Romans--Introductory Thoughts (part 3)

There are actually several circumstances that brought out the need for Paul to write this letter. However, it is a common belief that Romans was merely written to serve as a general document that affirms the whole of Christian doctrine. And therefore there were no inherent or pressing problems with the Christians in Rome that would necessitate Paul writing this letter, as was the case for his other letters. For example, the late Brother Burton Coffman in his commentary on Romans states:

“Paul had never been to Rome; and, it would seem, neither had any other apostle; accordingly, therefore, the letter to the Romans was not designed for the purpose of dealing with church problems, nor for giving instructions relative to church government, but was primarily a magnificent treatise on Christian doctrine, somewhat in the abstract, and yet pertinent to that generation and all subsequent ages” (Coffman Commentaries: Romans, Vol. 6, p.xi).

Thus it is held that Paul’s intent behind this letter was to focus on the general doctrine of salvation. While I will admit that this view holds some credence, if not for any other reason, there are many brilliant scholars, including those of like-minded faith that I respect dearly who maintain this thought. However, there are also many brilliant scholars, including those of like-minded faith, who would disagree somewhat and suggest that perhaps there were some pressing needs and circumstances going on with the Christians in Rome, that necessitated Paul’s writing to them. Interestingly, what one believes in regard to this, could actually play a large role in how this book as a whole is even interpreted.

Paul undoubtedly wanted to express to them his eagerness to preach to them the gospel (1:15). No one disagrees with this. One of the purposes of this letter is also seen toward the latter part; to convey to them his travel plans, including his plan to stop and spend some time with them and teach them on his way to Spain, as well as to request prayers of them, and seek their support in his work in Spain (15:15-32). Thus, at the time of this writing, Paul’s plan was to go to Jerusalem and then after this he intended to make his way to Spain. On the way to Spain, he would stop in Rome. See also Acts 19:21 and 23:11. Of course, we know from the history recorded for us in the book of Acts, that his plans changed however, once in Jerusalem and taken into custody. And Paul therefore never went to Rome under the terms which he had planned.

So how then, is Romans to be understood; as a general doctrinal essay or as an address of a specific need? I believe both. Paul undoubtedly lays down a very clear message with regard to the deeper issues of the gospel that are applicable to all Christians. He sets forth a treatise that leaves no doubt as to how we are to carry ourselves and maintain our standing in God’s loving grace. It is also a writing that should leave no doubt in the readers’ minds that it is God’s righteousness and not our own that saves us. It is undeniable that Paul is defending the gospel message here also; that Jesus indeed came to die for our sins and resurrected for the benefit of all man; and all of this was based on God’s love for us as unworthy and fallible human beings. Paul wanted these brethren to know that the saving gospel is for all man.

But we also cannot ignore the fact that this letter is obviously responding to certain circumstances that were occurring between these Christian brethren. It seems apparent that there was a dire need for unity between the Jew and Gentile Christian communities (Romans 12:16; 14:1-15:13). I actually wonder if what Paul addresses here in chapter 14 is at least somewhat similar to what instigated the Jerusalem conference (see Acts 15:1-35); the difference being that this should especially not happen among more mature Christians. Paul seems to have addressed a similar problem in the Corinthian church (1 Corinthians 8), at least in the sense of teaching them that the true spirit of Christianity will necessitate getting along and figuring out a way to make peace and unity work, even when there are serious disagreements. And make no mistake about it that Paul's charge for unity was something that was to be taken seriously (Romans 16:17-18). The specific details of what was being argued might be up for debate. Obviously we will explore this further when we get to this point of our study. But one thing is for certain; they were arguing about something and it was causing a lot of dissension. And Paul is basically saying, “stop it.” He makes it very clear that there is no room in the kingdom for such mindless bickering that has nothing to do with what Christianity is supposed to be about.

“For the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking but of righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit” (Romans 14:17).

Paul no doubt explains throughout this book that our submission to God’s will and holiness is not a matter that can be compromised (e.g., Romans 12:1-2). We cannot minimize this. But he also makes it quite clear that neither is legalism acceptable; and that unity is essential among God’s people. Thus, I believe, at least in part, that it was out of a motivation of love and concern for his brethren that Paul penned this letter. It was a concern for him that these brethren were not getting along. Such behavior among saints goes against everything Christianity is supposed to stand for. I believe there is just too much throughout the entire letter, where Paul is talking about how all are unworthy, and that all have been extended God’s love and grace, for this not to be something specifically Paul was addressing. At the very least, he saw the potential for lack of harmony because of the Jew/Gentile controversy as a whole; kind of a "don't bring this into the church" exhortation. But it is quite apparent that such controversy already existed (14:4, 10). Further, if all of Paul's other letters addressed specific problems, there is nothing to indicate why Romans would be any different. In the context of the New Testament, any letter written seems to imply that there was a need. With this all said though, I am not sure we can deny that this is a systematic presentation of the gospel message for mature Christians either. This is why I say “both.” This is a letter that is intended for all Christians in all ages; then, now, and into the future. It is relevant for all of us since it deals with salvation from sin through God’s grace.

There are a plethora of themes talked about for Romans. I think that justification by faith (Romans 1:16-17); God’s righteousness and fairness (Romans 9-11); and the equality of Jew and Gentiles are all relevant messages to the recipients of this letter. However, I like what Jack Cottrell says with regard to the theme; in summary: our salvation comes by way of God’s grace, not by law.

“Rather than seeing 1:16-17 as the thesis statement for Paul’s treatise, I see it more or less as the starting point leading up to the thesis, which is 3:28: ‘for we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from observing the law.’

In the most general sense Paul’s thesis relates to the gospel, since his desire to preach the gospel in Rome (1:15) is what led him to compose the epistle as a written version of his gospel. But since the gospel is the good news about salvation, also in a general sense the theme of Romans is salvation. And the manner in which sinners are saved, whether Jews or Gentiles, is the same: justification by faith.

…..Yes, sinners are justified by faith, but this means they are not justified by works of law, which is the only alternative. It is just as important to include the negative statement in the theme as the positive one.

In actuality, then, the basic theme of Romans is the contrast between law and grace as a way of salvation. This contrast is seen especially in 3:28, which (literally translated) says, ‘for we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of law.’ The contrast is stated succinctly in 6:14, ‘you are not under law but under grace.’ This is the gospel, the good news of salvation. Certainly it is good news to know that God justifies us by faith in the saving work of Jesus Christ. But in a real sense it is also good news to know that we are not justified by law-keeping: a way of salvation which is not only futile but which sinners in their hearts know is futile, and which leads only to self-deception or to despair (pp.29-30).”

Cottrell's point here seems, in large part, to be that it is not possible and therefore self-deceptive to think that we have the ability to earn salvation by way of our own righteousness. Of course, it should also be affirmed that God’s saving gospel message, extended by His grace, is indeed something to be obeyed or responded to (Acts 2:38; Romans 6:1-4). But what is necessary is that we understand that this does not serve as our source of salvation. Perhaps, I should let Paul’s explanation speak for itself:

“Therefore, since we have been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ. Through him we have also obtained access by faith into this grace in which we stand, and we rejoice in hope of the glory of God. More than that, we rejoice in our sufferings, knowing that suffering produces endurance, and endurance produces character, and character produces hope, and hope does not put us to shame, because God’s love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit who has been given to us. For while we were still weak, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly. For one will scarcely die for a righteous person—though perhaps for a good person one would dare even to die—but God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. Since, therefore we have now been justified by his blood, much more shall we be saved by him from the wrath of God. For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, now that we are reconciled, shall we be saved by his life” (Romans 5:1-10).

After having much more to say here in Romans 5 about Christ’s shed blood that reconciles us to God through His grace, Paul then begins the next chapter by conveying how we contact that saving blood and thus, enjoy the full benefits of God's grace:

“What shall we say then? Are we to continue in sin that grace may abound? By no means! How can we who died to sin still live in it? Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life. For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we shall certainly be united with him in a resurrection like his" (Romans 6:1-5).

Next time, we will actually get into the text; beginning with chapter 1. In addition to a chapter-by-chapter, section-by-section study of Romans, I anticipate we will embark upon more in depth, this distinction between law vs. grace and faith that Paul seems to emphasize throughout this letter. It will undoubtedly come up several times, actually. This is especially interesting when you consider that James 2:24 seemingly and at face value, states the opposite of Romans 3:28. I believe the bible harmonizes both of these truths and that it is impossible that God’s inspired, infallible ,and inerrant Word (2 Timothy 3:16-17) could contradict itself.

Paul wants all of us as Christians to understand that God’s grace, and nothing else is the source of our salvation. If we were to be 100% obedient from here on out, then all we would be doing is giving what we already owe to God for what He has already done for us. And so, when you keep in perspective that we cannot be 100% obedient (Romans 3:23), it really puts in perspective how much we owe our salvation to the wonderful grace of God. Romans always has and always will be applicable to everyone. And may our study of this great book enrich our lives abundantly and enable us to praise God from the mountaintops, literally and represented through our pure lifestyles. It is the natural way to respond after truly understanding God’s grace.

I will leave you with one more quote from Jack Cottrell:

“This contrast between law and grace as competing ways of salvation is not a matter of OT versus NT nor Old Covenant versus New Covenant, as if law were the way to be saved prior to Christ and grace is the way to be saved now that Christ has come. Also, the contrast between law and grace—THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT—is not simply the Law of Moses versus the grace of Jesus Christ. No sinner has ever been saved nor can be saved by the law that applies to him, whether it be the Law of Moses for Jews under the Old Covenant, or some other comparable set of God’s commandments for anyone else in any other time. Every sinner who has been saved since the time of Adam has been saved by grace and not by law, and this will always be the case” (p. 30).