What is significant about Paul’s authorship however, is his background, which was extremely Jewish in nature. This is important to keep in mind as we study Romans. In some aspects, it even contributes to understanding why he was so qualified to write this letter. Notice what Paul has to say about his own Jewish background:
“I ask then, has God rejected his people? By no means! For I myself am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, a member of the tribe of Benjamin” (Romans 11:1).
“Circumcised on the eighth day, of the people of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews; as to the law, a Pharisee” (Philippians 3:5).
“Are they Hebrews? So am I. Are they Israelites? So am I. Are they offspring of Abraham? So am I” (2 Corinthians 11:22).
“I am a Jew, born in Tarsus in Cilicia, but brought up in this city, educated at the feet of Gamaliel, according to the strict manner of the law of our fathers, being zealous for God as all of you are this day” (Acts 22:3).
Notice some of the labels that Paul’s gives himself in describing how strong his Jewish background really was: “Israelite,” “descendant of Abraham,” “a member of the tribe of Benjamin,” “Circumcised,” “of the people of Israel,” “a Hebrew of Hebrews,” “as to the law, a Pharisee,” “a Jew,” “educated at the feet of Gamaliel,” and “according to the strict manner of the law of our fathers.”
Understanding Paul’s background is vital because as he so masterfully makes his case for the contrast between law vs. grace, he speaks as one who has been on both sides of the Jew vs. Gentile controversy that was apparently taking place. Also, when he conveys that we are justified by grace through faith, apart from law (Romans 3:28; Romans 6:14, etc.), he speaks as one, who at one time in his past, was likely a legalist, according to how the word is generally defined:
“But in general the term is made use of to denote one who seeks salvation by works of law (not of the law, but of “law” generally, whether moral or ceremonial instead of by the merits of Christ” (Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature, McClintock and Strong, Volume V, p. 325).
By being converted, Paul did not start believing and teaching that God’s grace means we can continue in sin (Romans 6:4). What his conversion meant, at least in part, was that he no longer sought acceptance by God on the mere basis of his strict adherence to the law. This is especially seen in the comparison he draws between his mindsets before and after his conversion in Philippians 3:6-9. Notice the difference between vv. 6 and 9 here:
“as to zeal, a persecutor of the church; as to righteousness under the law, blameless. But whatever gain I had, I counted as loss for the sake of Christ. Indeed, I count everything as loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord. For his sake I have suffered the loss of all things and count them as rubbish in order that I may gain Christ and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which comes through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God that depends on faith—"
As one who had a tremendous, and in many ways even admirable commitment and zeal to the Law (Acts 22:3; Galatians 1:14; Acts 26:4-5), the Apostle Paul by his conversion, forsook everything he had for so many years stood for, including his efforts to move up in rank. In and of itself, Paul’s life and conversion account is a strong testament to the fact that when we become Christians, it is indeed a sacrifice and service. We had to give up the world and the ways of our past by putting our trust in God. This faith was a commitment to live and think differently as a unique people of God (1 Peter 2:9). And it continues to be a complete reliance on His way as opposed to our own righteousness. So keep this in mind as you read the book of Romans. Paul, by becoming a Christian, set himself in complete opposition to everything he had once stood for as a Pharisee with such a strong Jewish background. He now understands that the way of law is futile and empty (Romans 10:1-4). And this is precisely what he wants to teach these brethren. And when you consider the conflict that likely existed between these Jewish Christians and Gentile Christians here in Rome, this was undoubtedly a message they needed to hear and take to heart; that neither were worthy, but both because of God’s grace had hope. None were more worthy of salvation than the other. Is this not a message for which we need to earnestly contend in the church today? Who among us would claim based on their righteousness that they are deserving of justification? I certainly won’t make such a bold claim. For, Paul says if I do, I have fallen from grace (Galatians 5:4).
Another aspect to consider here is the recipients of this epistle to the Romans. To whom exactly did Paul write this letter? Jewish Christians? Gentile Christians? Both? If both, which was the majority? Or does it even matter, really? There are arguments for several views with regard to the specifics of who this letter went to. In fact, there are so many, it kind of proves to me that there is no way we can be dogmatic in what we speak to these things. Jack Cottrell in his commentary on Romans however, seems to put in perspective what we can be certain about:
“The epistle to the Romans is addressed 'to all in Rome who are loved by God and called to be saints (1:7).' These saints in Rome were almost certainly a mixture of Jewish and Gentile Christians, though there is no way to tell which group had the larger number. There appears to have been tension if not conflict among the two groups. What is obvious is that in the epistle Paul addresses both groups with some passages being specifically directed toward the Jewish Christians and some toward the Gentile Christians…..this whole question is really irrelevant, since it applies equally to both groups. All are sinners (3:9, 23), no one will be saved by law (3:19-20), and all are equal recipients of the grace that is in Christ Jesus" (3:24; 4:11-12). [p. 21].
A large part of Paul’s message is to convey that we are all equal; regardless of our differences in race, socioeconomic status, gender, and level or degree of righteousness or sin. As for our ability to justify ourselves before God, we are all in the same boat.
“For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, bestowing his riches on all who call on him. For everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved” (Romans 10:12-13).
The city of Rome was predominantly a Gentile city. In fact, the population did heavily favor that of the Gentiles, probably in large part due to Claudius’ charge for the Jews to leave Rome (Acts 18:2) just under 10 years earlier from the time of this writing, which was around A.D. 58, most believe. But as those of Jewish descent had begun to filter back into Rome after Claudius’ death, and because of the content of Romans, we cannot deny that there were Jewish Christians here. Perhaps the majority of the Christians in Rome were indeed Gentile, and that is at least in part what threatened the Jews. But either way, most commentators agree in that even if this were the case, it was probably not by an overwhelming amount. The important thing to remember here is that they apparently were not getting along and both parties were guilty of thinking they were better than the other. In our culture, on so many levels, this should sound quite familiar, and therefore indicates to us once again that Romans is indeed for everyone.
As for how the church in Rome started, the most logical explanation (and it makes the most sense to me, personally) is that there were people from Rome at Pentecost when the church was established (Acts 2:5, 10). These people, shortly after having been converted to Christianity on this day, likely went back to Rome and started the church there.
There does not seem to be any Biblical or historical support for Peter ever having gone to Rome, much less having started the church there.
Also, Matt Dabbs, at his website, is doing a study on Romans himself. It is excellent, in my opinion and thorough. You can find his specific content on Romans (along with other studies of Bible series') here. Be sure and check out his post entitled, “Studying Romans--historical background and occasion.” Matt discusses some things here that I did not consider or go into very deeply in this post. Another interesting post that is relative to this introductory discussion can be found here where Matt, in a thought-provoking way, challenges the traditional belief that God's plan was to save His own but only because of the Jews' rejection of His way, He then extended the opportunity of salvation to the Gentiles (non Jews); as if God had never originally planned to extend hope to the Gentiles. This is good stuff by Matt and if you are interested in a deeper study of these issues, I highly recommend going there. I have enjoyed the brief conversations I have had with Matt about the scope of Romans. And I look forward to continuing to read and study his thoughts......as well as pick his brain. :-)
More introductory thoughts to come soon regarding the purpose and occasion of the Romans letter, as well as the theme.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment