Paul’s letter to the Romans is really the chief part of the New Testament and is truly the purest gospel. It is worthy not only that every Christian should know it word for word, by heart, but also that all believers should occupy themselves with it every day, as the daily bread of the soul. We can never read it or ponder over it too much, for the more we deal with it, the more precious it becomes and the better it tastes.1
Paul’s letter to the Romans is a classic . . . probably without equal among New Testament texts.2
Why would anyone write yet another commentary on Romans? Good question! Commentaries on Romans are well served and always have been. I do not claim to have read all of them, but I do have a cohort of my favorites that I have tried to interact with during my own study of the letter.3 On my desk I have kept commentaries by N. T. Wright (NIB), Douglas J. Moo (NICNT), Tom Schreiner (BECNT), and Robert Jewett (Hermeneia) close by as my primary dialogue partners, with several others never far away (Leon Morris, James D. G. Dunn, Leander Keck, Charles Talbert, and Luke Timothy Johnson). Lest people think that I’m simply adding yet another volume to an already crowded library of Romans commentaries, let me add that the problem of a proliferation of Romans commentaries is not a new one. At the height of the European Reformation, for example, no less than ten Romans commentaries were written by Protestant and Catholic theologians between 1532 and 1542. In fact, John Calvin felt the need to apologize and defend his choice of writing a commentary on Romans at this time. The French Reformer wrote:
Since so many scholars of pre-eminent learning have previously devoted their efforts to explaining this Epistle, it seems unlikely that there is any room left for others to produce something better. . . . It will, however, I hope be admitted that nothing has ever been so perfectly done by men that there is no room left for those who follow them to refine, adorn, or illustrate their work. I do not dare to say anything of myself, except that I thought that the present work would be of some profit, and that I have been led to undertake it for no other reason than the common good of the Church.4
Like Calvin, I know I haven’t come up with the first word or the last word on Romans. Like Calvin too, I also believe that what I have to say in my reading of Romans might “be of some profit” to readers and for “the common good of the church” — an aim that is actually achievable thanks to the goals and format of the Story of God Bible Commentary Series (SGBC). Romans is a letter with its own narrative world and is a clear extension of the biblical story line. Romans is “big picture” theology, and it naturally lends itself to expositing the canonical narrative from which it springs. What is more, Paul’s letter to the Romans is deeply steeped in pastoral and missional theology. Not just in the later chapters, but beginning front and center in Romans 1 we can detect the mission of God operating in the mission of the church. Thus, I was excited when asked to contribute the volume on Romans in the SGBC. For I knew that I had hit the theological jackpot in terms of writing a commentary that brings the scriptural story into the living stories of the pastors and people who cherish what is easily Paul’s most magnificent letter.
Among the many parts of the Christian Bible, none has arguably been so treasured and so influential as Paul’s letter to the Romans. Its impact on the great thinkers of the church like Augustine, Martin Luther, and Karl Barth testify to the letter’s enduring poignancy and power. Over a span of centuries, Romans has been a powerful source for theological reformation and an inspiration for spiritual renewal. When people read Romans, big things can happen: paradigms shift, decades of compromise are called out, the superficiality of Christian culture is named and shamed, we are refreshed by a scandalous grace, joy in the gospel is rediscovered, and the evangelical mission of the church is reaffirmed.
My thesis is that Romans is the gospel at theological depth. In this letter, Paul explores how the gospel creates a community of worshipers from Jews and Gentiles who are united in the Messiah. Paul cannot be with the Roman Christians for the moment, so in the interim he “gospelizes” them, that is to say, he endeavors to cultivate a gospel-soaked faith, spirituality, unity, and mission in the Roman house churches. At ground level, Paul wrote to the Romans to solicit their support for his own mission westward, to unify their fractious house churches around a common set of gospel values, and to direct them to live obediently under the one Lord.
There are several people I need to thank for this project. First, my fellow editors, Scot McKnight, Joel Willitts, and Lynn Cohick, who have been great coworkers to construct a commentary series that will help pastors and preachers get inside the biblical story. Second, special thanks to my colleagues at Ridley College, not the least Brian Rosner, a true-blue Pauline scholar, for his encouragement. Third, to the great team at Zondervan including Katya Covrett, Jesse Hillman, Nancy Erickson, and especially Verlyn Verbrugge, who worked on this manuscript in his last days before passing away. Verlyn was a sweet Christian man, a great academic editor, and I am very grateful for having the opportunity to have worked with him. Fourth, two Ridley students, Matt Smith and Rachel Lopez, who read through a draft and offered some good advice and feedback. Fifth, personal testimonies were sent to me by Craig Lloyd, James Allman, Craig Keener, and Bob Mendelsohn, to whom I am grateful. Sixth, and of course, my family, who have continued to bless me with their love, support, and encouragement. Seventh, the assistance of the Ridley librarian Ruth Millard for finding several books for me and indulging my contempt for book return due dates. Eighth, Ben Sutton ably compiled the bibliography and the list of abbreviations.
Finally, I’ve been blessed by the ministry of many fine people who have pastored me and my family in the Christian faith. To them this book is dedicated. To that end, I hope this commentary enables similar men and women in the church to do what Paul set out to do, namely, to encourage a diverse and complicated group of believers to “do what leads to peace and to mutual edification” as they live and work under the auspices of the Lord Jesus Christ (Rom 14:19).
1. Martin Luther, “Preface to the Letter of Saint Paul to the Romans,” in Luther’s Works 35 (Saint Louis: Concordia, 1960), 365.
2. Phil Esler, Conflict and Identity in Romans: The Social Setting of Paul’s Letter (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2003), 1.
3. Gerald L. Bray, trans. and ed., Ambrosiaster: Commentaries on Romans and 1 — 2 Corinthians (ACT; Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 2009); John Chrysostom, “The Homilies of St. John Chrysostom: Epistle of St. Paul the Apostle to the Romans,” in NPNF 11: 329 – 564; Theodore de Bruyn, Pelagius’s Commentary on St Paul’s Epistles to the Romans (Oxford: Clarendon, 1993); Karl Barth, The Epistle to the Romans (trans. E. C. Hoskyns; London: Oxford University Press, 1932); C. H. Dodd, The Epistle to the Romans (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1932); C. K. Barrett, A Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans (New York: Harper & Row, 1957); C. E. B. Cranfield, The Epistle to the Romans (ICC; 2 vols.; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1975 – 79); Ernst Käsemann, Commentary on Romans (trans. G. W. Bromiley; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980); Leon Morris, The Epistle to the Romans (Pillar; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988); James D. G. Dunn, Romans 1 – 8, 9 – 16 (WBC; 2 vols.; Dallas: Word, 1988); Joseph A. Fitzmyer, Romans (AB; New York: Doubleday, 1993); Peter Stuhlmacher, Paul’s Letter to the Romans: A Commentary (trans. S. Hafemann; Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1994); Douglas J. Moo, The Epistle to the Romans (NICNT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996); Brendan Byrne, Romans (SP; Collegeville, MN: Liturgical, 1996); Mark D. Nanos, The Mystery of Romans: The Jewish Context of Paul’s Career (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1996); Luke Timothy Johnson, Reading Romans: A Literary and Theological Commentary (New York: Crossroads, 1997); Thomas R. Schreiner, Romans (BECNT; Grand Rapids: Baker, 1998); Klaus Haacker, Der Brief des Paulus an die Römer (THKNT; Leipzig: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 1999); Christopher Bryan, A Preface to Romans: Notes on the Epistle in its Literary and Cultural Setting (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000); A. Katherine Grieb, The Story of Romans: A Narrative Defense of God’s Righteousness (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2002); N. T. Wright, “Romans,” in New Interpreter’s Bible (ed. L. E. Keck; Nashville: Abingdon, 2002), 10:395 – 770; Charles H. Talbert, Romans (Macon, GA: Smyth & Helwys, 2002); Esler, Conflict and Identity in Romans; Thomas H. Tobin, Paul’s Rhetoric in its Contexts: The Argument of Romans (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2004); Ben Witherington, Paul’s Letter to the Romans: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004); William Dumbrell, Romans: A New Covenant Commentary (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2005); Leander E. Keck, Romans (ANTC; Nashville: Abingdon, 2005); Robert K. Jewett, Romans: A Commentary (Hermeneia; Minneapolis: Fortress, 2007); Craig S. Keener, Romans (NCCS; Eugene, OR: Cascade, 2009); Frank Matera, Romans (Paideia; Grand Rapids: Baker, 2010); Arland J. Hultgren, Paul’s Letter to the Romans: A Commentary (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2011); Colin G. Kruse, Paul’s Letter to the Romans (Pillar; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2012); Solomon Andria, Romans (ABCS; Nairobi: Hippo, 2012).
4. John Calvin, “John Calvin to Simon Grynaeus,” Calvin’s Commentaries: The Epistles of Paul the Apostle to the Romans and Thessalonians (trans. R. Mackenzie; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1960), 2 – 3.