Notes

Chapter 1: Getting Oriented

1. K. Stendahl, “Paul and the Introspective Conscience of the West,” Harvard Theological Review 56 (1963): 199–215.

2. E. P. Sanders, Paul and Palestinian Judaism (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1977).

3. J. D. G. Dunn has written about these matters in many places. Most accessible is his two-volume commentary on Romans (Word Biblical Commentary 38A, 38B [Dallas: Word, 1988]). One of his earliest writings on the matter was “The New Perspective on Paul,” Bulletin of the John Rylands Library 65 (1983): 95–122. He very helpfully elaborates his view in light of criticism in “The New Perspective on Paul: Whence, What and Whither?” in The New Perspective on Paul, rev. ed. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2008), 1–97.

4. N. T. Wright, “The Paul of History and the Apostle of Faith,” Tyndale Bulletin 29 (1978): 61–88. Wright also describes his own new-perspective approach in What Saint Paul Really Said (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997) and Paul in Fresh Perspective (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2005).

5. Suetonius, Life of Claudius 25.2. The date has been disputed, but a solid case for AD 49 can be made. See, for example, E. M. Smallwood, The Jews under Roman Rule, Studies in Judaism in Late Antiquity 20 (Leiden: Brill, 1976).

6. For more detail, see D. J. Moo, The Epistle to the Romans, New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996), 211–17. Note also S. Westerholm, Perspectives Old and New on Paul: The ‘Lutheran’ Paul and His Critics (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004); S. Kim, Paul and the New Perspective: Second Thoughts on the Origin of Paul’s Gospel (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2001). On the Judaism of Paul’s day, see especially D. A. Carson, P. T. O’Brien, and M. A. Seifrid, eds., Justification and Variegated Nomism, vol. 1, The Complexities of Second Temple Judaism (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2001).

7. Augustine, Confessions 8.29.

Chapter 2: Paul and the Romans

1. First Clement 5.7: “He [Paul] taught righteousness to all the world, and when he had reached the limits of the West he gave his testimony before the rulers, and thus passed from the world.”

2. See Acts 15:3; 20:38; 21:5; 1 Cor. 16:6, 11; 2 Cor. 1:16; Titus 3:13; 3 John 6.

3. For a lengthy argument for an exclusively gentile audience, see A. A. Das, Solving the Romans Debate (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2007). R. N. Longenecker, on the other hand, has argued that the majority of Christians Paul addresses were Jews (Introducing Romans: Critical Issues in Paul’s Most Famous Letter [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2011], 55–91). M. Nanos thinks that Paul addresses a mainly gentile Christian audience with a view to getting them to recognize the continuing status of Israel as the people of God (The Mystery of Romans: The Jewish Context of Paul’s Letter [Minneapolis: Fortress, 1996]).

Chapter 3: The Gospel of God

1. For further study, refer to D. J. Moo, The Epistle to the Romans, New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996), 70–76, 79–90; for other perspectives, see E. Käsemann, “The Righteousness of God in Romans,” in New Testament Questions of Today (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1969), 168–82; D. Campbell, The Deliverance of God: An Apocalyptic Reading of Justification in Paul (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009).

2. A collection of essays that covers the field very well is K. Donfried, ed., The Romans Debate, rev. ed. (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1991).

3. See, among more recent authors, R. Jewett, Romans, Hermeneia (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2007); A. J. Hultgren, Paul’s Letter to the Romans: A Commentary (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2011).

4. See J. Jervell, “The Letter to Jerusalem,” in Donfried, Romans Debate, 53–64.

5. See in this regard the instructively titled book by A. J. M. Wedderburn, The Reasons for Romans (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1991).

6. J. Denney, “St. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans,” in The Expositor’s Greek New Testament, ed. W. R. Nicoll (1897; repr., Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1970), 2:570.

7. A warning about imposing an “architectonic structure” on Romans has been sounded by J. C. Beker, Paul the Apostle: The Triumph of God in Life and Thought (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1980), 64–69.

Chapter 4: God’s Wrath against Sinners

1. F. L. Godet, Commentary on Romans, trans. A. Cusin (1883; repr., Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1977), 107.

2. See J. Boswell, Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality: Gay People in Europe from the Beginning of the Christian Era to the Fourteenth Century (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1980), 111.

3. See, for example, Testament of Naphtali 3.4–5; Philo, Change of Names 211; Special Laws 4.79; Decalogue 142, 150; Josephus, Against Apion 2.273.

4. On the teaching of this text and of the New Testament generally about homosexuality, see R. Gagnon, The Bible and Homosexual Practice: Texts and Hermeneutics (Nashville: Abingdon, 2002); R. Hays, The Moral Vision of the New Testament (San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 1996), 379–406.

Chapter 5: Jews Are “without Excuse”

1. See T. Schreiner, Romans, Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1998), 114–15; N. T. Wright, “Romans,” in New Interpreter’s Bible Commentary, vol. 10, Acts–1 Corinthians, ed. L. E. Keck (Nashville: Abingdon, 2002), 441–42.

2. For more details, see D. J. Moo, The Epistle to the Romans, New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996), 139–43; J. Murray, The Epistle to the Romans, New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1959), 1:78–79.

3. See C. E. B. Cranfield, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, International Critical Commentary (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1975), 1:155–56.

4. Failure to pay the temple tax was widely criticized (e.g., Psalms of Solomon 8.11–13; Testament of Levi 14.5).

5. See J. A. Fitzmyer, Romans: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, Anchor Bible 33 (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1993), 318.

Chapter 6: The Universal Power of Sin

1. See L. E. Keck, “The Function of Rom 3,10–18: Observations and Suggestions,” in God’s Christ and His People: Studies in Honour of Nils Alstrup Dahl, ed. J. Jervell and W. A. Meeks (Oslo: Universitetsforlaget, 1977), 141–57.

2. See J. D. G. Dunn, Romans, Word Biblical Commentary 38A (Dallas: Word, 1988), 1:158–60; N. T. Wright, “Romans,” in New Interpreter’s Bible Commentary, vol. 10, Acts–1 Corinthians, ed. L. E. Keck (Nashville: Abingdon, 2002), 459–61.

3. See D. J. Moo, “‘Law,’ ‘Works of the Law,’ and Legalism in Paul,” Westminster Theological Journal 45 (1985): 90–96.

Chapter 7: God’s Righteousness in Christ

1. Margin of the Luther Bible (1545), on 3:23. Martin Luther, Biblia: Das ist: Die gantze Heilige Schrifft Deutdsch (Wittenberg: Durch Hans Lufft, 1545).

2. While details of interpretation differ, see, for this general approach, N. T. Wright, “Romans,” in New Interpreter’s Bible Commentary, vol. 10, Acts–1 Corinthians, ed. L. E. Keck (Nashville: Abingdon, 2002), 467–70; D. A. Campbell, The Rhetoric of Righteousness in Romans 3:21–26, Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplements 65 (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1992), 58–69.

3. See J. D. G. Dunn, “Once More, PISTIS CHRISTOU,” in Society of Biblical Literature 1991 Seminar Papers, ed. E. H. Lovering (Atlanta: Scholars Press), 730–44; R. B. Matlock, “Saving Faith: The Rhetoric and Semantics of πίστις in Paul,” in The Faith of Jesus Christ: Exegetical, Biblical, and Theological Studies, ed. M. F. Bird and P. M. Sprinkle (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2009), 73–89. This volume of essays provides a valuable overview of the issue.

4. See L. Morris, The Apostolic Preaching of the Cross (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1965), 9–26.

5. See Morris, Apostolic Preaching, 136–56.

6. The most famous objector was C. H. Dodd; see Dodd’s The Bible and the Greeks (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1935), 82–95.

7. For this view, see D. J. Moo, The Epistle to the Romans, New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996), 231–37; D. P. Bailey, “Jesus as the Mercy Seat: The Semantics and Theology of Paul’s Use of Hilasterion in Romans 3:25,” Tyndale Bulletin 51 (2000): 155–58; A. J. Hultgren, Paul’s Letter to the Romans: A Commentary (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2011), 662–75.

8. Wright, “Romans,” 472; D. A. Campbell, The Deliverance of God: An Apocalyptic Reading of Justification in Paul (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009), 621–76.

9. J. Denney, The Death of Christ, ed. R. V. G. Tasker (London: Tyndale, 1951), 98.

10. See J. D. G. Dunn, Romans, Word Biblical Commentary 38A (Dallas: Word, 1988), 1:185–86.

11. Simon Gathercole argues that both covenant standing and one’s own works are the basis for boasting. Where Is Boasting? Early Jewish Soteriology and Paul’s Response in Romans 1–5 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002), 225–26.

12. See C. E. B. Cranfield, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, International Critical Commentary (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1975), 1:219–20; R. Jewett, Romans, Hermeneia (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2007), 298.

Chapter 8: The Faith of Abraham

1. R. H. Charles, ed., The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1913), 2:48.

2. J. A. Fitzmyer, Romans: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, Anchor Bible 33 (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1993), 385.

3. See, for example, Philo, Special Laws 4.187; see also C. E. B. Cranfield, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, International Critical Commentary (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1975), 1:244–45.

4. R. B. Gaffin Jr., Resurrection and Redemption: A Study in Paul’s Soteriology (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1978), 113; N. T. Wright, Christian Origins and the Question of God, vol. 3, The Resurrection of the Son of God (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2003), 248; M. F. Bird, The Saving Righteousness of God: Studies on Paul, Justification and the New Perspective, Paternoster Biblical Monographs (Waynesboro, GA: Paternoster, 2007), 48–59.

Chapter 9: Rejoicing in Life and Hope

1. R. Jewett, Romans, Hermeneia (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2007), 357; B. Witherington III, with D. Hyatt, Paul’s Letter to the Romans: A Socio-rhetorical Commentary (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2004), 136.

2. For this view, see J. Murray, The Imputation of Adam’s Sin (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1959). See also A. A. Hoekema, Created in God’s Image (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1986), 154–67.

3. See A. J. Hultgren, Christ and His Benefits: Christology and Redemption in the New Testament (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1987), 54–55.

Chapter 10: Freedom from the Power of Sin

1. Against, for instance, those who think that Paul might simply be using a metaphor (believers have been “immersed” in Christ; so L. Morris, The Epistle to the Romans, Pillar New Testament Commentaries [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988], 246) and those who think that the reference might be to “baptism in the Spirit” (so D. M. Lloyd-Jones, Romans: An Exposition of Chapter 6; The New Man [Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1973]).

2. See F. F. Bruce, The Letter of Paul to the Romans, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1985), 129.

3. See J. D. G. Dunn, Baptism in the Holy Spirit (London: SCM, 1970), 145, passim.

4. For this general interpretation, see G. R. Beasley-Murray, Baptism in the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1962), 133. This volume also provides the best overview of baptism in the New Testament.

5. See C. E. B. Cranfield, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, International Critical Commentary (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1975), 1:308; N. T. Wright, Christian Origins and the Question of God, vol. 3, The Resurrection of the Son of God (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2003), 251–53.

6. F. L. Godet, Commentary on Romans, trans. A. Cusin (1883; repr., Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1977), 251.

7. See J. Murray, The Epistle to the Romans, New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1959), 1:229.

8. Lloyd-Jones, Exposition of Chapter 6, 303–10.

Chapter 11: Freedom from the Law

1. See R. H. Gundry, “The Moral Frustration of Paul before His Conversion: Sexual Lust in Romans 7:7–25,” in Pauline Studies: Essays Presented to Professor F. F. Bruce on His Seventieth Birthday, ed. D. A. Hagner and M. J. Harris (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980), 232–33.

2. See J. Murray, The Epistle to the Romans, New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1959), 1:251; R. Jewett, Romans, Hermeneia (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2007), 444–45.

3. See J. D. G. Dunn, Romans, Word Biblical Commentary 38A (Dallas: Word, 1988), 1:378–86; Chris A. Vlachos, The Law and the Knowledge of Good and Evil: The Edenic Background of the Catalytic Operation of the Law in Paul (Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2008), 98–107.

4. See (combined with other views) D. J. Moo, The Epistle to the Romans, New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996), 423–31; N. T. Wright, “Romans,” in New Interpreter’s Bible Commentary, vol. 10, Acts–1 Corinthians, ed. L. E. Keck (Nashville: Abingdon, 2002), 551–54.

5. See, for example, Philo, Decalogue 142–143, 173; 4 Macc. 2:6.

6. See, in detail, Moo, Epistle to the Romans, 443–53.

7. See D. M. Lloyd-Jones, Romans: An Exposition of Chapters 7:1–8:4; The Law, Its Functions and Limits (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1974), 229–57.

8. See C. E. B. Cranfield, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, International Critical Commentary (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1975), 1:344–47; Murray, Epistle to the Romans, 1:256–59; Dunn, Romans, 1:387–89, 403–12.

9. See Dunn, Romans, 1:395; Wright, “Romans,” 570; and the broader treatment by K. Snodgrass, “Spheres of Influence: A Possible Solution for the Problem of Paul and the Law,” Journal for the Study of the New Testament 32 (1988): 106–7.

Chapter 12: Life and Hope through the Spirit

1. Paul uses the Greek word for “condemnation,” katakrima, only here and in Rom. 5:16, 18—a lexical suggestion of the connection between the passages.

2. See J. D. G. Dunn, Romans, Word Biblical Commentary 38A (Dallas: Word, 1988), 1:416–18; N. T. Wright, “Romans,” in New Interpreter’s Bible Commentary, vol. 10, Acts–1 Corinthians, ed. L. E. Keck (Nashville: Abingdon, 2002), 577; R. Jewett, Romans, Hermeneia (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2007), 481.

3. “Sin offering,” the NIV rendering, is probably justified, since the phrase Paul uses here, peri hamartias, frequently has this meaning in the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Old Testament.

4. So Augustine; cf. E. Käsemann, Commentary on Romans, trans. G. Bromiley (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980), 232–33.

5. E. Adams, Constructing the World: A Study in Paul’s Cosmological Language, Studies of the New Testament and Its World (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2000), 179–84.

6. See especially J. Moo, “Romans 8:19–22 and Isaiah’s Cosmic Covenant,” New Testament Studies 54 (2008): 74–89.

7. A few commentators have thought that the “one who subjected it” might be Adam (B. Byrne, “Creation Groaning: An Earth Bible Reading of Romans 8.18–22,” in Readings from the Perspective of the Earth, ed. N. C. Habel [Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2000], 193–203) or even Satan (F. L. Godet, Commentary on Romans, trans. A. Cusin [1883; repr., Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1977], 314–15).

8. Godet, Commentary on Romans, 320; Dunn, Romans, 1:476.

9. See G. Fee, God’s Empowering Presence: The Holy Spirit in the Letters of Paul (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1994), 588–90.

10. Chrysostom, “Homily on Romans XV,” in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Series 1, ed. P. Schaff, 9:454.

Chapter 13: Israel and the Plan of God

1. See R. R. Ruether, Faith and Fratricide: The Theological Roots of Anti-Semitism (New York: Seabury, 1974).

2. See D. A. Hagner, “Paul’s Quarrel with Judaism,” in Anti-Semitism and Early Christianity: Issues of Polemic and Faith, ed. C. A. Evans and D. A. Hagner (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993), 128–50.

3. This view can be traced back to the nineteenth century. Two prominent exponents in recent years have been K. Stendahl, “Paul among Jews and Gentiles,” in Paul among Jews and Gentiles and Other Essays (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1976), and J. Gager, Reinventing Paul (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000), 128–42.

4. I emphasize that the problem is Israel’s exclusion from salvation, because a revisionist interpretation has received some support in recent years. According to this interpretation, Paul was bewailing not Israel’s failure to be saved—Israel is already saved by virtue of the torah covenant—but Israel’s failure to support the mission to the gentiles. See L. Gaston, Paul and the Torah (Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 1987), 135–50; S. G. Hall III, Christian Anti-Semitism and Paul’s Theology (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1993), 88–93, 113–27.

5. On this, see B. M. Metzger, “The Punctuation of Rm 9:5,” in Christ and Spirit in the New Testament: In Honour of Charles Francis Digby Moule, ed. B. Lindars and S. Smalley (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1973), 95–112; M. J. Harris, Jesus as God: The New Testament Use of Theos in Reference to Jesus (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1992), 144–72.

6. See R. N. Longenecker, Galatians, Word Biblical Commentary 41 (Dallas: Word, 1990), 297–99. For the opposite view, taking “Israel of God” to refer only to Jewish Christians, see P. Richardson, Israel in the Apostolic Church (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1969), 74–84.

7. N. T. Wright, The Climax of the Covenant: Christ and the Law in Pauline Theology (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1991), 238.

8. See C. E. B. Cranfield, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, International Critical Commentary (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1979), 2:480–81; J. A. Fitzmyer, Romans: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, Anchor Bible 33 (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1993), 562–63; and, for a broader perspective on election, W. W. Klein, The New Chosen People: A Corporate View of Election (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1990).

9. See J. Piper, The Justification of God: An Exegetical and Theological Study of Romans 9:1–23 (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1983), 45–54; T. Schreiner, Romans, Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1998), 497–503.

10. See Klein, New Chosen People, 166–67.

11. See G. K. Beale, “An Exegetical and Theological Consideration of the Hardening of Pharaoh’s Heart in Exodus 4–14 and Romans 9,” Trinity Journal 5 (1984): 129–54.

12. For the way Paul uses the Old Testament along these lines throughout Romans, see D. J. Moo, “Paul’s Universalizing Hermeneutics in Romans,” The Southern Baptist Journal of Theology 11 (2007): 62–90.

Chapter 14: Israel, the Gentiles, and the Righteousness of God

1. See J. Murray, The Epistle to the Romans, New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1965), 2:43.

2. See D. P. Fuller, Gospel and Law: Contrast or Continuum? The Hermeneutics of Dispensationalism and Covenant Theology (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980), 71–79; C. E. B. Cranfield, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, International Critical Commentary (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1979), 2:507–10.

3. See T. Schreiner, Romans, Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1998), 536–38; R. Jewett, Romans, Hermeneia (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2007), 610.

4. See J. D. G. Dunn, Romans, Word Biblical Commentary 38B (Dallas: Word, 1988), 2:587–88; N. T. Wright, “Romans,” in New Interpreter’s Bible Commentary, vol. 10, Acts–1 Corinthians, ed. L. E. Keck (Nashville: Abingdon, 2002), 610.

5. For this interpretation, with respect to “zeal,” see D. C. Ortlund, Zeal without Knowledge: The Concept of Zeal in Romans 10, Galatians 1, and Philippians 3, Library of New Testament Studies (London: T&T Clark, 2012).

6. For argument and elaboration of this general interpretation of Rom. 10:4, see D. J. Moo, The Epistle to the Romans, New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996), 638–41; see also Wright, “Romans,” 656–58.

7. Wright, “Romans,” 659–62.

8. For this general approach, see especially M. A. Seifrid, “Paul’s Approach to the Old Testament in Romans 10:6–8,” Trinity Journal 6 (1985): 35–37; C. S. Keener, Romans, A New Covenant Commentary (Eugene, OR: Cascade, 2009), 127; Cranfield, Epistle to the Romans, 2:524–26.

Chapter 15: The Future of Israel

1. For this view, see J. Calvin, Commentaries on the Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Romans, trans. J. Owen (1849; repr., Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1947), 410–11.

2. See J. Murray, The Epistle to the Romans, New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1959, 1965), 2:79.

3. See C. E. B. Cranfield, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, International Critical Commentary (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1979), 2:562–63; J. D. G. Dunn, Romans, Word Biblical Commentary 38B (Dallas: Word, 1988), 2:658; R. Jewett, Romans, Hermeneia (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2007), 681.

4. Murray, Epistle to the Romans, 2:82–84; N. T. Wright, “Romans,” in New Interpreter’s Bible Commentary, vol. 10, Acts–1 Corinthians, ed. L. E. Keck (Nashville: Abingdon, 2002), 683.

5. Murray, Epistle to the Romans, 2:92–93.

6. Cranfield, Epistle to the Romans, 2:573–74.

7. J. C. Beker, Paul the Apostle: The Triumph of God in Life and Thought (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1980), 333–35.

8. For a good criticism of bicovenantalism, or, as it is sometimes called, the Sonderweg (“special way”) view, see R. Hvalvik, “A ‘Sonderweg’ for Israel: A Critical Examination of a Current Interpretation of Romans 11:25–27,” Journal for the Study of the New Testament 38 (1990): 87–107.

9. One recent advocate is Wright, “Romans,” 689–91.

10. See C. M. Horne, “The Meaning of the Phrase ‘And Thus All Israel Will Be Saved,’” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 21 (1978): 331–34.

11. Some other significant texts are Num. 16:34; Josh. 7:25; 1 Sam. 7:5; 25:1; 1 Kings 12:1; 2 Chron. 12:1; Dan. 9:11. Also frequently cited in this regard is the rabbinic text Mishnah Sanhedrin 10.1, which first affirms, “All Israelites have a share in the world to come,” and then gives a list of exceptions.

Chapter 16: The Christian Mind-Set

1. See R. J. Karris, “Romans 14:1–15:13 and the Occasion of Romans,” in The Romans Debate, ed. K. Donfried, rev. ed. (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1991), 81–84.

2. See A. J. M. Wedderburn, The Reasons for Romans (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1991), 78–81; N. T. Wright, “Romans,” in New Interpreter’s Bible Commentary, vol. 10, Acts–1 Corinthians, ed. L. E. Keck (Nashville: Abingdon, 2002), 702.

3. See R. Jewett, Romans, Hermeneia (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2007), 742.

4. See C. E. B. Cranfield, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, International Critical Commentary (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1979), 2:613–16; Wright, “Romans,” 709.

5. Several ancient writers use the human body to argue that the political state, although comprising many very different kinds of people, is a single entity. A few writers even call the state the “body” of the emperor.

6. F. L. Godet, Commentary on Romans, trans. A. Cusin (1883; repr., Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1977), 435.

7. I should mention, however, that a few scholars think Paul is suggesting that doing good to the enemy might increase his or her share in the judgment to come. They point out that in the Old Testament, coals and fire are consistently images of judgment. See J. Piper, “Love Your Enemies”: Jesus’ Love Command in the Synoptic Gospels and in the Early Christian Paraenesis, Society for New Testament Studies Monograph Series 38 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979), 115–18.

8. See S. Morenz, “Feurige Kohlen auf dem Haupt,” in Religion und Geschichte des alten Ägypten (Köln: Böhlau, 1975), 433–44.

Chapter 17: Citizens of the World and Citizens of Heaven

1. The best defense of this view is found in O. Cullmann, The State in the New Testament (New York: Harper & Row, 1956), 55–70; cf. K. Barth, Church and State (London: SCM, 1939), 23–36.

2. See C. E. B. Cranfield, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, International Critical Commentary (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1979), 2:672.

3. A few interpreters go so far as to argue that 13:1–7 was not a part of Paul’s original letter to the Romans (e.g., W. Munro, Authority in Paul and Peter: The Identification of a Pastoral Stratum in the Pauline Corpus and 1 Peter, Society for the Study of the New Testament Monograph Series 45 [Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983], 56–67).

4. See T. Schreiner, Romans, Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1998), 692–95.

5. For this view, see S. Westerholm, Israel’s Law and the Church’s Faith (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988), 201–2.

6. J. Calvin, Commentaries on the Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Romans, trans. J. Owen (1849; repr., Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1947), 489.

Chapter 18: A Plea for Unity in the Church

1. See C. K. Barrett, A Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, Harper’s New Testament Commentaries (New York: Harper & Row, 1957), 256–57.

2. See E. Käsemann, Commentary on Romans, trans. G. Bromiley (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980), 369.

3. A. Nygren, Commentary on Romans (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1949), 442.

4. This interpretation is supported by the wide majority of contemporary interpreters. See, for example, C. E. B. Cranfield, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, International Critical Commentary (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1979), 2:694–97; J. D. G. Dunn, Romans, Word Biblical Commentary 38B (Dallas: Word, 1988), 2:799–802; D. J. Moo, The Epistle to the Romans, New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996), 826–33.

5. R. Jewett, Romans, Hermeneia (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2007), 840.

6. From On the Freedom of a Christian Man in H. Ware and C. A. Buchheim, eds., First Principles of the Reformation (London: John Murray, 1883), www.fordam.edu/halsall/mod/luther-freedomchristian.asp.

7. “Lord” could refer to God, but a good case can be made for thinking that the “Lord” here is Jesus Christ (see J. Murray, The Epistle to the Romans, New International Commentary on the New Testament [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1965], 2:177).

Chapter 19: Additional Comments on the Concluding Material

1. See especially P. T. O’Brien, Consumed by Passion: Paul and the Logic of the Gospel (Homebush West, Australia: Lancer, 1993), 31, 50–51.

2. Note, however, that there is dispute about whether the “people” in Isaiah 66:20 are Jews scattered outside Israel or gentiles (as I am assuming). See Roger D. Aus, “Paul’s Travel Plans to Spain and the ‘Full Number of the Gentiles’ of Rom. XI.25,” Novum Testamentum 21 (1979): 236–37.

3. P. Lampe, “The Roman Christians of Romans 16,” in The Romans Debate, ed. K. Donfried, rev. ed. (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1991), 218; J. A. D. Weima, Neglected Endings: The Significance of the Pauline Letter Closings, Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplements 101 (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1994), 226–28.

4. His major work is the monograph Die stadtrömischen Christen in den ersten beiden Jahrhunderten: Untersuchungen zur Socialgeschichte, 2nd ed. (Tübingen: Mohr, 1989). A summary of some of his main points is found in Lampe, “Roman Christians.”

5. Some, however, have made exaggerated and, I think, unfounded claims on this point. E. S. Fiorenza, for instance, argues that these women were Paul’s coworkers and therefore that most of them held ministries equal in authority to his (“Missionaries, Apostles, Coworkers: Romans 16 and the Reconstruction of Women’s Early Christian History,” Word and World 6 [1986]: 430). See also R. Jewett, Romans, Hermeneia (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2007), 944.

6. See J. Murray, The Epistle to the Romans, New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1965), 2:226.

7. So most commentators, among them N. T. Wright, “Romans,” in New Interpreter’s Bible Commentary, vol. 10, Acts–1 Corinthians, ed. L. E. Keck (Nashville: Abingdon, 2002), 761–62; J. D. G. Dunn, Romans, Word Biblical Commentary 38B (Dallas: Word, 1988), 2:888–89; Jewett, Romans, 962–63.

8. Indeed, some claim that “Junias,” a contraction of the name “Junianus,” is unknown. See Richard S. Cervin, “A Note Regarding the Name ‘Junia(s)’ in Romans 16.7,” New Testament Studies 40 (1994): 464–70.

9. So most recent commentators, among them T. Schreiner, Romans, Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1998), 796; A. J. Hultgren, Paul’s Letter to the Romans: A Commentary (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2011), 582–83.

10. Some inferior manuscripts insert a benediction almost identical to 16:20 after 16:23 (see NIV footnote). As this addition is almost certainly not original, most English translations do not contain 16:24. See D. J. Moo, The Epistle to the Romans, New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996), 933.

11. See E. Käsemann, Commentary on Romans, trans. G. Bromiley (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980), 422, 427–28; J. A. Fitzmyer, Romans: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, Anchor Bible 33 (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1993), 753; Jewett, Romans, 998–1002.

12. See L. Hurtado, “The Doxology at the End of Romans,” in New Testament Textual Criticism, Its Significance for Exegesis: Essays in Honor of Bruce M. Metzger, ed. E. J. Epp and G. D. Fee (Oxford: Clarendon, 1981), 185–99; I. H. Marshall, “Romans 16:25–27—An Apt Conclusion,” in Romans and the People of God: Essays in Honor of Gordon D. Fee on the Occasion of His Sixty-Fifth Birthday, ed. S. K. Soderlund and N. T. Wright (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999), 170–84.