ROMANS,
EPISTLE
TO
THE
of
the
data
to
be
found
in
the
letter,
with
state-ments
in
Acts,
suggests
that
Rom.
was
written
from
Corinth
at
the
close
of
the
so-called
third
missionary
journey
(i.«.
the
period
of
missionary
activity
described
in
Ac
1823-21).
After
the
riots
in
Ephesus
(Ac
la^-")
St.
Paul
spent
three
months
in
Greece
(20'),
whither
Timothy
had
preceded
him.
He
was
thus
carrying
out
a
previous
plan
somewhat
sooner
than
he
had
originally
Intended.
Ac
ig^'-
22
informs
us
that
the
Apostle
wished
to
malse
a
tour
through
Macedonia
and
Achaia,
and
afterwards,
having
first
visited
Jerusalem
once
more,
to
turn
his
steps
towards
Rome.
From
the
letter
itself
we
learn
that
he
was
staying
with
Gaius
(le^s),
who
is
probably
to
be
identified
with
the
Gaius
of
1
Co
1".
At
the
time
of
writing,
Paul
and
Timothy
are
together,
for
the
latter's
name
appears
In
the
salutation
(IG^').
Sosipater,
whose
name
also
appears
there,
may
be
identified
with
the
Sopater
mentioned
in
Ac
20'.
Phoebe,
the
bearer
of
the
letter,
belongs
to
Cenchreae,
one
of
the
ports
of
Corinth.
The
allusions
in
the
letter
all
point
to
the
stay
in
Corinth
implied
in
Ac
20.
Above
all,
the
letter
itself,
apart
from
such
important
passages
as
l"-
"
and
1522.
so^
ig
ample
evidence
of
St.
Paul's
plans
to
visit
Rome,
—
the
plans
mentioned
in
Ac
IQ^'-
22.
it
is
then
more
than
probable
that
the
letter
was
written
from
Corinth
during
the
three
months'
stay
in
Greece
recorded
in
Ac
20».
A
comparison
of
Ro
IS*!-
">
with
Ac
lO''-
«
brings
out
oneof
the
most
strildng
of
Paley's
'undesigned
coincidences.'
The
parallel
references
to
Jewish
plots
in
Ro
15^'
and
Ac
20^
are
also
noteworthy.
It
should,
however,
be
mentioned
that
if
on
critical
grounds
eh.
16
has
to
be
detached
from
the
original
letter,
and
regarded
as
part
of
a
lost
letter
to
the
Bphesians,
much
of
the
evidence
for
the
place
and
date
of
Romans
is
destroyed,
though
the
remaining
indications
suffice
to
establish
thefposition
laid
down
above.
The
date
to
which
the
letter
is
to
be
assigned
depends
on
the
chronology
of
St.
Paul's
life
as
a
whole.
Mr.
Turner
(Hasthigs'
DB,
s.v.
'Chronology
of
NT')
suggests
A.D.
55-56.
But
for
further
treatment
of
this
subject,
readers
must
consult
the
general
articles
on
CHRON01.0QT
OF
NT
and
Paul.
The
immediate
occasion
for
the
letter
is
clearly
the
prospective
visit
to
Rome.
St.
Paul
is
preparing
the
way
tor
his
coming.
This
explains
why
he
writes
to
the
Romans
at
all;
it
does
not
explain
why
he
writes
the
particular
letter
we
now
possess.
A
shorter
letter
would
have
been
sufficient
introduction
to
his
future
hosts.
How
are
we
to
account
for
the
lengthy
dis-cussion
of
the
central
theme
of
the
gospel
which
forms
the
larger
part
of
the
letter?
Some
suspect
a
con-troversial
purpose.
The
Church
at
Rome
contained
both
Jews
and
Gentiles;
through
Priscilla
and
Aquila
and
others
St.
Paul
must
have
known
the
situation
in
Rome;
he
could,
and
doubtless
did,
accommodate
his
message
to
the
condition
of
the
Church.
The
objections
he
discusses
may
be
difficulties
that
have
arisen
in
the
minds
of
his
readers.
But
the
style
of
the
letter
is
not
controversial.
St.
Paul
warns
the
Romans
against
false
teachers,
as
against
a
possible
rather
than
an
actual
danger
(16"-™).
Similarly,
the
discussion
of
the
reciprocal
duties
of
strong
and
weak
(ch.
14)
is
marked
by
a
calm
conciliatory
tone
which
suggests
that
the
writer
is
dealing
with
problems
which
are
probable
rather
than
pressing.
In
fact,
St.
Paul
seems
to
be
giving
his
readers
the
result
of
his
controversial
experiences
in
Corinth
and
Galatia,
not
so
much
because
the
Church
in
Rome
was
placed
in
a
similar
situation,
as
because
he
wished
to
enable
her
members
to
profit
from
the
mistakes
of
other
Churches.
If
the
letter
is
not
controversial,
it
is
not,
on
the
other
hand,
a
dogmatic
treatise.
Com-prehensive
as
the
letter
is,
it
is
incomplete
as
a
com-pendium
of
theology.
The
theory
that
St.
Paul
is
here
putting
his
leading
thoughts
into
systematic
form
'
does
not
account
for
the
omission
of
doctrines
which
we
know
Paul
held
and
valued
—
his
eschatology
and
his
Christ-ology,
tor
instance'
(Garvie).
Romans
is
a
true
letter.
ROMANS,
EPISTLE
TO
THE
and
the
selection
of
topics
must
have
been
influenced
by
the
interest
of
the
Church
to
which
he
was
writing.
But
apart
from
the
position
of
the
Roman
Christiana,
and
apart
from
the
wish
of
the
Apostle
to
prepare
the
way
for
his
visit
to
them,
the
form
and
character
of
the
letter
were
probably
determined
by
the
place
Rome
held
in
the
Apostle's
mind.
St.
Paul
was
proud
of
his
Roman
citizenship.
He
was
the
first
to
grasp
the
significance
of
the
Empire
for
the
growth
of
the
Church.
The
missionary
statesmanship
which
led
him
to
seize
on
the
great
trade-centres
like
Ephesus
and
Corinth
found
its
highest
expression
in
his
passionate
desire
to
see
Rome.
Rome
fascinated
him;
he
was
ambitious
to
proclaim
his
gospel
there,
departing
even
from
his
wonted
resolve
to
avoid
the
scenes
of
other
men's
labours.
It
should
be
noted
that
the
Church
at
Rome
was
not
an
ApostoUc
foundation.
The
Christian
community
came
into
existence
there
before
either
St.
Paul
or
St.
Peter
visited
the
city.
He
explains
his
gospel
at
some
length,
because
it
is
all-important
that
the
capital
of
the
Empire
should
understand
and
appreciate
its
worth.
He
is
anxious
to
impart
some
spiritual
gift
to
the
Roman
Christians,
just
because
they
are
in
Rome,
and
therefore,
lest
Jewish
plots
thwart
his
plans,
he
unfolds
to
them
the
essentials
of
his
message.
Indeed,
his
Roman
citizenship
helped
to
make
St.
Paul
a
great
catholic.
The
influence
of
the
Eternal
City
may
be
traced
in
the
doctrine
of
the
Church
developed
in
Ephesians,
which
was
written
during
the
Roman
captivity.
The
very
thought
of
Rome
leads
St.
Paul
to
reflect'
on
the
universality
of
the
gospel,
and
this
is
the
theme
of
the
letter.
He
is
not
ashamed
of
the
gospel
or
afraid
to
proclaim
it
in
Rome,
because
it
is
as
world-wide
as
the
Empire.
It
corresponds
to
a
uni-versal
need:
it
is
the
only
religion
that
can
speak
to
the
condition
of
the
Roman
people.
It
is
true
he
is
not
writing
for
the
people
at
large.
His
readers
consist
of
a
small
band
of
Christians
with
strong
Jewish
sympathies,
and
perhaps]even
tending
towards
Jewish
exclusiveness.
His
aim
is
to'open
theireyes
to
the
dignity
of
the
position,
and
to
the
world-wide
significance
of
the
gospel
they
profess.
JQlicher
further
points
out
that
Rome
was
to
be
to
St.
Paul
the
starting-point
for
a
missionary
campaign
in
the
West.
Consequently
the
letter
is
intended
to
win
the
sympathy
and
support
of
the
Roman
Church
tor
future
work.
It
is
to
secure
fellow-workers
that
the
Apostle
explains
so
fully
the
gospel
which
he
is
eager
to
proclaim
in
Spain
and
in
neighbouring
provinces.
2.
Argument
and
content.
—
Romans,
like
most
of
the
Pauline
letters,
falls
into
two
sections:
doctrinal
(chs.
1-U)
and
practical
(chs.
12-16).
In
the
doctrinal
section,
it
is
usual
to
distinguish
three
main
topics:
justification
(chs.
1-4),
sanctification
(chs,
5-8),
and
the
rejection
of
the
Jews
(chs.
9-11).
It
is
not
easy
to
draw
any
sharp
line
between
the
first
two.
The
following
is
a
brief
analysis
of
the
argument:
—
The
salutation
is
unusually
long,
extending
to
seven
verses,
in
which
St.
Paul
emphasizes
the
fact
that
he
has
been
set
apart
for
the
work
of
an
Apostle
to
all
the
Gentiles.
'Then
follows
a
brief
introduction.
The
Apostle
first
thanks
God
for
the
faith
of
the
Roman
Christians,
and
then
ex-presses
his
earnest
desire
to
visit
them
and
to
preach
the
gospel
in
Rome.
For
he
is
confident
—
and
here
he
states
is
central
theme
—
that
the
gosi^el
is
the
power
of
God
unto
salvation
for
all
men,
if
they
will
only
believe
(l^-^').
Salvation
for
all
through
the
gospel
—
that
is
the
thought
to
be
developed.
And
first
it
is
necessary
to
show
that
such
a
saving
power
is
a
universal
need,
'rhe
evidence
for
this
is
only
too
abundant.
Nowhere
have
men
attained
God's
righteousness:
everywhere
are
the
signs
of
God's
wrath.
The
wilful
ignorance
which
denies
the
Clreator
has
led
to
the
awful
punishment
of
moral
decay
with
which
St.
Paul
had
grown
sadly
familiar
in
the
great
cities
of
the
Empire.
Indeed,
so
far
has
corruption
advanced
that
the
consciences
of
many
have
been
defiled.
They
not
only
commit
sin
without
shame;
they
openly
applaud
the
sinner
(w.^^-'^).
Nor
can
any
one
who
still
perceives
this
failure
hold
himself
excused.
'The
very
fact
that
he
recognizes
sin
as
such,
oon-
