Romans 16

For a discussion of the question whether chapter 16 was an original part of this epistle or whether it was a separate letter which has somehow become attached to Romans see the Introduction, pp. 24ff. As I have tried to show there, there are good reasons for seeing this chapter as an integral part of the letter from the beginning. And it is a significant part of the letter. The multiplicity of greetings to people of whom we know nothing apart from their being listed here roots the letter in a specific context. It was a letter to real people and, as far as we can see, to ordinary people; it was not written to professional theologians (though through the centuries scholars have found the epistle a happy hunting ground). As we consider the weighty matters Paul deals with, we are apt to overlook the fact that it was addressed to people like Ampliatus and Tryphena and Rufus. Clearly Paul expected this kind of person to be helped by what he wrote, a fact which modern experts sometimes overlook.¹ And it is fitting that this letter, which has given us so much solid doctrinal teaching, should end with this emphasis on persons, on love, and on a reminder that humble servants of God perform all sorts of active ministry.

C. Commendation of Phoebe, 16:1–2

¹I commend to you our sister Phoebe, a servant^a of the church in Cenchrea. ²I ask you to receive her in the Lord in a way worthy of the saints and to give her any help she may need from you, for she has been a great help to many people, including me.

People did a good deal of travelling in the first-century Roman empire and, since they often went to places where people they knew had friends, used letters of commendation. There are references to them in the New Testament (cf. Acts 18:27; 2 Cor. 3:1; 8:18–24; 3 John 9–10). Such letters did not, as far as our information from the ancient world goes, contain greetings (one greetings expression is known in such a letter but no more), but letters of a completely different sort sometimes contained commendations. The commendation of Phoebe at the end of a letter dealing with other things is quite in character. It seems likely that she was the person entrusted with the task of taking the letter to the Roman church, for a commendation of someone not with the letter normally refers to a future arrival (cf. 1 Cor. 16:10; Col. 4:10). The Christians were noted for their hospitality, and letters of recommendation were necessary as a way of guarding against fraud.²

1. The opening does not read like the beginning of a letter, but as something that follows on from a preceding passage.³ I commend makes use of the verb normally employed in such recommendations.⁴ Phoebe is the pagan name⁵ of a woman otherwise unknown. When the early Christians became believers, they did not bother to change names associated with heathen deities (any more than we do with the names of the days of the week; for that matter we still use the names of pagan deities such as Diana). Phoebe is called our sister, a normal description of a female believer; believers were “family”.

She was also a servant of the church⁶ in Cenchrea. Several translations call her “a deaconess” (as RSV; cf. NEB, “who holds office”). It is not easy to defend that translation, for the word “deaconess”⁷ is not found until much later. But Paul’s word,⁸ besides meaning “servant”, is the word for “deacon” (it is the word used, e.g., in Phil. 1:1), and it may well be that Paul is describing Phoebe as a deacon of the church at Cenchrea. Some commentators hold that there would not have been female officebearers as early as Paul’s time and thus argue for the meaning “servant” here. But the social conditions of the time were such that there must have been the need for feminine church workers to assist in such matters as the baptism of women or anything that meant contact with women’s quarters in homes. The form of expression here makes it more likely that an official is meant than the more general term “servant”, though in view of the wide use of the term for the general concept of service this is far from being proved. Phoebe is certainly called a deacon; the question is whether this is an official position or general service.⁹ She came from Cenchrea, which was the port of Corinth towards the east on the Saronic Gulf (Corinth was on the isthmus between the Gulf of Corinth, with Lechaeum as its port, and the Saronic Gulf). Paul is mentioned as having been there (Acts 18:18).

2. I ask you is NIV’s insertion; Paul simply says “in order that”, introducing the purpose¹⁰ of his commendation, namely that the Romans receive her in the Lord.¹¹ The expression “in the Lord” recurs in verses 8, 11, 12 (bis), 13, and 22, while “in Christ” is found in 3, 7, 9, and 10. Some have seen a difference in meaning, but this seems unwarranted; the variation is surely stylistic. But it should be noticed that the life in Christ is emphasized throughout this chapter. To receive someone “in the Lord” means more than simply to receive that person into one’s house; there is the reminder that what Christians do they do in Christ. They are to give Phoebe a welcome worthy of the saints, which may mean the kind of welcome that is appropriate for saints to give or the welcome that is fitting for saints to receive.

To give her any help she may need is more exactly “to stand by her in whatever matter she has need of you”.¹² We know nothing of Phoebe’s circumstances and needs, but clearly they were such that Paul anticipated that she would need assistance in the capital and further that he expected the Romans to be able to help. “Matter” is a very general term¹³ and does not allow us to see very closely what the lady’s needs were. But she had come on quite a journey, and we may guess that there was something important behind it.¹⁴

We cannot say more, but Paul goes on to make it clear that Phoebe was someone special.¹⁵ She had helped many people, himself included, though in precisely what way he does not say. The word he uses¹⁶ is the feminine of a word which SH note was “used like the Latin patronus for the legal representative of the foreigner. In Jewish communities it meant the legal representative or wealthy patron.” But we cannot reason from that that Phoebe was the legal protector of the Christians at Cenchrea, for a woman could not hold that position. The word must be used figuratively in this place. But it is a word that points to an important person. We should reflect also that it was most unlikely that a woman would travel alone and that Paul says nothing about travelling companions. If she had had any, Paul would surely have commended them to the Romans also. The inference is that Phoebe travelled with a retinue of servants, and this, too, points to a woman of means. There were not many wealthy people in the church of the day, but it seems that Phoebe was one of them.

D. Greetings, 16:3–16

³Greet Priscilla^a and Aquila, my fellow workers in Christ Jesus. ⁴They risked their lives for me. Not only I but all the churches of the Gentiles are grateful to them.

⁵Greet also the church that meets at their house.

Greet my dear friend Epenetus, who was the first convert to Christ in the province of Asia.

⁶Greet Mary, who worked very hard for you.

⁷Greet Andronicus and Junias, my relatives who have been in prison with me. They are outstanding among the apostles, and they were in Christ before I was.

⁸Greet Ampliatus, whom I love in the Lord.

⁹Greet Urbanus, our fellow worker in Christ, and my dear friend Stachys.

¹⁰Greet Apelles, tested and approved in Christ.

Greet those who belong to the household of Aristobulus.

¹¹Greet Herodion, my relative.

Greet those in the household of Narcissus who are in the Lord.

¹²Greet Tryphena and Tryphosa, those women who work hard in the Lord.

Greet my dear friend Persis, another woman who has worked very hard in the Lord.

¹³Greet Rufus, chosen in the Lord, and his mother, who has been a mother to me, too.

¹⁴Greet Asyncritus, Phlegon, Hermes, Patrobas, Hermas and the brothers with them.

¹⁵Greet Philologus, Julia, Nereus and his sister, and Olympas and all the saints with them.

¹⁶Greet one another with a holy kiss.

All the churches of Christ send greetings.

Apart from Prisca and Aquila we know nothing of any of the people in this list. There are 24 names and two people who are not named. Of the 26 nine are women,¹⁷ and if we add Phoebe there is a very impressive number when we reflect on the character of the male-dominated society of the day. Some of the names are Jewish (Herodion, Apelles), some are Latin (Ampliatus, Urbanus), though most are Greek. It is perilous to argue from this to the nationality of each of the individuals named, for in the first century people not uncommonly bore more than one name as they moved in the cosmopolitan society of the empire. But the effect of the whole list is to emphasize the universality of the church. It is not a society of people from one nation or class or social grouping.

3. Paul begins his greetings with one for Prisca and Aquila. NIV mg. is perhaps a trifle misleading when it says that Prisca is “a variant of Priscilla”, for it is Prisca that is the base word of which Priscilla is a diminutive. Luke favors the name Priscilla, whereas Paul seems always to use Prisca.¹⁸ Prisca is mentioned before her husband on four occasions out of six (Acts 18:18, 26; Rom. 16:2; 2 Tim. 4:19; Aquila is first in Acts 18:2; 1 Cor. 16:19), from which some have deduced that she came from a higher social stratum, and others that she was more able than her husband. Aquila (the name is the Latin for “eagle”) was a tentmaker from Pontus who had evidently settled in Rome, but had been compelled to leave when the Emperor Claudius expelled the Jews (Acts 18:2). It was their common trade that brought him and Paul together and began a friendship that lasted. They went with Paul to Ephesus (Acts 18:18), and remained there when he went on. They were evidently a fine Christian couple, for they were able to instruct the redoubtable Apollos in the faith (Acts 18:26). They had a church in their house in more places than one (v. 5; 1 Cor. 16:19). It is sometimes objected to what the New Testament tells us about them that they seem to be travelling too widely, but we should remember what Parry calls “the migratory habits of Jews engaged in business” (CGT) and the fact that they were active in spreading the gospel. In this latter task they may have been on the move as much as Paul was. Paul refers to them here as his fellow workers,¹⁹ a term always used in the New Testament of people who worked together in the fellowship of the gospel. This is made clear here by the addition in Christ Jesus.

4. NIV begins a new sentence, but the Greek simply carries on with “who”.²⁰ These people risked their lives for Paul,²¹ and he expresses his thanks to them for what they did (the only place in the New Testament where the verb “to thank” has a human object). He adds that all the churches of the Gentiles share his feelings. Evidently what they did was widely known, but unfortunately we do not share that knowledge. Paul lets us know that there was an occasion when he was in great danger in Ephesus (1 Cor. 15:32; cf. Acts 19:23, 30–31). There may possibly be a connection, but we have no way of knowing whether there was and, if so, what it was. The expression indicates that Priscilla and her husband were widely known among the Gentiles.

5. The greeting is extended to cover the church that meets at their house²² (for other such house churches cf. 1 Cor. 16:19; Col. 4:15; Philem. 2; cf. also Acts 12:12). There were no church buildings in the first century (not until the third century on our present information), so it was natural for Christians to meet in private homes. Some have thought the expression means something like “family worship”; they see a reference to a godly family and remind us of conversions of households (e.g., Acts 16:15; 1 Cor. 1:16). A household would include all the members of the family, perhaps other relatives, slaves, and employees. But under first-century conditions there seems no reason to limit a house church to those linked with the householder in some way. It seems that other Christians would join a house church (where else could they worship?). Nothing is known of how and where the whole church in a city like Rome would meet (Paul speaks of “the whole church” as meeting in Corinth, 1 Cor. 14:23, so it did meet). Nor do we know the relationship of a house church to the church as a whole. It was not a schismatic assembly, for greetings are sent in a letter to the church as a whole.²³

Paul also greets Epenetus (SH cite the name from inscriptions in Asia Minor and in Rome). Paul calls him “my beloved”²⁴ (“beloved” again in vv. 8, 9, and 12), so evidently he was very dear to the apostle. He is called the first convert to Christ in the province of Asia.²⁵ Paul’s word means “firstfruit” rather than “first convert”, and we should see in this the thought that “firstfruit” implies later fruit; it carries with it the thought of a greater harvest.

6. Greetings are sent to Mary.²⁶ While her name could possibly be Latin, it is generally agreed that she was Jewish. Mary is the name of a number of women in the New Testament, but there is no reason to identify this Mary with any of the others. Whatever her nationality, she was distinguished by the fact that she worked very hard for you. There is no indication of the direction her many labors took, but Paul is clearly referring to Christian service of some kind. The past tense shows that he has in mind some past endeavor. It is interesting that Paul both knows of and is appreciative of service rendered to the Roman Christians.

7. Next come Andronicus (the name means “man of victory”) and Junias. NIV thus makes the second name that of a man, but this seems unlikely.²⁷ The patristic commentators seem to have taken the word as feminine and understood the pair to be man and wife.²⁸ Paul calls them his “kinsfolk”, which may possibly be meant in the sense of relatives (as NIV), but more probably means “fellow Jews” (as in 9:3). The term recurs in verses 11 and 21, and it seems unlikely that there were so many members of Paul’s family in Rome or with him when he wrote (especially since these two were Christians before Paul). He goes on to say that they were “fellow prisoners” of his,²⁹ which may mean that they were in jail together or that they had shared the same fate (not necessarily at the same time). We have no record of this, but Paul tells us that he was in prison often (2 Cor. 11:23; Clement of Rome says that Paul was in prison seven times, 1 Clem. 5:6), so there were ample possibilities for this. It is possible that the expression is to be taken figuratively, but there seems no good reason for this. It is likely that we should understand this couple to have suffered the same fate as Paul had undergone at the hand of the authorities.

Andronicus and Junias are also outstanding among the apostles,³⁰ which might mean that the apostles held them in high esteem or that they were apostles, and notable apostles at that. The former understanding seems less likely; it “scarcely does justice to the construction in the Greek” (Harrison).³¹ It is fairly clear from the New Testament that there was a wider circle of apostles than the Twelve, and it would seem that this couple belonged to that wider circle. Some find an argument from this that Junias was masculine, holding that a woman could not be an apostle, but we should bear in mind Chrysostom’s comment: “Oh! how great is the devotion of this woman, that she should be even counted worthy of the appellation of apostle!”³² This couple³³ were very early on the Christian scene, for Paul says that they were³⁴ Christians before he was and his conversion must have taken place within a year or two of the crucifixion.³⁵ That puts them among the earliest of all believers and makes it probable that they originally were Jews from Palestine.

8. Ampliatus is another of those beloved by Paul; once again we discern the warmth of affection with which the apostle regarded his fellow workers. The name is a common one according to Lightfoot,³⁶ often connected with the Emperor’s household. A number of commentators draw attention to a tomb dating from the late first century or early second century in the catacomb of Domitilla, the earliest Christian catacomb. It bears the inscription AMPLIAT[I]. Parry comments, “The single personal name suggests a slave: the honour of an elaborately painted tomb suggests that he was very prominent in the earliest Roman Church: the connexion with Domitilla seems to show that it is the name of a slave or freedman through whom Christianity had penetrated into a second great Roman household” (CGT). We cannot be certain that this is the tomb of the man Paul greets, but it is an intriguing possibility.

9. Urbanus is a common slave name which Lightfoot finds common also in the imperial household. Like Prisca and Aquila he was a fellow worker of Paul’s, though we have no information as to where they had worked together. Our may mean Paul and the Romans, or Paul and Timothy (cf. v. 21), or all who work for Christ. The name Stachys, which means “ear (of grain)”, is “comparatively rare” according to Lightfoot, though he does find one person of this name holding an important office in the imperial household (p. 174). “My beloved” may mark this man out as a personal friend of Paul’s.

10. Apelles is a name found among the imperial household (Lightfoot), but also borne by Jews (its likeness to Abel may have made it a natural name for Jews looking for a suitable additional name; cf. Saul who was also Paul). Bruce says that it “was sufficiently common among the Jews of Rome for Horace to use it as a typical Jewish name”. This man was tested and approved.³⁷ We have no way of knowing what test he had undergone, but he was a man of tested excellence and Paul approves of him accordingly.

The apostle goes on to refer to the household of Aristobulus. This is the name of a grandson of Herod the Great who ended his days in Rome, apparently as a private citizen. He was on friendly terms with the Emperor Claudius, and it is not unlikely that on his death his slaves passed to the Emperor. If they did, they would collectively retain the name “those of Aristobulus”.³⁸ There would be many Jews in such a household, and this may have opened up the way for the gospel. However it happened, it is of interest that there were Christians in such a household in Rome.

11. The name Herodion is obviously connected with Herod and is thus a link with the household of Aristobulus; Herodion may even have been a member of that household. The name would tell us that he was a Jew even had Paul not added that he was “my kinsman”, which probably means “fellow Jew” as in verse 7.

Narcissus was the name of a wealthy and powerful freedman who had been prominent under Claudius but put to death early in Nero’s reign. His slaves would have passed to the Emperor and have been designated by the name Narcissus. Lightfoot mentions an inscription referring to a member of this household (p. 175). Narcissus was not of the character that we associate with Christian profession, so it is interesting that even from that household there came those who were “in the Lord”.

12. Because the names Tryphena and Tryphosa are similar sounding it has been conjectured that they were sisters, and even that they were twin sisters. Either proposition may be true, but, of course, we have no way of knowing for certain. Both names come from a root meaning “live delicately, luxuriously”. Paul is perhaps using some gentle irony when he commends two ladies called “Delicate” and “Dainty” for the fact that they work hard.

His present tense points to a continuing labor, while he uses the past tense of Persis. It may be that she was old or that some factor like sickness had interfered with her productive capacity. Be that as it may, Paul is appreciative of her very hard work.³⁹ He calls her “beloved” (as in vv. 5, 8, and 9); evidently she was very dear to him. The name, incidentally, means “Persian”.

13. Rufus (“red”) was a common Latin name and indeed one of the most common slave names (SH). We read in Mark’s Gospel of a man called Simon who was the father of Alexander and Rufus (Mark 15:21). Now it is usually agreed that that Gospel was written with Rome very much in mind, and evidently the point of mentioning Simon was that he was the father of two people well known in the Roman church. It is not improbable that this is the man Paul greets, though again we must be cautious, for there is no way of verifying this. This Rufus was chosen in the Lord.⁴⁰ All Christians are, of course, “chosen in the Lord”, and it is accordingly unlikely that that is the sense of the expression in this place. It would not differentiate Rufus from any other Christian, but it seems that Paul is singling him out, not placing him in the same category as all others. We should see him as a “choice” believer (cf. French élite).

Paul also sends a greeting to Rufus’s mother, who has been a mother to me, too. NIV gives us what appears to be the sense of it, but Paul says “his mother and mine”.⁴¹ It is possible that he and Rufus were siblings, but there seems no reason for making the assumption. Rather, it would seem that on some occasion of which we have no knowledge Rufus’s mother had been very kind to Paul. It seems that people were more ready to claim an extended family in that day than we are (cf. Mark 10:30), so that Paul’s usage is not exceptional.⁴²

14. Now comes a group of five names, otherwise unknown, but commonly names of slaves and freedmen. It is possible that they form a group, such as a house church (there are brothers linked with them). They may have been slaves of one man or freedmen. Asyncritus (apparently a rare name) means “incomparable”, and Phlegon “burning”.⁴³ This latter is cited from Xenophon as the name of a dog (Lagrange); it was also used for slaves and freedmen. Hermes was the name of the Greek god who was called Mercurius by the Romans; it was a common name for slaves. Patrobas, a shortened form of Patrobius (BDF 125[1]), was not a common name. It was the name of a wealthy freedman of Nero who was later put to death by Galba. His reputation is such that he is unlikely to have been a Christian, but one of his dependents may have borne the name. Hermas is the contraction of a number of names and thus was comparatively common.

15. Next to be greeted in Philologus. The name means “fond of words”, which may be the equivalent of “Chatterbox” or may refer to a secretarial occupation. Lightfoot cites it from the inscriptions of the imperial household. Julia was probably the commonest of all Roman female slave names (SH); she may have been the wife (or sister) of Philologus. Nereus is a name “possibly marking one of Nero’s freedmen” (M, II, p. 350; Howard adds that the name is “as old as Homer”). The name of his sister is not given, but Paul greets her, too. The final name in this section of the letter is Olympas; it is clearly a Greek name (and a contraction of some longer name). With this group there is associated a group of saints; Paul sends a greeting to all of them.⁴⁴ Possibly we have here members of another house church.

16. Paul urges them all to use a holy kiss as a greeting (mentioned again in 1 Cor. 16:20; 2 Cor. 13:12; 1 Thess. 5:26; “a kiss of love”, 1 Pet. 5:14). The kiss was, of course, a regular greeting in the society in which the early Christians moved (cf. Mark 14:45), and we should understand it in this way and not as a liturgical action like the “kiss of peace” which was taken into the service of Holy Communion.⁴⁵ This probably came about because the time when Christians came together and thus exchanged a greeting tended to be that of worship. It is usually held that men kissed men and women women, but Tertullian refers to a wife being kissed by “any one of the brethren” (To His Wife ii.4). Clement of Alexandria speaks of people who “make the churches resound” with kissing; he points out that “the shameless use of a kiss … occasions foul suspicions and evil reports” (Instructor iii.12). This led to its restriction and general abandonment. H. Windisch thinks that “It is to be assumed that the holy kiss was customary in the churches”, so that Paul means “that on the reading of the letter it should take place at the request of the absent apostle” (TDNT, I, p. 501; see also Gamble, pp. 75–76).

Paul further sends greetings from All the churches of Christ, an expression not found elsewhere in the New Testament. Paul does not explain which churches are involved, but it is probable that the expression reflects the fact that the delegates from the churches were gathering to take the collection to Jerusalem (Acts 20:3–5). In any case Paul would have let the leaders of the churches know of his plans and the provincials would have been glad to send their greetings to the church in the capital and perhaps give some backing to Paul. It reflects the fact that at this time most of the churches were in the East, so that a greeting from that area could be taken as a greeting from “all” the churches.

E. A Doctrinal Warning, 16:17–20

¹⁷I urge you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and put obstacles in your way that are contrary to the teaching you have learned. Keep away from them. ¹⁸For such people are not serving our Lord Christ, but their own appetites. By smooth talk and flattery they deceive the minds of naive people. ¹⁹Everyone has heard about your obedience, so I am full of joy over you; but I want you to be wise about what is good, and innocent about what is evil.

²⁰The God of peace will soon crush Satan under your feet.

The grace of our Lord Jesus be with you.

This rather strong warning about false teaching is held by a number of scholars to be an interpolation into the letter or perhaps a Pauline fragment from another writing. They regard the tone as distinctly sharper than anything elsewhere in this letter and find nothing in the context to justify it (why should Paul insert such a sharp warning between two sets of greetings?). But the differences should not be exaggerated. Murray points out that the tone is not so very different from that in other places (e.g., 2:1–5; 3:8; 9:19–20, etc.). And as for its placing, Paul has just spoken about the kiss of peace; a warning against divisions that would spoil harmony follows naturally on that reminder of unity. He has also referred to “all the churches of Christ”, and when he thinks of the churches he had founded, could he forget the people who had caused trouble and fomented division with their false teachings? In the light of those troubles it would be natural for him to warn the Romans to be on their guard against false teachers they might well face. Again, Romans is a long letter and it must have taken quite a while to compose it. It is possible that news was brought to Paul just before he finished it that made him think a warning was in order. Some have suggested that it was at this point that Paul took the pen in order to authenticate the letter and his concern overflowed in this warning. Any or all of these considerations may be relevant, and they lead us to see that the objections are not insuperable.⁴⁶

Exactly what was the danger against which the warning is given? A variety of answers is given. Thus some think that the troublemakers were Judaizers, while others see them as libertines or proto-gnostics. It is possible that they were not a homogeneous group and that more than one kind of false teaching is in mind. The words are too general for us to be certain, and in any case it is the fomenting of faction on which Paul concentrates his attention. Some (e.g., Dodd) think that, the false teaching was already in Rome, but it is usually held that, whatever the teaching was, it had not yet made its appearance there; Paul is speaking of a possibility and warning against it.

17. I urge you is the language of appeal, not of command;⁴⁷ Paul is inviting his readers to heed what he says, but he is not giving a peremptory order. He wants his readers to watch out for troublemakers, where his verb⁴⁸ is quite a strong one. Chrysostom explains it in these terms: “that is, to be exceedingly particular about, and to get acquainted with, and to search out thoroughly.” They should not adopt a casual attitude to false teachers. Paul can use the same verb for a right attitude to good teachers (Phil. 3:17); the word denotes close attention, not opposing or following as such. There is an article with divisions (and another with obstacles); it is “the well-known divisions” and not some hypothetical danger of which Paul warns. Evidently the troubles were widely known.⁴⁹ Paul puts a strong stress on unity and regards the dissensions as contrary to the teaching you have learned. The teaching clearly refers to common Christian teaching; it cannot refer to anything like “Paulinism”, for Paul had never been to Rome. It is the common stock of Christian instruction, and Paul plainly aligns himself with it. He puts emphasis on you; from what he has heard of the Roman church he knows that its members have been well grounded in the faith (cf. 1:8; 6:17). They have had good teaching and have learned it well. He reminds them of its importance. Any new teachers whose instruction did not conform to that good teaching must not be followed. Keep away from them, the apostle says. They are teaching error; it is important to have nothing to do with them.⁵⁰

18. For introduces the reason for the foregoing. Such people makes it clear that the warning is against more than one form of false teaching. It is not “these” people, as though a definite group, but anyone of this kind. The false teachers are not serving⁵¹ our Lord Christ, but their own appetites. This last word translates a term that more exactly means “belly” (cf. Phil. 3:19). It is unlikely that this means that they were gluttons (would it be necessary to give a warning against such obvious sin?). Paul may mean that they were preoccupied with food laws, or that they exercised an indiscriminate self-indulgence, or a greed arising out of general egotism.⁵² NIV takes “belly” to stand for the appetites in general.⁵³

Despite such base conduct they manage to deceive people by their plausible way of putting things. Smooth talk renders a word found here only in the New Testament and which BAGD explain as “smooth, plausible speech”.⁵⁴ Flattery is a word always elsewhere in the New Testament used in a good sense,⁵⁵ but here NIV gives us the sense of it. Paul is describing people whose conduct is base, but whose words are excellent. Such people may easily deceive.⁵⁶ The naive are the guileless, the innocent, perhaps we could say here the simple. They are people who are innocent, indeed, but not because of a reasoned understanding of what is good and what is evil. They are too simple to know and thus they readily fall prey to the plausible deceiver. Paul looks for Christians to avoid both gullibility and cynicism.

19. “For”⁵⁷ (which NIV omits) is difficult, for what follows is not obviously a reason for what went before. Perhaps Paul is expressing his confidence in the Romans (“For ‘I have no fear about you’ ”), or the connection may be “This warning is serious for you are widely known and they will be sure to make an attack on you” (cf. Godet). Obedience is an important concept in Romans (see the note on 1:5), and Paul assures his readers that their obedience is widely known. It has reached⁵⁸ to all. “Therefore”,⁵⁹ he says, “I rejoice over you”, where there is some emphasis on “you”. Clearly Paul knew of no great blemish in the Roman church. He adds his wish that they be wise about what is good,⁶⁰ and innocent⁶¹ about what is evil. There may be a reminiscence of some words of Jesus (Matt. 10:16); Paul has similar teaching elsewhere (1 Cor. 14:20). Hodge quotes from Grotius a neat summing up of what Paul is looking for: “too good to deceive, to wise to be deceived.”

20. Now comes a little devotional section with a prophecy and a prayer for grace. Paul speaks of God as The God of peace (as in 15:33), a significant title over against the “divisions” of verse 17. This God of peace, however, is pictured in a warlike activity, that of crushing Satan. We should bear in mind that our English idea of peace, like the Greek from which it is borrowed, is a negative idea, the absence of war. But we must not read our idea of peace back into the Bible. The New Testament writers tended to take their idea of peace from the Old Testament, and for the Hebrews peace (shalom) was a positive idea, the idea of wholeness, of well roundedness. It was the prosperity of the whole life, a positive and not a negative idea.

Now one feature of this wholeness was spiritual prosperity, the overcoming of evil, and thus Paul can speak of God in terms of peace when he says that God is at war with the evil one. Part of the true concept of peace is that of defeating evil, and that is what the God of peace does. Paul is not praying that God will defeat evil but prophesying that he will in fact do this; this is a prophecy, not a prayer. Notice that it is God who does the crushing, but that Satan ends up under the feet of believers (cf. Chrysostom, “ ‘under your feet,’ so that they may obtain the victory themselves, and become noble by the trophy”). The metaphor is a vivid one and looks for the complete triumph of the Christian (for the connection between “under the feet” and triumph, cf. Heb. 2:8). There may be an allusion to Genesis 3:15 (if so, it is to the Hebrew, for LXX is different). NIV says this will happen soon,⁶² which is taken by some to refer to a speedy eschatological happening (e.g., Käsemann, p. 418) and seen as an activity in the present world by others (e.g., Haldane, Wilckens). Nothing in the context indicates that Paul is looking to the parousia, and it is better to see the promise of a victory over Satan in the here and now.

The grace of our Lord Jesus be with you (with some slight variations) is the way Paul normally ends his letters. He may expand this somewhat (as in 2 Corinthians) or abbreviate it a little (as in Colossians), but there is always the prayer for grace (for this term see the note on 1:5). There are problems about the ending of this epistle, but it certainly seems as though this was seen as the end. It may well be that Paul took the pen and wrote these words himself. We know that he wrote something at the end of every letter; it was the way he authenticated it (2 Thess. 3:17). Sometimes he draws attention to this and sometimes he does not, but there is no reason to doubt that he always did it.⁶³ It is quite possible that Paul wrote these words, then passed the pen back to Tertius for a postscript. Something unusual has happened at the end of this letter, and this is a very possible understanding of it.

F. Greetings from People with Paul, 16:21–24

²¹Timothy, my fellow worker, sends his greetings to you, as do Lucius, Jason and Sosipater, my relatives.

²²I, Tertius, who wrote down this letter, greet you in the Lord.

²³Gaius, whose hospitality I and the whole church here enjoy, sends you his greetings.

Erastus, who is the city’s director of public works, and our brother Quartus send you their greetings.^a

21. Earlier Paul had greeted certain friends in Rome by name. Now he passes on to the Romans greetings from friends of theirs who happen to be with him at the time of writing. First is Timothy, whom he describes simply as my fellow worker.⁶⁴ This man, the son of a Jewish mother (and therefore accepted as a Jew) and a Greek father, Paul circumcised and took with him on his missionary travels (Acts 16:1–3). He evidently became a trusted and highly valued helper, for he is mentioned as being with Paul a number of times in Acts and his name crops up in every one of Paul’s letters except Galatians, Ephesians, and Titus. And, of course, he was the recipient of two of them himself. Paul’s many references to him show that he was very dear to him. A number of times Timothy was joined with Paul in the authorship of letters. On this occasion we do not hear of him until now, possibly because he had not been with Paul when the apostle began the letter, possibly because the nature of the letter was such that it had to be seen to come from Paul alone. At any rate he is interested in Rome, and he sends his greetings.

Greetings come also from Lucius, who may (or may not) be the man mentioned in Acts 13:1. The name resembles “Luke”,⁶⁵ but it is not identical with it and there is no real reason for equating them. This Lucius we must leave as otherwise unknown to us, but the name is Roman, which may hint at a reason for his greeting the Roman church. But it is not a very convincing reason, for the next two names are Greek. Jason was the name of Paul’s host at Thessalonica (Acts 17:5–9), but the name is not uncommon and we do not know whether this was the same man or not. There is a Sopater in Acts 20:4 and given that this is a recognized shortening of Sosipater, and remembering that Paul commonly uses people’s correct names, while Luke tends to use the abbreviated forms, it is not impossible that this is the same man. But it looks as though Luke’s Sopater is one of the Gentiles taking the Gentile collection to Jerusalem, while Paul’s man is expressly said here to be one of his relatives, and thus a Jew. So we should probably not identify them. The term rendered relatives is the one Paul has used before in 9:3; 16:7, 11 and which seems to mean “fellow countrymen”. We cannot insist that the people mentioned were in fact members of Paul’s family.

22. It was Paul’s habit to use an amanuensis when writing his letters, though he did write a little himself towards the end. This is the one occasion on which we hear of the scribe, for Paul lets him convey his own greetings to the Roman church. The fact that his name is Latin may mean that he had some kinship with this church, but for whatever reason he sends his own greetings. It is a little human touch. That the apostle allows this to be done in connection with such a weighty letter as this sheds light on the relationship between the apostle and his helpers. Tertius calls attention to himself with the emphatic I and tells the reader that he wrote the letter. There is a teasing little problem with in the Lord, which is usually taken with greet but which in the Greek follows immediately on “wrote the letter”.⁶⁶ It is also true that in this chapter “in Christ” or “in the Lord” occurs repeatedly in verses which convey greetings (vv. 3, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 [twice], and 13), and not once is it connected with the greeting. It may well be that Tertius meant that he wrote the letter “in the Lord”, which, of course, immediately raises the question of what it means to “write in the Lord”. If this is the way to take it, we should see the writing of the letter, not as a mechanical project, but as something Tertius undertook as a piece of service to his Lord.⁶⁷

23. Gaius was a not uncommon name; we find it in Acts 19:29; 20:4; 3 John 1. But there seems no reason for equating the man who sends his greetings to Rome with any of these. Rather, he is likely to be the Corinthian Gaius whom Paul baptized (1 Cor. 1:14). He may be the man named Titius Justus in Acts 18:7, for that man received Paul in Corinth; this accords with his description here as “host”.⁶⁸ Further, the name Titius is a gens name which is likely to have been preceded by a praenomen (his name could well have been Gaius Titius Justus; so Cranfield). Paul speaks of Gaius as host to the whole church as well as to himself. This may mean that the church met in his house or that he habitually provided hospitality either for local church people or for travelling Christians like Paul.⁶⁹ Clearly he was better off than most of the early Christians.

Erastus (meaning “beloved”) is unlikely to have been Paul’s travelling companion (Acts 19:22; cf. also 2 Tim. 4:20), for his position in Corinth would have made that difficult. He was clearly an important person, though possibly not the city’s director of public works, as NIV makes him. The word used of his office seems rather to indicate something like “treasurer”.⁷⁰ But the aedile (or director of public works) held office for a year only, and he normally had held other offices previously. There seems no reason why we should not think that our Erastus was the city treasurer at the time Paul wrote and that he later was honored with the office of aedile.⁷¹

Joined with Erastus in sending greetings is Quartus, described as “the brother”. Nothing more is known of this man. Brother presumably means “Christian brother”, though it is possible to think he is someone’s sibling (for all the males in the chapter could be described in the same way). Bruce wonders whether he could be brother of Tertius, for that name means “third” and this one “fourth”, but Cranfield finds this “an exercise of free fancy”. We simply do not know.

24. NIV mg. includes words which some MSS have as verse 24 and which are substantially a repetition of part of verse 20 (the differences are that this verse has a fuller description of Christ and it includes the word “all”). In modern critical editions this section is universally rejected. For its content it is sufficient to refer to the notes on verse 20.⁷²

G. Doxology, 16:25–27

²⁵Now to him who is able to establish you by my gospel and the proclamation of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery hidden for long ages past, ²⁶but now revealed and made known through the prophetic writings by the command of the eternal God, so that all nations might believe and obey him— ²⁷to the only wise God be glory forever through Jesus Christ! Amen.

The doxology is found in some MSS at the end of chapter 14, by one at the end of chapter 15, by some at this point, by quite a few both here and at the end of chapter 14 (for details see the Introduction, n. 71^†), while some omit it altogether. Some hold that Paul wrote it and others point out that Paul normally closes a letter with a benediction rather than a doxology. Accordingly it has been conjectured that it was composed as a suitable ending when the 14-chapter edition was formed and considered too valuable to be lost when scribes encountered the 16-chapter edition. Another view is that it was added to Romans in a New Testament which had this epistle as the last; it would then have served as a fitting close to the Pauline writings in general. Some are impressed by the liturgical tone of the passage and seek its origin in worship. There may be something in this, but we should keep in mind the point made by Brevard S. Childs: “The doxology is not a liturgical response of the letter’s recipients to Paul’s words, but a liturgical response of Paul to the subject of his book.”⁷³ There are other ideas, but there seems little point in canvassing them. The point for us is that we have the doxology at this point in the 16-chapter edition and it is fittingly studied here. It is beyond doubt that these verses express Pauline ideas, and those who hold that it was not written by Paul agree that it contains Pauline language, even quotations from Paul. It is better to take it as simply the close of Romans as we know it and see what we can learn from that.⁷⁴

25. To him who is able reminds us of the power of God, and this in that he can establish believers.⁷⁵ Once again Paul refers to my gospel (cf. 2:16; 2 Tim. 2:8). This means that it is the gospel he preaches, a gospel he has not only heard about but has made his own. It is not to be understood as meaning that Paul had a gospel different from that of the church in general. He can insist that he preaches what the others preach (1 Cor. 15:11). The gospel of which he speaks is the gospel other people had preached and the Roman believers had come to accept. It may be that Paul put a little more emphasis on its application to the Gentiles and perhaps on the freeness of divine grace, but it was essentially the same gospel.

With it he links the proclamation of Jesus Christ,⁷⁶ which stands for much the same thing but from a different point of view. It seems probable that we should take according to the revelation with the proclamation rather than with to establish you (so Denney, SH, Cranfield). The gospel is revealed truth, not human wisdom. Paul goes on to speak of the mystery (see the note on 11:25), which points to the gospel as something that people could never have worked out for themselves. The truth that the Son of God would come from heaven to live and die for us and that we enter into salvation only by faith in him is not obvious and could be known by us only when and as God revealed it. This mystery was “kept silent through times eternal”. Paul’s choice of verb is intriguing,⁷⁷ and the use of the perfect tense means that the silence is permanent. We should understand that the silence of God is not some deprivation, the absence of noise or speech, but something positive, what P. Dewailly calls God’s “plenitude and concentration”.⁷⁸ The silence of God stands for God’s hiddenness, the truth that his innermost being is not open to the scrutiny of mortals. He may choose to make himself known, but that does not mean that everything about him has been revealed. There still remains that about God which is beyond our perception and our understanding. The silence endured “through times eternal”,⁷⁹ which appears to be a reference to the eternity of God rather than to the time from creation to the coming of Christ (as some think).

26. But now there is a difference:⁸⁰ the mystery has been revealed. The change to the aorist tense is significant; it points to a definite event, the coming of Christ. Leenhardt points out that the now “should be heard in its full resonance; it expresses the eschatological character of the present moment, a drama in which the action of God is embodied in man’s history in order that he may be directed towards his true end.” The gospel has been made known, and been made known to the Gentiles (cf. 1:5). The prophetic⁸¹ writings most naturally refer to the writings of the Old Testament prophets, though some think of the prophets of the New Testament period and Godet of the writings of the apostles. But it seems that Paul is saying that the real meaning of the Old Testament has become apparent only through the coming of Christ, which, of course, is a constant theme of the New Testament writers.⁸² And this took place by divine command,⁸³ the command of the eternal God, where the adjective at least hints at changelessness. The mystery has been revealed but lately, but that does not mean a change of mind in the regions celestial. An eternal God works out an eternal purpose. This purpose is “with a view to the obedience of faith”⁸⁴ and “unto all the Gentiles”.⁸⁵ The verse ends with “having been made known”, which NIV correctly links with “revealed”.⁸⁶

27. Most translations agree with NIV, to the only wise God, but it is a question whether we should understand it as GNB, “To the only God, who alone is all-wise”.⁸⁷ However we translate, there is no doubt that Paul thinks of God as the only God and also as the only God who is wise. To this God is ascribed glory forever through Jesus Christ. There is no cessation of his glory: it is forever. And the Christian knows that glory is to be ascribed to God on the basis of what Christ has done. It is that that enables us to see what a glorious God this God is. Amen rounds off the doxology with a firm affirmation.⁸⁸

↑ Back to top