Romans

Aaron Sherwood

Description

Paul's majestic letter to the Romans has impacted generations of readers. Christians regularly turn to it as a foundation for doctrine, evangelism, and Christian living. However, individual verses are often pulled from their context or later doctrinal formulations are imported into the text. Are we truly following Paul's meaning? What if we reread Romans on its own terms, with sensitivity to its flow and structure?Aaron Sherwood's Romans commentary keeps Paul's argument central. As we encounter the letter's message and theology, the forest is never lost for the trees. Reading Romans with rhetorical perception results in illuminating and sometimes surprising conclusions.Encounter afresh this majestic letter with Sherwood's insightful commentary.

Sujets

• Philosophie et théologie
• New Testament
• Christianity

Informations

• Publié par: Lexham Press
• Date de parution: 02 décembre 2020
• Nombre de lectures: 0
• EAN13: 9781683594024
• Langue: English
• Poids de l'ouvrage: 5 Mo

Extrait

AARON SHERWOOD
ROMANS
A STRUCTURAL, THEMATIC, & EXEGETICAL COMMENTARY
Romans: A Structural, Thematic, and Exegetical Commentary
Copyright 2020 Aaron Sherwood
Lexham Press, 1313 Commercial St., Bellingham, WA 98225
LexhamPress.com
You may use brief quotations from this resource in presentations, articles, and books. For all other uses, please write Lexham Press for permission. Email us at [e-mail] .
Unless otherwise noted, Scripture quotations are the author’s own translation.
Print ISBN 9781683594017
Digital ISBN 9781683594024
Library of Congress Control Number 2020935616
Lexham Editorial: Derek Brown, Matthew Boffey, Ronald van der Bergh, Danielle Thevenaz
Cover Design: Kristen Cork
Dedicated to
all those who invested in me,
especially early in my life,
to help make me into
someone who could
attempt a volume
like this one.
CONTENTS
PREFACE
INTRODUCTION
I. The Setting and Purpose of this Volume
II. The Orientation of the Commentary
III. The Occasion(s) of Romans
IV. Communicative Strategy, Structure, and the Purpose(s) of Romans
V. Theology in Romans
VI. Glossary
COMMENTARY
PART I: PAUL INTRODUCES HIS PASTORAL CARE ACCORDING TO THE GOSPEL (ROMANS 1:1–15)
Overview
Romans 1:1–7: Letter Greeting
Romans 1:8–15:
Prayer and Thanksgiving, and the Thesis of Romans
PART II: PAUL’S APOLOGY FOR HIS GOSPEL (ROMANS 1:16–11:36)
Overview
Romans 1:16–17:
The Theme of the Apology:
Paul’s Gospel Is Not Shameful (Despite Appearances)
Romans 1:18–3:20:
The Antithesis to the Apology:
The Need of Humanity apart from the Gospel for God’s Powerful Salvation
Romans 3:21–31:
The First Part to Paul’s Selective Elaboration on the Gospel
Romans 4:1–25:
God’s Covenantal Consistency in the Gospel
Romans 5:1–21:
The Second Part to Paul’s Selective Elaboration on the Gospel
Romans 6:1–7:6:
Response to the First Objection: The Gospel Does Not Allow Sinfulness
Romans 7:7–8:30:
Response to the Second Objection: The Gospel Does Not Implicate Torah in Sin and Death
Romans 8:31–39:
The Third Part to Paul’s Selective Elaboration on the Gospel
Romans 9:1–11:36:
Response to the Third Objection:
God Is Not Unfaithful to Israel in the Gospel
Summary of Romans 9–11
Summary of Romans 1:16–11:36
PART III: MAIN LETTER BODY: PASTORAL EXHORTATIONS FOR ROME AND PAUL’S SPANISH MISSION (ROMANS 12–15)
Overview
Romans 12:1–12:21:
Christian Community and Godly Living within the Community of Faith
Romans 13:1–14:
The Community of Faith Living in a Godly Manner within the World
Romans 14:1–15:6:
The Weak and the Strong
Romans 15:7–13:
The Full Purpose of the Gospel
Summary of Romans 12:1–15:13
Romans 15:14–33:
The Roman Church’s Aid for Paul’s Spanish Mission
Romans 16:1–23 (15:33–16:27):
Letter Closing
EXCURSES
EXCURSUS 1: NATURAL THEOLOGY AND THE IDENTITY OF THE ACCUSED IN ROMANS 1:18–32
EXCURSUS 2: INTERPLAY BETWEEN ROMANS 3:27–8:17 AND GALATIANS 3:1–4:7
EXCURSUS 3: SALVATION, REDEMPTION, DELIVERANCE, AND ATONEMENT IN ROMANS
EXCURSUS 4: THE “I” IN ROMANS 7
EXCURSUS 5: DIVINE FOREKNOWLEDGE AND PREDESTINATION IN ROMANS 8:28–30
EXCURSUS 6: THE SALVATION OF “ALL ISRAEL” IN ROMANS 11:25–27
EXCURSUS 7: THE DISPUTED ORIGINALITY OF ROMANS 16
BIBLIOGRAPHY
SCRIPTURE AND ANCIENT SOURCES INDEX
SUBJECT INDEX
AUTHOR INDEX
PREFACE
Let me first say what the preface of every Romans commentary ought to start by saying, and often does: I love Romans. It has naturally been a transformative experience immersing myself in this astounding letter. As well, I recognize that scholars most commonly write a commentary on this august, influential letter at the height of their long and impressive careers. So I am terribly humbled to attempt a commentary on Romans at this point in my life. Especially when I compare the number of pages I used here to the mere eleven pages that Romans takes up in my English Bible. I join my single voice to the estimable discussion of many others, who have already put forward so much effort in interpreting Romans.
And yet.
It also needs confessing that Romans has, for some time, been a small burr under my saddle. This is undoubtedly an amazing letter, and I do love Romans. But love of Romans is not the main reason that I set out on this project.
My undergraduate degree in philosophy was heavily weighted toward metaphysics. My fellow students would joke how we all really wanted to major in quantum physics, but none of us were good enough at math. We used to say we were philosophy majors because we suffered from physics envy. This volume is something of a repeat of history.
I did not continue in philosophy; nowadays I mainly wear the hat of a Pauline specialist—which I love, but originally I wanted to be a Jesus scholar. It is just that early in my graduate program I learned how the Pauline documents antedate the final forms of the Gospels. So I reckoned that in order to study Jesus, I should start at the beginning and work my way through Paul. I never quite got out. And even then, what I am really taken by (would fashions in scholarship and publishing allow it) is Ephesians. In fact, if anything, my gravitation toward Romans was probably generated by the arguable confluence of Ephesians 2 and Romans 15:7–13.
Concerning the large, historical discussion over Romans particularly, my own reading placed in me a suspicion: I suspected that some aspects of interpretation have just needed a bit of another going over. Suspicion led to my own investigation. Investigation led to findings that (in my estimation) fit the data and withstand scrutiny. And said findings seem to bear out my suspicion: certain conventional ideas concerning what Romans is about are not quite correct. Or certain conventional ideas are correct, but not for the reasons that people presume. Or certain other things legitimately taken from Romans ought to be given less weight than they typically enjoy.
For a while, I have been bugged by the nagging suspicion that scholars and theologians understand the letter almost perfectly, but not quite. It’s like seeing a picture across the room that is hung just a little bit crooked. Which might be allowed to pass, except that in the view of so many, Romans is the key to Paul, if not all Christian theology. I do celebrate Romans—really, I do. But it could be argued that it is not always appreciated for what it actually is and says, compared to what is often thought or presumed. I hope not to lose readers in saying so, but I like to start teaching Romans with the joke that what Star Wars , The Beatles, and Romans have in common is that all three are a bit overrated.
Moreover, it is not easy to arrive at this assessment of things. As a student, I have found my favorite commentators’ good and correct insights to be invaluable and formative. But because of the peculiarities of the genre of commentary, even their insights are sometimes hard to ferret out.
All this explains what really moved me to write this volume. What, when you get right down to it, is Romans saying? Ultimately, this volume aims at assimilating all the best features and findings of other commentaries, while also filling in gaps in the big picture, in order to be the commentary that I had always wanted as a student. I hope to make this volume as user-friendly as I had wanted all my own favorite commentaries to be. So I do my best to take advantage of all the best formatting ideas from preceding commentaries. As well, at various important points in the letter, I feel that the data warrant a new reading, which inevitably has a domino effect. Ultimately, my reading of Romans overall is distinct enough to need its own presentation.
This volume hopes to helpfully revisit the “crooked picture” parts of other interpretations of Romans, its theology, and its relative importance. Because I do love this letter, I hope to set out what it genuinely is about, so that other students can stop missing it because they instead focus upon what it is less about. Ideally, this volume frees up Romans to speak to others in the same ways in which it has spoken to me.
Lastly, I would like to take the opportunity to acknowledge some of the many others who deserve credit for the positive aspects of this volume. Great credit goes to especially Ms. Kristin Fance, reference librarian at Houston Baptist University, and also to the interlibrary loan staff at Pierce County Library, Washington, for their indispensable aid in securing countless research resources. My gratitude also to my editor Derek Brown, my copyeditor Matthew Boffey, and the publishing staff at Lexham Press/Faithlife for their efforts in revising this volume and bringing it to fruition. All mistakes, of course, remain my own.
INTRODUCTION

I. THE SETTING AND PURPOSE OF THIS VOLUME
This commentary focuses more upon the overall shape and message of Romans and less on smaller details beyond what they say of the larger message. The investigation especially looks at how Paul uses the letter structure to help convey his message. This approach allows Paul to set the theological priorities of Romans, ensuring that modern readers take Paul’s own meaning and theology from his discussion.
St. Paul’s Epistle to the church at Rome is one of the most analyzed documents of the last two millennia. So why yet another commentary on Romans?
This volume aspires to be a commentary that notes the trees but focuses mostly on the forest; the trees are recognized for where they stand in the wider landscape. That is, there are at least two key areas where this commentary tries to overcome the tendencies of its genre. First, it examines the text in a way that more strongly accents Paul’s overall message, relative to the blocks out of which he constructs it. Second, and related, it reflects the relative emphasis that Paul himself places on various motifs or portions of his discussion.
Some modern commentaries