I’ve just prepared a brief study of Romans for our YWAM Heidebeek staff. I thought I’d just put it online. Perhaps more will be benefited by it.

A Background Issue & Purpose of Romans

In 49 AD emperor Claudius expelled the Jews from Rome. According to the Roman historian Suetonius this was because they “were continually making disturbances at the instigation of one Chrestus”. “Chrestus” is almost surely a reference to “Christus/os” (Christ; Chrestus was a common slave name and it’s not unlikely that Suetonius confused it with “Christus” (Latin) or “Christos” (Greek)). What does this mean? Well, there were differences of opinion among the Jewish population whether Jesus of Nazareth was the promised Messiah. We recognize that from Paul’s missionary journey’s! Apparently the differences in opinion caused disturbances of such a magnitude (we don’t know what they looked like), that Claudius felt it necessary to send the Jews away (among whom were Aquila and Priscilla – Acts 18:2). In 54 AD he died and his edict became obsolete. Consequently, many Jews would have returned to Rome after 5 years of “exile”.
What did this mean for the church? Before 49 AD, the church of Rome most likely was very Jewish in terms of leadership and customs. Now that they’d been gone for appr. 5 years, the Gentiles will have “taken over”. Result: tensions. How can Jew and Gentile make up 1 people of God together? What about Torah observance? Who should be in leadership? Etc.
Paul undoubtedly has heard of this situation and it’s one of the reasons he wrote the letter to the Romans that we have in our Bible.

So, Romans is not a comprehensive outline of Paul’s theology. It’s also not anti-Torah. And it doesn’t want to answer questions like “how does one get saved”? That doesn’t mean that the letter has got nothing to say about such issues, but it’s not the reason why Paul wrote. Some of his purposes (inspired by the Holy Spirit; therefore the letter still functions as God’s Word to us today, who are indwelt with the same Spirit) are:

1. Both Jew and Gentile are guilty as charged, have both received God’s gracious offer to be justified by believingly accepting Christ’s sacrifice and have thus become 1 people of God (see e.g. Rom 15:5-6).

2. The Torah didn’t give the Jews the advantages that thought they had.

3. The fact that according to the gospel the righteousness of God has been revealed “apart from the law” (Rom 3:21) doesn’t mean that righteousness (righteous living) isn’t important anymore. Taking away the law doesn’t create lawlessness.*

Another thing to note is that you should imagine a courtroom while reading the letter, especially in Romans 1:16-5:11. Both Jew and Gentile are the accused and are declared guilty. And (surprise, surprise), even the Judge Himself is being accused! Has God acted righteously with Israel? Is He really a righteous Judge?

To conclude: you should read Romans as a pastoral letter, written to address some real, historical tensions in the Roman churches. A look at Romans 12-16 will tell you that. Romans 1-11 provides the “theological” foundation for Paul’s practical instructions in chapters 12-16.

A Possible Outline of Romans 1-8

Here’s a possible outline of Paul’s train of thought in Romans 1-8. Most commentators pretty much agree upon this, although there are variations. Personally I believe 5:1-11 closes of ch. 1-4, while 5:12-21 creates the transition from the first part into ch. 6-8.

1:1-3:20 All Righteously Judged

1:1-17 Introduction of Paul and his Gospel (thesis in 1:16-17: God’s Righteousness Revealed in the Gospel)
1:18-32 Gentiles are Guilty (God’s Wrath Revealed)
2:1-16 God’s Righteous Judgment on Those Without and Those Under the Law
2:17-3:8 Jews are Guilty (Law: no safeguard against sin)
3:9-20 No One is Righteous

3:21-5:11 All Righteous by Faith

3:21-31 All are justified by faith in Christ
4:1-25 Promise to Abraham Rested On Faith (Thus it was guaranteed to all his descendants: Jew & Gentile)
5:1-11 Results of Justification: Reconciliation, Hope, Salvation

5:12-8:39 All Righteous to Faith(fulness)

5:12-21 Adam & Christ: Universal Death to Universal Life
6:1-23 Dead to Sin (Specifically to Gentiles)
7:1-25 Dead to Law (Specifically to Jews)
8:1-30 Alive in the Spirit (The hope of renewed creation-salvation)
8:31-39 Nothing Can Separate from God’s Love

Some Thoughts on Romans 1:16-17

Rom 1:16-17 is a concise, theologically loaded passage. In these 2 verses you basically find an outline of at least 1:18-5:11, perhaps even the whole letter. It’s also a passage that has received lots of attention. How should it be translated? What is Paul trying to say here? I’ll briefly unpack some of the issues. It’s important to realize though – and I’m definitely saying this to myselfJ – that your interpretation of 1:16-17 doesn’t change the whole meaning of the letter. Rather, the meaning of the whole letter should inform our interpretation of these 2 verses.

“God’s righteousness/righteousness from God”: is it the righteousness that God has, or the righteousness He gives. After all, He justifies the believer. In Greek, both readings are possible. It’s possible that Paul even has both readings in mind.

“through faith for faith”: read some translations and you’ll understand that these are much debated words. Grammatically there’s room for different choices and the context doesn’t really exclude all options either. Here’s some of the options:

1. “from faith to faithfulness” – the Greek word for “faith” also means “faithfulness” (in Dutch: vertrouwen en trouw/getrouwheid). This is actually important: someone who has faith is expected to also be faithful. You could think of James’ “faith without works is dead”. If someone who claims to have faith isn’t faithful, you could seriously doubt his faith.

So, “from faith to faith” would be: “from faith [the response of faith to God’s gracious offer of salvation through the work of Christ on the cross] to faithfulness [faith will always lead to faithfulness; in my opinion this option is supported by a key concept in the letter: the “obedience of faith”. You encounter this concept in Rom 1:5 and 16:26, at the very beginning and end of the letter. In my opinion this is a so-called “inclusio”: everything between those 2 verses can be seen in the light of “obedience of faith”.]

2. “by faith from first to last” – this is the NIV’s interpretation. I don’t think this is right though, because it’s taking a lot of room in translating the Greek expression and it’s frankly unnecessary for Paul to say this here like that: the fact that justification is by faith is very clear from the letter anyways.

3. “from God’s faithfulness to human faith” – remember, God’s righteousness, His faithfulness to his promises and covenant with Israel, are doubted. Paul might want to state here: God’s righteousness is revealed in His faithfulness, which leads to a response of faith by man (both Jew and Gentile).

4. And there are more options…  E.g.: “from faith to faith” speaks of a growing faith. Personally I don’t prefer this one, because “faith” in the context of “justification by faith” isn’t a growing thing. You either believingly accept or don’t accept what God has done in Christ Jesus.

Hab 2:4: in the last part of vs. 17 Paul quotes Hab 2:4. Dan Lewis (who has taught in our SBS’s for many years) has written some good stuff on Paul’s use of this verse. I’ll print it out 3-4 times so you can have a look at it if you want.

Helps With Reading Romans 1-8

As you read Romans, I’d encourage you to see it as a carefully constructed argument (Dutch: betoog). The one thing follows very logically on the other. If you start to see how different passages are connected to previous (and even later) ones, the letter becomes more and more clear. What is the Spirit, through Paul, trying to say to these churches, and across the centuries to us?

Two ways to follow Paul’s train of thought:

1. Colour repeated words. E.g., give the word group “righteousness/justified/etc.” a specific colour, or “faith”, or “law”, or “sin” (see also “transgression”, “iniquity”, “trespass”). This’ll help you see which themes appear frequently in the letter and where.

2. In Romans Paul enters into an imaginary (Duch: denkbeeldige) dialogue. He’s anticipating questions, criticism and accusations. In the 1^st century this was called a “diatribe” (Dutch: diatribe, of schimprede/smaadrede), with which his readers would have been familiar. Indicate the questions that Paul is bringing up. This will give lots of insight into the challenges, questions and criticisms some in the Roman churches will have had.

And, don’t forget to enjoy and marvel at the beauty of God’s gracious plan.

I pray this’ll help you prepare for February 2, when I’ll take you on a quick tour through Romans 1:18-8:39!

*I’ve formulated this partially after Gordon D. Fee, God’s Empowering Presence.