23 in 9:25 prophesying the inclusion of Gentiles:
Those who were not my people I will call ‘my people’,
and her who was not beloved I will call ‘beloved’.
He then cites Hosea 1:10 in 9:26 that declares,
And in the very place where it was said to them, ‘You are not
my people’,
there they shall be called children of the living God.
Paul applies another term, saints (‘holy ones’), that was used to characterize Israel (cf. Lev. 11:44; 19:2; 20:7, 26) to the believers in Rome. He is ‘called to be an apostle’, and they are called to be saints, consecrated to God. Daniel 7:18, 21–22, 27 and Joel 2:16 provide the background for the idea that they are sanctified as the end-time people who will triumph with God and ‘receive the kingdom and possess it forever’.17 Beloved by God, they are called to be holy, which gives them the task of presenting their ‘bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God’ (12:1). These affirmations unveil Paul’s conviction that, in Christ, former heathens have been grafted into Israel’s rich heritage (11:17). In what follows, Paul will unpack how it is that membership in the people of God no longer has anything to do with one’s birthright or ethnicity but only the obedient response to God’s initiative in Christ. He also will clarify why the gospel is so desperately needed by humanity that is mired in sin, why some in Israel, who had the advantage of receiving ‘the oracles of God’ (3:2), ‘the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises’ (9:4), are cut off from God, and why Gentiles, the unbeloved (9:25) ‘who did not strive for righteousness’, have attained ‘righteousness through faith’ (9:30).
Paul modifies the traditional Greek salutation by changing the Greek charein (‘greetings’; cf. Acts 15:23; 23:26; Jas 1:1) to the similar-sounding charis (grace) and adding the Semitic peace. Grace through Christ is God’s response to sin (5:20). It results in peace between God and reconciled sinners, and peace of mind (8:6) in the security of God’s acceptance. It also results in peace in their midst because they are cemented together by their common bond to our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. The reference to peace is particularly pointed in a letter to Romans. Augustus’s rise to power put an end to civil war and bloodshed by establishing a military dictatorship. ‘Peace’ became a prominent propaganda mantra: Caesar as peacemaker.18 When Nero came to power, he seemed to have no ambition to establish himself by achieving military victories, and many who continued to long for peace thought he would bring a new age of universal peace and the end of all wars. His reign did not turn out the way people hoped, which only confirms that humans apart from God do not know the ways of peace (3:17; cf. Isa. 59:7–8). How different the peace of God is (5:1–11; 8:6; 15:13, 33; 16:20). The Romans talked about peace. In contrast to military kingdoms that reign through terror, injustice and oppression, God’s kingdom brings the reality of ‘righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit’ (14:17).
The letter opening asserts that Paul has been called to serve a higher cause under the highest authority, Jesus Christ our Lord, who is mentioned four times in 1:1–7. That Paul puts God and Christ side by side in his greeting in 1:7 manifests his belief in Christ’s full divinity. No Jew would send greetings from God and Moses. The confession about Christ in 1:3–4, however, is the theological epicentre of this opening. In the recent history of the interpretation of these verses, the focus has fallen on the attempt to reconstruct the Christology of the early confession that Paul presumably cites. It is argued that the adoptionist tenor of the text is a fossil of the early church’s lower Christology that later developed into a higher Christology: the earthly Son of David became the heavenly Son of God only at the resurrection.19
This interpretation is mistaken. If Paul cites this piece of liturgical confession to summarize his gospel, he must concur with it. He would not have understood it to convey the idea that Jesus was elevated to Son of God at his resurrection. Had ‘Son of David’ been intended to be antithetical to ‘Son of God’, ‘we would have expected the particle de [‘but’], which usually implies contrast’.20 Instead, the two titles are not antithetical but complementary. Paul declares that God sent ‘his Son, born of a woman, born under the law’ (Gal. 4:4), and he does not envision a time when Jesus was not God’s Son. Why then would the Son be appointed Son? The summary of the gospel reaches the high point with the declaration that the Son is ‘Jesus Christ our Lord’. It accords with the implication of Jesus’ challenge in Mark 12:35–37 that he is more than the son of David; he is also David’s Lord. The confession for Paul means that Jesus who comes from David’s stock is not simply the Messiah of Israel but has a status as Lord over the entire universe that transcends earthly history. This interpretation matches the trajectory more poetically rendered in Philippians 2:6–11.
While the confession is primarily describing a two-stage progression in the manifestation of Jesus as the Son of God, the explanation of the patristic interpreters should not be ignored. The Church Fathers used this passage to legitimate the two natures of Christ but mainly to reinforce the real humanity of Christ.21 This reading remains valid in that Jesus’ Davidic descent does affirm his humanity, a theme that surfaces in 8:3: God sent his Son ‘in the likeness of sinful flesh’. The pre-existent Son of God entered fleshly existence so that God might condemn ‘sin in the flesh’ – the frail, corupted nature of Adamic humanity – and accomplish redemption. In the next stage, Christ became the prototype for the resurrection when the Spirit raised his mortal body from the dead (8:11). The difference is that when he was raised by God he was also enthroned to share God’s rule, which is expressed by the image of him sitting at God’s right hand (8:34). God’s promise to David to ‘raise up your offspring after you’ (2 Sam. 7:12) is given a new interpretation. It does not refer to David’s heirs coming into existence and reigning but to the singular event of Jesus’ resurrection. In these opening verses, Paul previews these two vital soteriological features that are developed in chapter 8.22 Paul’s apostolic calling to take the gospel to the Gentiles is embedded in this Christological confession with Davidic roots:
I will make the nations your heritage,
and the ends of the earth your possession.
(Ps. 2:8)
It matches Paul’s citation from Isaiah 11:10 in 15:12:
The root of Jesse shall come,
the one who rises to rule the Gentiles;
in him the Gentiles shall hope.23
Paul’s letters normally contain a formal expression of thanksgiving. As does the salutation, this thanksgiving section differs from those in his other letters. It contains only a brief, rather generic note of thanks (1:8). He does not focus on the recipients of the letter and what he prays God will accomplish for them, as he does in other letters where he knows well his audience and their situation. Instead, he addresses only what he prayed God would do for him. He draws attention to his enduring wish to come to Rome, hindrances that have prevented him from doing so thus far, the scope of his mission and his indebtedness to preach the gospel to Greeks and barbarians. Since the thanksgiving section provides an abstract of the contents and purpose of the letter, it hints at the letter’s primary purpose to pave the way for a future visit. With three explanatory remarks he justifies and enlarges on this purpose, which may be outlined as follows (adapted from Byrne, p. 48):
1. Thanksgiving: their faith is proclaimed throughout the world (1:8).
2. Intention: Paul’s constant prayer that he might succeed by God’s will in coming to them (1:9–10). Reason: to strengthen them and to impart some spiritual gift so that they may be mutually encouraged by their trust in one another (language from the arena of business relationships; 1:11–12).
3. Past intention: Paul’s abiding but thwarted ambition to visit them (1:13a). Reason: to reap some harvest among them as he has done among the rest of the Gentiles to whom he is indebted to preach the gospel (1:13b–14).
4. Reiteration of his past intention: his eagerness to preach the gospel also to those who are in Rome (1:15). Reason: because of the gospel’s power that reveals God’s righteousness that saves both Jew and Greek through faith (1:16–17).
After the cursory thanksgiving in 1:8, Paul seeks to capture the goodwill of an audience he has not met in person and cause them to be kindly disposed to what follows (captatio benevolentiae). He broaches the subject of his prospective visit to Rome that will fulfil a long-held desire but postpones until the close of the letter his hopes of securing their support for a mission to Spain when he finally does arrive in Rome (15:14–32). He lays the groundwork for this visit, however, by explaining his indebtedness to preach the gospel to all. He then gives a brief statement about the powerful effect of the gospel that saves everyone who has faith. The statements in 1:3–4 and 1:16–17 about the gospel express the theme of the letter. The gospel is the medium by which word of God’s righteous regime will reach all peoples throughout the world. Faith responds to hearing the gospel preached (10:13–17). Its matchless power has driven Paul to proclaim the gospel among the Gentiles throughout the East and drives him to want to proclaim the gospel in Rome and beyond.
8. That Paul begins with first does not mean he intends a ‘second’. It basically means ‘Let me begin’ (NEB). This thanksgiving is not as fulsome as those written to churches that he founded and tended (cf. Phil. 1:3–11; 1 Thess. 1:2–10). That Paul gives thanks for all of them in Rome suggests that he has ‘no quarrel with anyone in the community’ (Kruse, p. 59). There is no hint that he writes to address problems among the Romans that he may have heard about. He salutes them because others have spread word of their faith throughout the world (cf. 16:19). Paul employs hyperbole because those in Spain have not yet heard the gospel, but it gives evidence of the gospel’s unstoppable power to expand throughout the world. Believers elsewhere can take heart that the faith has taken root in the very capital of the Roman Empire.
9–10. Paul appeals to God as his witness, since God knows his internal thoughts, that he constantly remembers them in his prayers. This statement also reiterates the fact that he serves God. The word translated serve (latreuō) is connected to worshipping in 1:25 (cf. Phil. 3:3). The use of the cognate noun latreia in 12:1 reveals that any ritual understanding of worship has been modified so that the believers’ daily lives in giving themselves completely over to God are understood as a sacrificial offering (12:1–2). Paul serves God with his whole being, and serving God with [in] my spirit is probably a reference to his prayer life (cf. Luke 2:37), ‘the inward side of his apostolic service contrasted with the outward side consisting of his preaching’ (Cranfield, I, p. 77).
He twice attests that he has long wanted to come to them but has not as yet succeeded. God directs his mission agenda (cf. Acts 16:7–10), hence his prayers that God might open the way for him to come to Rome. In 15:20–22, he explains that his work in proclaiming the gospel in the eastern regions where Christ has not been named has prevented him from venturing to Rome. He writes that he is now ready to head west, and that also means west of Rome.
It is noteworthy that Paul connects these verses to his thanksgiving with the use of for. The Romans’ faith is proclaimed throughout the world, but parts of the world have yet to hear the gospel. A subtext underlies this thanksgiving. If they will support his intended mission to Spain (15:24), the Christian faith and the renown of their faith will extend even further.
11–12. Longing to see you is the language of friendship and signifies Paul’s desire to solidify a friendship that he implies already exists. Paul’s expectation that sharing some spiritual gift with them will serve to strengthen them may hint that the church suffers afflictions for its faith. The same verb appears in the Thessalonian correspondence in the context of bracing the church to face bitter persecution (1 Thess. 3:2, 13; 2 Thess. 2:17; 3:5; cf. 1 Pet. 5:10). Paul does not specify the spiritual gift he might impart, but it certainly involves ‘ministering’, ‘teaching’ and ‘exhortation’, gifts he lists in 12:6–8. He also would expect that ‘my gospel’ (2:16), which he expounds in this letter, will strengthen the Roman believers when he comes to them ‘in the fullness of the blessing of Christ’ (15:29; cf. 16:25). Later, he implies that his preaching from Jerusalem to Illyricum has brought ‘spiritual blessings’ to the Gentiles (15:19, 27).
Paul seems to back-pedal by stating his expectation that they will be mutually encouraged by each other’s faith. He is not worried that he might have sounded presumptuous or patronizing. He does not wish to imply that they are hampered by some deficiency in their faith but recognizes that successful ministry is not a one-way street. He wishes to come alongside them, knowing that ultimately God is responsible for strengthening them through his gospel (16:25). Paul’s extensive list of persons in 16:1–23 testifies to his belief in the reciprocity between the minister and those with whom he or she ministers. DeSilva translates it, ‘to be mutually encouraged by our faith in [or trust in, or faithfulness toward] one another’, in which ‘faith’ refers to ‘trust or reliability in a business partnership’.24 While the faith of believers inspires and buttresses the faith of other believers, Paul is making another point. He hints at his anticipation of forming a partnership with them (cf. Phil. 1:5; 4:15–16). In the Graeco–Roman world, gifts ‘entail the expectation and obligation of return’.25 Paul assumes from a policy Jesus instituted that sowing spiritual gifts should reap material benefits from the recipients, though he makes no use of the right (1 Cor. 9:11–14). He is confident, however, that in return for the spiritual gift he shares with them (cf. 15:27) they will see fit to offer him ‘tactical and logistical support’ for his mission to Spain (15:24; Jewett, p. 130).
13. Driven by the divine necessity compelling him to preach the gospel to the Gentiles (1 Cor. 9:16; Gal. 1:16), Paul had intended to come to Rome to reap some harvest among you (literally, ‘that I might have some fruit in you’, ASV), that is, conversions from his missionary preaching (Col. 1:6), as he had elsewhere among the Gentiles. His original intentions, however, were derailed. Stuhlmacher asserts, ‘This verse in no way indicates that Paul is still intending to come as a missionary to preach the gospel in Rome.’ 26 Paul states unequivocally that his goal is ‘to proclaim the good news, not where Christ has already been named, so that I do not build on someone else’s foundation’ (15:20). His sights are set elsewhere, and he only wants to assure the Roman believers that he has not deliberately ignored them.
He expects a different kind of harvest (fruit) from his future visit. The Greek word translated as harvest (‘fruit’, karpos) appears in 15:28. It is translated there as ‘what has been collected’ to refer to the financial contribution from Gentile churches that he will deliver to the poor among the saints in Jerusalem. In Philippians 4:17, the word refers to the Philippians’ gifts towards supporting his missionary work in Thessalonica (Phil. 4:16). If Paul is to preach the gospel in Spain, he will need ‘the fruit’ of the Romans’ material support for this missionary venture, evangelizing ‘still unconverted Gentiles in northern Italy, southern Gaul, and the Iberian Peninsula’.27 His ultimate goal is to set off for Spain with Rome as the launching platform.
14. Greeks and barbarians, the ‘non-Greeks’, along with the wise, the intelligentsia who are astute in their own eyes (12:16), and the foolish, the coarse and uncultivated, are classifications derived from human evaluations. The Greeks labelled people benighted barbarians because of their want of Greek language, culture and education. The onomatopoetic word suggested to Greek ears that their language sounded like stammering gibberish (‘bar, bar, bar’). The term has a less derogatory connotation in the New Testament , used to describe those who speak an unfamiliar language (Acts 28:2, 4; 1 Cor. 14:11). Philo, a Greek-educated Jew, even describes the law of Moses as written in the language of ‘barbarians’, which some felt needed to be translated into Greek (Mos. 2.27 [Colson, LCL]). Those who considered themselves innately superior to others, however, applied the term contemptuously to outsiders judged to be ‘wild’, ‘crude’, ‘fierce’ and ‘uncivilised’.28 From a Roman perspective, the Spaniards, whom Paul plans to evangelize, fit both categories of barbarian in the negative sense of being foolish and as those who speak a language foreign to Greeks (Jewett, pp. 130–132).
15. Paul is always eager to win new converts through the preaching of the gospel and rejoices when others ‘dare to speak the word with greater boldness and without fear’ (Phil. 1:14). He essentially fulfils his long-held hope to preach the gospel to the Romans by providing them with an advanced instalment of his gospel in this letter.29
The gospel challenges the human predilection to dishonour those who are different in three ways. First, it erases human barometers that sort people into castes. All are sinners (3:23); all are without excuse (1:20; 2:1); and God makes foolish all the world’s wisdom with its specious labelling of persons (1 Cor. 1:20). Second, the gospel reveals that God is impartial towards all (2:9–11) and has no intention of turning barbarians into Greeks, Gentiles into Jews, or Jews into Gentiles. God’s impartiality is the theological grounds for the mission to the Gentiles. Third, Paul’s claim to be indebted to preach the gospel to all differentiates him from Greek philosophers who courted only the educated and refined and shunned those regarded as ignorant and stupid (Michel, p. 50).
The gospel lays an obligation upon Paul (1 Cor. 9:16). Instead of saying he is duty-bound to Greeks and barbarians, however, he says he is indebted to them. How could he be indebted to those he has never met and who have given him nothing? As Minear explains it, ‘Obligation to him who died [Christ] produces obligation to those for whom he died.’ 30 That obligation imposes a duty on all Christians, not just Paul. Minear writes: ‘Those who belong to Christ are debtors whose every act of obedience is an expression of an obligation which simultaneously includes the Lord and those whom the Lord has welcomed.’ 31 The Roman Christians are no less indebted to those they might be tempted to dismiss as ‘foolish’ and ‘barbarians’.
The word ‘for’ (gar) connects this thesis statement to what precedes and starts a chain that explains why Paul fervently wanted to preach the gospel in Rome and why the aim of his pilgrim witness is ‘to bring about the obedience of faith among all the Gentiles’ (1:5). He is not ashamed of the gospel. Why? Because it is ‘the power God for salvation to everyone who has faith’ (1:16). Why? Because the gospel reveals God’s righteousness and progresses ‘from faith to faith’ (CSB). The gospel does not simply deliver information about God; it saves those who respond in faith and gives them life.
16. Paul’s declaration that he is not ashamed of the gospel is not an ironic understatement in which he expresses an affirmation through a negative statement (litotes). He does not mean, ‘I am mighty proud of the gospel’ (contra Jewett, p. 136). The expression I am not ashamed makes an assertion about something that is contrary to prevailing standards and values (Wolter, I, pp. 114–115).32 The gospel proclaims that a man who suffered crucifixion, the most shameful of deaths, was raised and exalted by God. This message is ‘a stumbling-block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles’ (1 Cor. 1:23) because it turns human wisdom upside down. Jews might be chagrined by how this gospel seems to nullify Israel’s priority and sacred institutions and to scatter God’s grace indiscriminately among other supposedly less-deserving nations.33 Gentile believers then displace the disobedient in Israel instead of Israel triumphing over Gentiles. To Gentiles, the gospel represents the quintessence of foolishness and weakness. Jewett comments,
A divine self-revelation on an obscene cross seemed to demean God and overlook the honor and propriety of established religious traditions, both Jewish and Greco-Roman. Rather than appealing to the honorable and righteous members of society, such a gospel seemed designed to appeal to the despised and the powerless . . . There were powerful, social reasons why Paul should have been ashamed of this gospel; his claim not to be ashamed signals that a social and ideological revolution has been inaugurated by the gospel.
(Jewett, p. 137)
He goes on: it ‘shatters the unrighteous precedence given to the strong over the weak, the free and well-educated over the slaves and ill-educated, the Greeks and Romans over the barbarians’ (Jewett, p. 139). It makes the preacher seem contemptibly weak (1 Cor. 4:9–11), submitting to the mortification of being clapped in chains (2 Tim. 1:8, 12, 16; 1 Pet. 4:16). The gospel radically transforms the meaning of honour and shame as it was understood in the ancient world. The only honour that matters is the honour that God ascribes to humans according to canons completely foreign to human standards. If Paul does not allude to a saying of Jesus (Mark 8:38), his words resonate with it. Not being ashamed of the gospel guards against the more calamitous fate of being put to shame before God at the end of the age (Mark 8:38; Luke 9:26).
The verb aischynō can also mean being put to shame for pinning one’s hope on the wrong things. Paul’s citation of Isaiah 28:16 in 9:33, ‘See, I am laying in Zion a stone that will make people stumble, a rock that will make them fall, / and whoever believes in him will not be put to shame’, has a compound form of the verb ‘to be disappointed’, ‘to be put to shame’ (kataischynein), to refer to the let-down that puts one to shame when one’s faith and hope are shown to be misplaced (cf. 10:11; 1 Pet. 2:6). He affirms in this verse his conviction that the gospel is not a mirage and that the hope it offers will not ‘disappoint’ (kataischynei, 5:5). Therefore, devoting his life to proclaiming the gospel will not be for naught because divine power infuses it (2 Cor. 4:7; 1 Thess. 1:5) and has produced his ministry success (15:19). In the context of his mission objectives introduced in this section, not being ashamed of the gospel also characterizes his conviction that it will ultimately triumph over all the seen and unseen powers of this world that afflict human existence (8:38).
In these opening verses, Paul provides a supplementary definition of the gospel.34 In 1:3–4, he describes what it is. It is the fulfilment of what God promised in the Scriptures concerning his Son. In 1:16–17, he describes what it does. It is God’s power for salvation (1 Cor. 1:18; 2:5) and reveals God’s righteousness. This additional definition discloses the fact that the gospel is more than a plan of salvation but is a power that brings about salvation. In the rest of the letter, he reveals that salvation encompasses being rescued from the wrath of God (5:9), being delivered from the dominion of sin (6:1–14), living in the Spirit (8:9) that will culminate in an acquittal in the divine law court (8:1), and receiving eternal glory with Christ at the end of the age (13:11).
The statement to everyone who has faith has pivotal importance in Romans. Faith in this instance refers to trust in the good news of salvation that God has accomplished in Christ (3:21–31). Paul does not understand faith to be ‘a leap in the dark’ but ‘a deliberate response to the convincing and persuasive light of truth’.35 It is the diametrical opposite of suppressing the truth about what can be known about God by deliberately choosing to remain in the dark (1:18–19).
The pattern of to the Jew first and also to the Greek accords with Jesus’ announcement, ‘I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel’ (Matt. 15:24; cf. 10:5–6). The gospel had been promised through the Jewish prophets long beforehand (1:2–3), and the Jews have been divinely privileged (9:4–5) and are elect and beloved of God ‘for the sake of their ancestors’ (11:28). Naturally, the gospel would come to them first. Since anyone can have faith, however, the advantage of the Jews over Gentiles is only ‘chronological’ (Ziesler, p. 70). Paul’s elucidation of the gospel reveals that God shows no favouritism in offering salvation to Jew and Greek based on the sole criterion of faith. Paul divides humanity into these two ethnic groups (cf. 1 Cor. 1:22–24; 12:13; Gal. 3:28; Col. 3:11), and the issue of Jew and Greek, circumcised and uncircumcised, emerges as a main theme in the letter (2:9–11; 3:9, 29–30; 4:9–18; 9:23–33; 10:12; 11:17–32). Jews and Greeks are also divided into those who are believers and those who are not. The divine power behind the gospel has brought members from both groups together in Christ to become ‘saints’, ‘God’s holy people’ (1:6–7), who are now identified as ‘the church [assembly]’ that belongs to God (1 Cor. 10:32). No distinction exists between them in the community of the called, but since they retain their ethnic and cultural differences, give and take is required for navigating their new identity and life together as siblings in Christ (14:1 – 15:7).
17. What Paul means by the righteousness of God is much debated. In Romans, the righteousness of God can be revealed and confirmed (3:5), disclosed and attested (3:21) and shown (3:25), and is something to which one must submit (10:3).
(1) The genitive ‘of God’ (tou theou) may be interpreted as a genitive of source or origin. It could refer to God’s conferral of the status of righteousness on believers as a gift of grace apart from works of the law (cf. 2 Cor. 5:21).36 In 10:3, Paul contrasts God’s righteousness with that which humans seek to attain by their own efforts. Paul’s hope of attaining the resurrection of the dead is based on ‘not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but one that comes through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God based on faith’ (Phil. 3:9). Cranfield argues that this view agrees best with the structure of the epistle’s argument: Paul expounds the words ‘the one who is righteous by faith’ in 1:18 – 4:25 and expounds the promise that ‘the one who is righteous by faith will live’ in 5:1 – 8:39 (Cranfield, I, pp. 97–98). The problem with this view is that when Paul specifically refers to righteousness conferred by God, as he does in Philippians 3:9, he adds the preposition ‘from’ (ek).
(2) The righteousness of God may be interpreted as a possessive genitive that refers to an aspect of God’s nature, God’s ‘justice’ or ‘moral integrity’ (cf. 3:5).37 God’s righteous character is revealed in God’s actions, the salvation of sinners who respond with faith and the retribution against sinners who do not. Some propose that Paul specifically has in mind God’s fidelity to his covenant promise to Abraham and to Israel. The promises ‘focus upon the eschatological gathering of all the nations into the people of God’.38 God keeps his promise to Abraham by making all those who believe, both Jews and Greeks, children of Abraham, children of God and joint heirs with Christ (8:16–17). This interpretation is supported by the congruence of the phrase ‘the justice [righteousness] of God’ (3:5) with ‘the faithfulness of God’ (3:3) and ‘God’s truthfulness’ (3:7). Seifrid shows, however, that the words ‘justice [righteousness]’ and ‘covenant’ seldom appear together in the Old Testament.39
(3) The righteousness of God may be a subjective genitive in which God is the subject of the verbal idea. Jewett argues that the passive voice of the verb is revealed
assumes that God is the agent behind this revelation of his righteousness. It does not simply refer to one of God’s attributes but designates God’s redemptive action that saves those who have faith, establishes new communities of faith, and ultimately will restore the whole creation.
(Jewett, p. 142)
In the Hebraic tradition, the phrase refers to God’s saving activity in history (cf. Ps. 98:1–2).40 The missional context makes this reading most likely. It also mates well with ‘the power of God’ (1:16) and the ‘wrath of God’ (1:18), which are both subjective genitives. As the wrath of God is ‘revealed’ (1:18) in what God does (1:24, 26, 28), it follows that the righteousness of God is also ‘revealed’ in what God does. God does justice on the earth because God is just; as Paul says in 3:26, he is both ‘just’ and ‘justifier’ (ASV). On the other hand, Paul may not have intended to limit the meaning of the phrase to only one aspect but deliberately chosen to be imprecise. God’s righteousness in the Old Testament
can denote God’s character as that of a God who will always do what is right, God’s activity of establishing right, and even, as a product of this activity, the state of those who have been, or hope to be, put right.
(Moo, p. 92)
God is righteous, acts righteously in relationships, and deigns to bestow a righteous standing on humans.
The phrase ‘from faith to faith’ (CSB; NRSV, through faith for faith) has also prompted multiple interpretations. Many accept the view reflected in the translation ‘by faith from first to last’ (NIV). This interpretation emphasizes the cardinal importance of faith alone and reinforces that faith is the only way God’s righteousness is recognized and accepted.41 The preposition ‘from’ is understood not as a starting point (‘received by faith and leading to greater faith’) but as identifying faith as the sole foundation.42
Another view recognizes that the idiom ‘from something to something’ expresses a progression (cf. 2 Cor. 2:16; 3:18). The immediate context that refers to the progression of faith from the Jew first and then to the Gentile suggests that Paul may have in mind the progression of the revelation of God’s righteousness from ‘the faith of the Old Testament believer to the faith of the New Testament believer’.43 This interpretation accords with Paul’s commentary on Abraham’s faith in chapter 4, where he identifies him as ‘the ancestor of all who believe without being circumcised and who thus have righteousness reckoned to them’ (4:11). The promises were made first to the Jews as God set them apart to be a light to the nations (Isa. 42:6; 49:6; 60:3; Acts 13:47). The gospel then comes to Gentiles through the witness of believing Jews. Once again, it is difficult to limit Paul’s meaning to one aspect to the exclusion of all others.44
Another view reads the preposition from a theocentric perspective to refer to God’s or Christ’s faithfulness, to which believers respond with faith.45 If this interpretation is correct, then Paul could have made it clearer by citing the Septuagint rendering of Habakkuk 2:4, ‘The one who is righteous will live by my faith [faithfulness]’, which includes the pronoun ‘my’ faith. While faith in Greek can mean ‘faithfulness’ and ‘trust’, one might expect, for clarity’s sake, that Paul has only one meaning in mind for faith in the four references to it in these two verses. That would be ‘human trust’. Paul’s emphasis on revelation sounded in verse 17, however, has too often been ignored. Mininger contends that Paul ‘describes how God’s own attribute of righteousness (content) is presently revealed in the gospel (location), which is more likely to be understood as coming about from divine faithfulness (source) to human faith (destination)’.46 Humans may not know ‘the mind of’ God (11:34) from their own resources, but God has revealed in history ‘the depth’ of his ‘riches and wisdom and knowledge’ and his ‘unsearchable’ judgments and ‘inscrutable’ ways (11:33) in the gospel. Humans can respond to ‘the power of God for salvation’ (1:16) only with faith. That this compressed phrase refers to God’s faithfulness to which humans respond with faith is confirmed by the letter’s opening in verses 1–7. Paul moves from God’s faithfulness in fulfilling the gospel, ‘which he promised beforehand through his prophets in the holy scriptures’ (1:1–2), to human response, ‘the obedience of faith among all the Gentiles’ (1:5).
Paul cites Habakkuk 2:4 to confirm the truth of this statement from the Scripture. He cited this passage in Galatians 3:11 in the context of his assertion that Abraham ‘believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness’ (Gal. 3:6). Does Paul intend the phrase by faith to be taken adjectivally, modifying persons as righteous, or adverbially, describing how righteous persons will live? The first option is represented by the RSV: ‘He who through faith is righteous shall live’; the second, by the NRSV: ‘The one who is righteous will live by faith.’ The context leads one to expect the citation to substantiate that one can conform to God’s righteous standards and come into a right relationship with God only through faith. Paul says this explicitly in 5:1: ‘we are justified [made righteous] by faith’.47 The first option tallies with the central argument of Galatians. One cannot get right with God based on obedience to the law (Gal. 2:16; 3:11) since the law imparts neither life nor righteousness (Gal. 3:21). As Gentiles ‘receive the promise of the Spirit through faith’ (Gal. 3:14), so Gentiles are justified ‘by faith’ (Gal. 3:8). Paul makes this same point in Romans 4:13–16. Interpreters may be trying to draw too fine a distinction in trying to narrow Paul’s meaning (Dunn, I, pp. 45–46). Schreiner asserts, ‘“To be righteous by faith” and “to live by faith” are alternate ways of expressing the same reality’ (Schreiner, p. 82).
Will live may refer to receiving ‘eternal life’ and being delivered from God’s wrath. That requires that the righteous live differently from those who are subjected to God’s wrath and ‘deserve to die’ (1:18–32). Being justified by faith is not the end of the story. Faith is also to govern one’s continuing life, as the ethical exhortations in 6:1–21 and 12:1–15 make clear.
The noun ‘righteousness’ occurs thirty-four times in Romans, its verbal cognate ‘to justify’ occurs fifteen times, and the adjective ‘righteous’ occurs seven times. Kruse helpfully identifies five different aspects of Paul’s references to the righteousness of God in Romans. Paul uses it (1) to speak of God’s ‘distributive justice’ by which ‘God recompenses humanity in accordance with its response to his revelation’ (1:18–32; 2:2–11; 3:1–20); (2) to defend God’s ‘covenant faithfulness’ (3:3–9; 9:1–29; 11:1–10); (3) to expound on God’s ‘saving action’ in providing redemption through Christ’s sacrificial death (3:21–26); (4) to expound on it as God’s ‘gift of justification and a right relationship with himself’ (4:1–25; 5:17; 9:30 – 10:4); and (5) to explain how that gift ‘leads to righteousness of life in believers’ (6:1–23; 8:4) (Kruse, pp. 79–80). Kruse contends, ‘All these aspects of God’s righteousness can be included under the one umbrella of God acting in accordance with his own nature for the sake of his name’ (Kruse, p. 80 [all emphasis original]). In the context of 1:17, it seems most likely that Paul has in mind two of these aspects, which are expressed most clearly in 3:25–26, namely, ‘God’s saving action in Christ whereby he brings people into a right relationship with himself’ (Kruse, p. 81). The gospel and the response to it reveal God’s righteousness that produces salvation, faith, life, and the elimination of the chasm between Jew and Greek. Bird masterfully manages to include the whole spectrum of views in his conclusion:
The righteousness of God signified the fidelity and justice of God’s character, the demonstration of his character as the judge of all the earth, and his faithfulness toward Israel in Jesus Christ. The righteousness of God, then, is the character of God embodied and enacted in his saving actions. It is a saving event that is comprehensive, and it involves vivification, justification, and transformation.
(Bird, p. 43)
Paul will make clear that humans cannot earn credits towards righteousness through obedience to the law. Checking one’s righteousness quotient as if it were a credit score manifests a wrong attitude that vitiates any claim to righteousness. Righteousness comes only from God and not from ourselves. Faith confesses one’s total inadequacy to attain righteousness on one’s own, trusts God’s enterprise to provide salvation solely through Christ and accepts a new identity in Christ. Marshall observes,
Faith alone can penetrate the ultimate paradox of the gospel: that the kingly power of God is manifest in the suffering and death of Jesus on the pagan cross, transforming the cross into a power that is infinitely greater than any human power.48
1. Windsor, Paul, pp. 99–112.
2. Lampe, From Paul to Valentinus, p. 183, maintains that from the list of those to be greeted in 16:3–15, nine of the thirteen persons about whom it is possible to draw conclusions have names that indicate a slave origin.
3. Glancy, ‘Slavery’, p. 459.
4. Fronto (Ep. 4.12) claims that images of the emperor were found ‘anywhere and everywhere’ so that ‘the emperor – especially Augustus’ could be called ‘the only Empire-wide god in the Roman pantheon’. Cf. Peppard, Son of God.
5. Hays, Echoes, p. 34.
6. Beker, Paul, p. 341.
7. Barrett, First Epistle, pp. 338–339.
8. The deeply entrenched opinion that Paul cites an early confession is refuted by Calhoun, Paul’s Definitions, pp. 85–142; Poythress, ‘Romans 1:3–4’; and Scott, Adoption, pp. 221–244. This confession accords with how Luke portrays the gist of Paul’s first sermon in Acts 13:33–35.
9. Breytenbach, ‘“For Us” Phrases’, p. 177.
10. Cf. also 2 Sam. 7:12–14; Isa. 11:1–5, 10; Jer. 23:5–6; 33:14–16; Ezek. 34:23–24; 37:24–25.
11. Paul does not develop here the idea that as the first raised from the dead (Acts 26:23), Jesus’ resurrection makes possible the resurrection of others (1 Cor. 15:21).
12. Calhoun, Paul’s Definitions, p. 133.
13. Cf. 1QS 3:7; 4:21; 8:16; 9:3; 1QH 7:6–7; 9:32.
14. Paul uses the term ta ethnē in Romans to denote ‘the Gentiles’ rather than ‘the nations’ in general, with the one exception of 4:17–18 where he refers to the ‘many nations’.
15. The phrase ‘among whom also’ (en hois kai) appears in Mark 15:40 and Acts 17:34 and means ‘including’.
16. Jervis, Purpose, p. 77.
17. Oropeza, Second Corinthians, p. 54. Cf. also 1 En. 62:8; 100:5; 1QM 3:5; 10:10; 12:7; 1QH 7:10; 1QS 5:18; CD 4:6.
18. Rock, Paul’s Letter, pp. 177–182.
19. Bauckham, God Crucified; Hengel, ‘Christological Titles’; and Hurtado, Lord Jesus Christ, document the church’s high Christology from early on.
20. Hurtado, ‘Jesus’ Divine Sonship’, p. 227.
21. Jipp, ‘Ancient, Modern, and Future’, pp. 241–259.
22. Ibid., pp. 256–257.
23. Jipp, Christ Is King, p. 178.
24. DeSilva, Introduction, p. 602 n. 11.
25. Barclay, Paul, p. 63.
26. Stuhlmacher, ‘Purpose’, p. 237.
27. Ibid.
28. H. Windisch, ‘βάρβαρος’, TDNT I, p. 548. Roman evidence examined by Dauge, Le Barbare, pp. 472–473, typifies barbarians as ‘inhuman, ferocious, arrogant, weak, warlike, discordant . . . unstable’, the antithesis of the enlightened Roman (noted by Jewett, p. 131).
29. Dahl, Studies, p. 77.
30. Minear, Obedience, p. 104.
31. Ibid., p. 105.
32. Cf. Plato, Prot. 341b. It does not imply that Jewish Christian critics of his gospel have put him on the defensive.
33. Watts, ‘Not Ashamed’, pp. 22–23.
34. As argued by Calhoun, Paul’s Definitions.
35. Keener, Mind of the Spirit, p. 6 n. 22.
36. Irons, Righteousness, most recently defends this view.
37. Keck, Paul, p. 117.
38. Williams, ‘Righteousness’, p. 270.
39. Seifrid, Justification, pp. 214–219.
40. Ziesler, Meaning, p. 186.
41. ‘Faith’ appears forty times in the letter; the verb ‘to believe/trust’, nineteen times.
42. Harris, ‘Prepositions’, p. 1189.
43. Quarles, ‘From Faith to Faith’, p. 21.
44. Taylor, ‘From Faith to Faith’, claims that the Greek idiom ek (‘from’) + an abstract noun + eis (‘to’) + an abstract noun denotes either progression or increase, and that it reflects Paul’s enthusiastic description of the increasing number of believers in the Gentile world.
45. Campbell, ‘Romans 1:17’, p. 281, contends that Paul refers to the ‘faithful obedience of Christ through Calvary that revealed God’s salvation and also created the possibility of individual salvation through belief and perseverance until the eschaton’.
46. Mininger, Uncovering, p. 61.
47. It is less likely that Paul understands this passage to be a messianic prophecy and that the ‘righteous one’ refers to Christ. ‘Righteous one’ is used as a title for Christ in Acts 3:14; 7:52; 22:14; 1 Pet. 3:18; 1 John 2:1, but never by Paul, and nothing in the context points to this meaning.
48. Marshall, Faith, pp. 207–208.