Reading the New Testament Romans

Paul’s longest letter (that’s why it’s first), that to the Romans, has been called by Irving Jensen ‘Paul’s masterpiece’. Luther called it ‘the chief part of the New Testament … the purest gospel’. Calvin said it opens the door ‘to all the most profound treasures of Scripture’. Coleridge called it ‘the most profound book in existence’. Down the years Christians from many different backgrounds have greatly valued it.

The background

The traditional view is that Paul wrote the letter in 56 or 57 AD, at the end of his third missionary journey, probably while at Corinth, although he may have written from Philippi before sailing for Troas. He was planning to return to Jerusalem with the collection made in Macedonia and Achaia (15:25, 26) then go on to Spain, visiting Rome en route (15:24). The letter was probably carried by Phoebe (16:1), a servant (deaconess?) in the church at Cenchrea. The last chapter of the letter shows that Paul had many friends in Rome. He sends many greetings to people known to him. He says he had often planned to visit (1:13, 15:22) but had been hindered from doing so on each occasion. When Paul eventually reached Rome, it was not as a freeman but as a prisoner.

The church at Rome was probably not very large, and consisted mainly of Gentiles. Paul speaks of them as Gentiles in 1:13. The reason for thinking this is that the church had not made any great impact on the Jewish population there. From the end of Acts we learn that there were some Jews at Rome, who must have come to the city after the expulsion of Jews by Claudius in 50 AD (this would now have been in the time of Nero, perhaps 13 years later.) The Jews in Rome had not heard of Paul from their countrymen in Judea, nor it seems did they know much about the gospel, though they had heard of it. They had a more open attitude than Paul had encountered elsewhere and Acts 28:21, 22 tells us that they wanted to hear more. All this suggests that the existing church was not prominent or influential in the city. 

We do not know anything about the origin of the church at Rome. There were visitors from Rome in Jerusalem on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:10) who may have been converted and returned to the city with the gospel. Also, Priscilla and Aquila had come from Rome and according to 16:3 had returned. Certainly they would have been involved in the nurture of the church, even if not in its founding. The New Testament certainly makes no suggestion that Peter was involved in establishing the church. It is more likely that the church was started spontaneously by converts who settled there from other parts of the world, with no direct apostolic involvement.

Perhaps the best way to understand the history is to assume a largely Jewish membership at first. Then when Claudius expelled the Jews it changed and became largely Gentile. When Jews eventually returned to Rome and to the church there were some cultural tensions. This certainly fits in with the opening chapters and with Chapters 14 and 15. It may illuminate Chapters 9-11 too. The book thus has a lot to say to established churches today that receive an influx of unchurched converts.

Paul was interested in this church for a number of reasons. He wanted to see the capital of the empire, and possibly make the church there a centre of outreach to other parts of Italy and maybe the rest of the empire. As we have seen, he wanted to go as far as Spain, which was the western edge of the known world at that time. We can also see from the character of the letter that he was concerned to give thorough and systematic instruction to the church there. Unlike 1 Corinthians or Galatians, this letter is less concerned with correcting errors and dealing with problems and more with simply teaching the truth. While not covering every area of Christian doctrine, it is the fullest account of Christian teaching in the New Testament, with the possible exception of Ephesians. 

The central theme is the gospel itself, the revelation of the righteousness of God in providing for the salvation of sinners. It is particularly addressed to Gentiles, reflecting the composition of the church at Rome. Paul speaks of himself as the Apostle to the Gentiles (1:5) and in Chapter 1 outlines the religious history of the Gentile world apart from the gospel. He speaks of the gospel as being for Gentiles also (3:29) and emphasises that there is no distinction between Jew and Gentile in the way of salvation. Key words or phrases include law, righteousness, faith, sin, death, flesh, impute (credit), in Christ, Spirit. Leschert draws attention to one characteristic little phrase Paul uses ten times in this letter – May it never be! (God forbid! the AV has). See 3:3, 5, 31; 6:1, 15; 7:7, 13; 9:14; 11:1, 11.

A possible outline Theme: Salvation by grace alone. As is often the pattern in his letters, Paul begins with doctrine (to the end of Chapter 11) and then comes to his application later.

1. Introduction 1:1-17 Salutation, author, destination, greeting 1:1-7 Occasion of writing 1:8-15 Theme stated 1:16-17

2. The Need of Divine Righteousness 1:18-3:20

The Decline of the Gentile World 1:18-32

All Are Without Excuse 2:1-16

The Need of the Jews 2:17-3:8

The Universal Condemnation 3:9-20

3. Justification By Faith Established 3:21-8:39

Justification Explained 3:21-31

Justification Illustrated from the OT 4:1-28

The Consequences of Justification 5:1-21

Objections to Justification Anticipated 6:1-7:25

The Security of the Justified 8:1-39

4. Justification By Faith and Israel’s History 9:1-11:36

God’s Absolute Sovereignty 9:1-29

Jewish Responsibility 9:30-10:21

The Merciful Purposes of God 11:1-36

5. Practical Consequences of Justification 12:1-15:13

Living Before God 12:1, 2

Living in the Church 12:3-16

Living Among Enemies 12:17-21

Living as a Citizen 13:1-14

Living in Love and Liberty 14:1-15:13

6. Personal Matters and Closing Doxology 15:14-16:21

Christian doctrine for all

It is interesting to note the way this letter was so important in the conversions of three of the most significant men in Christian history – namely Augustine of Hippo, Martin Luther and John Wesley. No wonder Dale Leschert calls it ‘one of the most influential letters in all of history’. The letter has also been very significant for the formulation of Christian doctrine. John Stott calls it ‘the fullest, plainest and grandest statement of the gospel in the New Testament’. Many theological terms we use are derived chiefly from this letter, eg justification, imputation, adoption, sanctification. The letter’s structure has greatly influenced Christian thought. However, it is a book, as F F Bruce notes, for ‘ordinary men and women’, people like you and me. Luther wanted every Christian to know it off by heart and make it ‘the daily bread of the soul’. As F F Bruce wrote, ‘there is no telling what may happen when people begin to study the letter to the Romans’. If you have never made serious study of the book, may I urge you to try. You will find Stuart Olyott’s little book The gospel as it really it (in Evangelical Press’s Welwyn series) a great help.

Originally published in Grace Magazine

Reading the New Testament Acts

It is clear from what we said in a previous article on the third Gospel that Acts was written by Luke, the beloved doctor. Acts or more fully Acts of the Apostles could be called, it has been suggested, Acts of the Holy Spirit. There is certainly an emphasis on the Spirit, beginning with the outpouring of the Spirit on the Day of Pentecost. However, the book’s opening gives us a clue to a better title. Acts is clearly the second part of a two-part work. The opening verse refers to a former account of all that Jesus began to do and teach. The implication is that Acts tells us what Jesus continued to do and teach to the early church by the Spirit through the Apostles.

Content

Acts begins where the Gospel leaves off, and continues the account of God revealing himself in mercy and grace, not just to Jews but to the whole world. We can divide the book into sections:

1. Introduction 1:1-11

2. Origin of the church: Jerusalem 1:12-8:3

3. Transition period: Samaria 8:4-11:18

4. Expansion to Gentiles, Paul’s mission: Antioch and the Empire 11:19-21:16

5. Imprisonment and defence of Paul: Caesarea and Rome 21:17-28:31

Acts is constructed logically around the geographical development given in Acts 1:8. The Lord says to the Apostles You shall be witnesses to me in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth. After the introduction Luke deals with events concerning the Jerusalem church and its growth. Then we get a glimpse into the expansion into Samaria and the coastal plain of Palestine to Caesarea. Further sections show the gospel spreading throughout the empire, into the cities of the Mediterranean world and on to the capital, Rome. As he records the expansion, Luke notes the churches’ spiritual and numerical growth - 2:47, 5:14, 6:7, 9:31, 12:24, 16:5, 19:20.

Characters and preaching

Acts can also be looked at from the point of view of the characters the Lord used.

1-5 Peter

6, 7 Stephen

8-12 Barnabas, Philip, Saul of Tarsus

13-28 Paul

Another characteristic is the record of the preaching of the early church. Acts could be called The Preaching of the Apostles as it records a number of sermons or speeches mostly by Peter and Paul. 

Peter’s speeches

Pentecost 2:14-39

In the Temple precincts 3:12-26

Defence to Sanhedrin 4:8-12,   5:29-32

To Cornelius and household 10:34-43

Paul’s speeches

Synagogue, Pisidian Antioch 13:16-41

Lystra 14:15-17

Thessalonica 17:2-3

Athens 17:22-31

Defence, Jerusalem 22:1-21

Defence before Felix 24:10-21

Defence before Festus and Agrippa 26:2-23

Comparisons have been drawn between Peter and Paul

They were both Apostles; Peter to Jews, Paul to Gentiles

As noted, preachers, whose sermons are recorded

Able to miraculously heal. Both healed lame men (Peter, 3:1-10; Paul, 14:8-10)

Instrumental in bringing miraculous personal judgement (Peter, Ananias and Sapphira struck dead, 5:1-11; Paul, Elymas struck blind, 13:6-11)

Freed from prison by divine intervention (Peter - Jerusalem, 12:1-11; Paul - Philippi, 16:19-30)

Men who stressed the Spirit’s work and Christ’s resurrection

Though Paul went to Gentiles and Peter to Jews, they were not exclusivist. Peter pioneered the gospel to the Gentiles as he spoke to Cornelius. Paul was willing to preach to his fellow-countrymen and had a great burden for them (see Romans 10). 

Historicity and aim

Acts’ historical reliability has been challenged at times, but never successfully. There are difficulties in fitting its chronology with that of the epistles, and some of Luke’s historical detail cannot be confirmed from outside sources. Many details have been confirmed, however, by the findings of archaeology and palaeography.

Acts is not an exhaustive account of the church’s spread. Luke, a careful historian, does not give us a comprehensive account of all that happened. His interest is in the spread from Jews to Gentiles, events that he himself witnessed firsthand, as we see from the we sections. He records nothing of the gospel’s spread southward or eastward but deals with its spread northward and westward into Greece and Rome. There were Christians in Egypt and Syria from early days. How this happened is not recorded. There were believers in Damascus before Paul’s conversion, but no account of this is given. When we consider that we hear nothing of the activities of most Apostles, we realise that much early church history remains hidden. The reasons for this limitation of the scope of Acts probably include the fact that Luke was writing mainly about events he knew personally or could find out from Paul, with whom he was closely associated. He could use these events more fully to illustrate his theme of the gospel’s expansion and its relevance to all mankind, Jew and Gentile alike. He was also instructing an individual, Theophilus, in the certainty of the gospel. The fact that this man was probably a Roman official led him to centre his interest on the spread of the gospel toward Rome, rather than dealing with the church’s growth in other geographical directions.

Period and interest

The chronological period covered by Acts is 30-60 AD, from the Ascension to Paul’s imprisonment in Rome. There are certain events that Luke records whose dates can be fixed independently.

Famine under Claudius 11:28 44-48 AD

Death Herod Agrippa I 12:20-23 44 AD (Spring)

Proconsulship Sergius Paulus 13:7 Before 51 AD

Expulsion of Jews from Rome 18:2 49 AD (probably)

Proconsulship Gallio 18:12 52, 53 AD

Proconsulship Felix 23:26, 24:27 52-56 AD

Accession Festus 24:27 57-60 AD

Luke’s interest was not primarily in a chronology of the period, though he paid more attention to these matters than most New Testament writers. Rather he charts for us the gradual decline in prominence of Jewish Christianity and the growth of faith among the Gentiles. At the book’s opening the atmosphere is very Jewish. The Apostles ask the Lord about the re-establishment of the Kingdom of Israel. The crowd who hear Peter’s Pentecost sermon is mainly Jewish. Peter speaks to the men of Israel (2:22). The church at Jerusalem was mainly Jewish, although there were two groups in the church, natives of Palestine and Hellenistic Jews of the Dispersion - which caused tensions over the distribution of food (see Acts 6).

At first, the church was seen as a sect within Judaism, The Way (9:2) or the sect of the Nazarenes (24:5). It was Stephen’s preaching that stirred up a violent reaction from the Jewish authorities and led to the church being scattered and the evangelisation of Samaria, Antioch and the Gentile world. The transition period (8:4-11:18) is not covered in detail, but it is clear that the gospel began to make inroads among the Gentiles. Here is the conversion of the Ethiopian and of Cornelius, both probably Gentile proselytes. We also have the positive Samaritan response to Philip’s preaching. These events mark a move away from the expectation of a Messianic Kingdom toward the establishment of the church as we know it.

The latter part, dealing with the mission to the Gentiles, begins with the establishment of a church in Antioch, where the break with Judaism seems to have first become evident. Believers were no longer seen as a sect within Judaism but were called Christians, a separate and distinct group with a different faith. It has been suggested that Acts was written with an apologetic intention. The relationship between the gospel, the Christian church it produced and the Roman government is traced from its origin to Paul’s Roman imprisonment.

The author was a close friend of Paul and may have intended to show that Paul’s gospel was no threat to the Empire. It was a spiritual not a political movement. One writer (J Ironside Still) advanced the theory that Acts was written to help Paul’s defence before Caesar. Perhaps Theophilus still had suspicions about the new movement, in view of the attitude of both Jews and Gentile, so Luke writes to give him certainty about what he had heard. Obviously that certainty was needed. Whatever is behind the book’s writing, Luke demonstrates that God’s supernatural revelation has come to all mankind, not just to the Jews.

This article originally appeared in Grace Magazine

Reading the New Testament John's Gospel

The fourth Gospel stands apart. It looks at the life and ministry of Christ but with a structure and style very different from the other Gospels, one that complements and does not contradict the others.

Author

Because of its uniqueness, its historical accuracy has been questioned. This raises the question of authorship and the purpose for writing.

External evidence Tradition states that it was written by the last surviving apostle, John, in his latter years at Ephesus. The earliest evidence of its existence is found in Eusebius. He quotes Papias referring to John the Apostle and John the Elder. Eusebius assumes there were two men named John in Ephesus at the same time. There were certainly two tombs there, which may have influenced him. However, he probably misunderstood. Papias simply meant John was the last of the Twelve and by then an old man. In 1 and 2 John he calls himself the elder. Eusebius’s distinctions between apostles and elders did not exist in Papias’s day. Eusebius also did not believe John wrote Revelation. There is no reason to think the fourth Gospel was written by an unknown elder. All the early church fathers from Irenaeus on back up the tradition that John son of Zebedee wrote it. Irenaeus knew Polycarp, a contemporary of Papias, who knew John. The tradition is long established. Even C H Dodd, who rejected John’s authorship, was unaware of any good external evidence for his view.

Internal evidence The content supports this view. The writer is Jewish, probably used to thinking in Aramaic and using Greek as a second language. Aramaic words appear and are translated and explained. The style is typically Hebrew in structure. The writer understood and quotes from the Old Testament and is familiar with Jewish customs and festivals. References to festivals help give a chronological framework. For instance, Passover - 2:23, 6:4, (5:1?), 13:1. He refers to Jewish expectations of Messiah and was acquainted with small details of Jewish custom (Chapters 2, 3, 11). He had been resident in Palestine and describes the geography well. He implies that he was an eye-witness of many events. See 1:14, 19:35.

The final internal clue comes from his self-references - The disciple whom Jesus loved (13:23, 19:26, 20:2, 21:7,20), the other disciple (18:15-16, 20:2, 21:2) and the disciple about whom a rumour spread that he would not die (21:20-25). Only one close associate of the Lord fits the bill. The absence of the name ‘John the son of Zebedee’ confirms it.

The style and vocabulary is similar to John’s letters. We also have the distinctive emphasis on love found in the letters also in the Gospel.

John’s name is mentioned 35 times in the New Testament, twice as often as those of the other Gospel writers combined. He was obviously a significant person. Son of Zebedee and Salome, he was the apostle James’s brother. His father must have been a successful Galilee fisherman. We know he employed servants in the business as well as his sons. Salome was probably sister to Jesus’s mother Mary. John 19:25 says Mary’s sister was among the group of women at the cross. By comparing lists in the other Gospels it seems likely that Mary and Salome were sisters. So John was Jesus’s cousin. If so, significantly, John makes nothing of it. John tells us in the Gospel that he was a disciple of the Baptist, who pointed out Christ as the Lamb of God. He followed the Lord as he first set out preaching in Galilee, and was chosen one of the Twelve. He belonged to the inner circle with Peter and James. These three went alone with the Lord at times. It is thought by many that John was the disciple who followed the Lord, after his arrest, into the High Priest’s house and that he was known to the High Priest’s family. He witnessed the crucifixion and went to see the empty tomb. He was commissioned, with the others as an Apostle and became one of the pillars of the church. Tradition says he became an elder in Ephesus and was exiled to the Aegean island of Patmos by Domitian, where he received the Revelation. Tradition also says that he was permitted to return to Ephesus by Nerva, in AD 96 and remained there until his death sometime between 98 and 117. We have referred to a characteristic note in his writing that have led him to be called the Apostle of Love. 

An attractive legend says that in old age, too frail to walk he was carried to the meeting place in Ephesus. All he could say in his extreme weakness was Little children, love one another. At one time he was given the name Son of Thunder along with his brother, for wanting to call down fire from heaven. He was a man who had been transformed by God’s grace.

Date and place of writing

When we attempt to fix a date for composition, we find a diversity of views among liberal scholars. Some date it as early as AD 40, others as late as 140-170, too late to have been John’s work. Conservative writers consider that it was written after the Synoptics sometime between 85 and 95 from Ephesus. A fragment of papyrus manuscript in the John Rylands Library at Manchester, known as the Rylands Fragment, or P52 contains about five verses of the Gospel. It has been dated around AD 125-135. This shows that the Gospel was probably in circulation before the 2nd Century began. 1Purpose It was probably written because the church had by that time reached a certain maturity, and needed further teaching on the nature of faith in Christ. It seems to have been written for Gentiles. John states the purpose of his writing toward the end, in 20:30. He wrote to convince his readers of Christ’s deity and humanity. We can see from his letters that he was living in a time when the incarnation was under attack, possibly from early forms of Gnosticism. He shows that the Lord was not just an appearance of deity, like an Old Testament theophany. These were appearances for a brief time not incarnations for a lifetime. Gnostics were happy to view Christ as a manifestation of God only but such an appearance cannot make true atonement for sins. John seeks to show The Word was made flesh and dwelt among us having first established what he means by The Word - the eternal God, one who was with God and was God (an obvious Trinitarian reference) - one who possessed the divine nature, yet was face to face with God - the same, yet distinct. John’s second purpose came from his desire for this knowledge of the truth to lead to faith and eternal life, believing, you might have life through his name. The book is theological, defending what theologians now call the hypostatic union - two natures, human and divine, in one person. It is also evangelistic - an invitation to faith in Christ. 1Distinctive features The most selective Gospel, over 90% is not parallelled elsewhere. If our dating is accurate and John was last to write, then he would probably have had access to the other Gospels. It is surprising that he makes so little use of their material and has so much that is unique. His purpose was not to write a comprehensive and exhaustive biography but to present the Lord in his incarnate deity in order to bring about faith. He selected materials suitable to that end. He leaves out all the parables but relates more direct discourses. Many sermons and discourses are found only in John. There are 27 interviews or conversations between the Lord and others, most exclusive to John. Without John we would not have the lengthy and significant teaching from the Upper Room or details of the prayer in Gethsemane. John does not record the sermon in Matthew 24-25 and the other Synoptics. It may be that this is because he wrote after AD 70.

The sections of teaching from the Lord deal more with who he is than with ethical direction and instruction. There is a greater emphasis on personal conversations and relationships between the Lord and individuals rather than on portraying him with the crowds. It is a very much more theological Gospel, dealing with Christ’s Person and faith’s nature.

Key words: signs, believe, life. Signs is used to refer to miracles. The use of sign indicates something about their purpose. John says the Lord did many other things that he did not record. He chose just eight sign-miracles to demonstrate his point, six of them unique to John. Interestingly, there are no accounts of demons being cast out. The first seven miracles were performed during his ministry before the crucifixion, the last in the period after the resurrection before the ascension. Around these sign-miracles John builds a literary framework of sermons, conversations and comments. In some cases the miracle recorded gives the background to the sermon that follows, as with the feeding of the 5000, which leads to the discourse on the Bread of Life. In other cases the sermon was illustrated by the miracle, as when the Lord speaks of being the Light of the World as he gives sight to the blind man. The word believe is used 98 times, usually translated believe, though sometimes commit or trust. It means more than just intellectual assent. It stands for the trust of the entire person to the Lord. The verb’s tense in many places where it is used implies continuous belief, involving progress, and therefore has reference to the whole of the Christian life, not just the initial entering into commitment and faith. John defines belief as receiving Christ. The third key word life implies all that the believer receives from the Lord, the highest and greatest experience we can know. The Lord said in his prayer (17:3) This is eternal life, that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent. In John’s terminology, life is not just the source of our existence on earth or an inner animal force but the nature we have, an interaction with our Maker.

Of all the Evangelists, John places greatest emphasis on Christ’s deity, mainly from the Lord’s own assertions about himself. Debating with the Jews he says before Abraham was, I am (8:58). They take up stones to kill him because they clearly understand him to be asserting eternal deity. Jesus is using the name God revealed to Moses at the Burning Bush. He amplifies its meaning with the famous seven I am sayings.

He made other statements in which he claimed to be God. I and my Father are One (10:30), He that has seen me has seen the Father (14:9). Clearly no sane and honest man, especially a Jew, would make such statements if they were not true. 

Structure

When we try to outline the Gospel it is clear that the book has a prologue (1:1-14/18) and an epilogue (21:1-25). What lies between falls neatly into two parts, public and private ministry. These have sometimes been designated ‘The Book of Signs’ and the ‘Book of Glory’ or ‘The Passion’. Others reject this approach. One scholar argues that 10:22-29 is the structural summit and everything is grouped around that. Others propose more elaborate schemes. There is a general agreement that the book is highly unified and tightly structured. The difficulty is what to make of that fact. For example, there is an inclusio referring to Cana in 2:1 and 4:54 but it is unlikely that there is anything theologically significant about Cana itself.

This article first appeared in Grace Magazine