Romans Introduction & 1:1-2 Bible Teaching

Teaching the Books of the New Testament

Welcome
Prayer
Song
Silence

Well, I have a surprise for you. After looking at the contents of the remaining books of the New Testament we need to cover – Titus, Philemon, the rest of 1st Timothy, 2nd Timothy and Mark – along with the need to re-record Romans – I’ve decided based on our vote last week to cover the four remaining books in Meat and hit Romans in Milk. I figure it will take us around 65 weeks to get through it – or a year and two months. I pray the spirit of the Lord God Almighty will attend to this teaching as it needs to be not only on point and as close to the truth as we can get but also inviting, understandable, and a benefit to the lives of believers today. I will try my best to incorporate an overall biblical perspective to our examination of the content so that we do not find ourselves guilty of assuming things based on singular passages – or sets of passages – alone.

Introduction to Romans

Romans Introduction
1.1-7
October 11th 2020
Represented in Milk due to bad recording quality from before

For many people, Paul’s letter to the believers at Rome is considered one of the most difficult in the New Testament. So difficult, it is said, that many churches refuse to include its contents (along with Revelation) in the curriculum for their Sunday Schools. I think we can alleviate some of this difficulty by taking our time, and trying to see what Paul means relative to other clear and plain teachings that are established in other places in scripture.

Context and Background

The Epistle or letter to the Romans was written to Christians residing in the city of Rome. This was Paul’s primary audience and much of what he will say here speaks to them and the problems they were having among themselves in that locale. Rome was the center of the Roman Empire and was ethnically very diverse. In the first century AD it had a population of around one million people in an area less than ten square miles. Of this large population, it is estimated that there was between 40,000 and 50,000 Jews in the city at that time. The Jewish population originates back to the second century BC as part of the Diaspora that occurred at that time. Biblically, the term diaspora refers to the “dispersing of Jews to areas outside of Israel.” But the terms can be used to describe the dispersing of any indigenous people from their homeland.

When Pompey the Great overran Judea, he sent a large number of Jews prisoners to Rome, to be sold as slaves. But it was not easy to control them. They persevered obstinately in adhering to the rites of their own nation, including keeping the Sabbath, dietary laws, etc, so that the Romans finally chose to give them their freedom, and assigned them a place in the vicinity of the city across the Tiber river. Ever industrious, they built a town there that was principally inhabited by Jews. Josephus mentions that 4000 Jews were banished from Rome at one time to Sardinia, and that a still greater number were punished who were unwilling to become soldiers, (Antiquities. xviii, ch. 3) Philo says, that many of the Jews at Rome had obtained their freedom; for, he says, being made captive in war, and were brought into Italy where they were set at liberty by their masters and they were not compelled to change the rites of their fathers.

So we have the Jews in Rome. Then we have what we call the Day of Pentecost where 3000 Jews came from all over to Jerusalem and the Holy Spirit fell on them and then they returned to their homes, Gospel in hand. This may have planted the Gospel in the hearts of some Jews from that area. Then add in those converted from the Gentile ranks, and the church at Rome was organically established, reflecting the city's diversity within its own walls. It is easy to see that in that church there would be a great diversity of sentiments among this diverse group of believers, and that there would have been some rather warm discussions about the authority of the Mosaic law.

We have talked about Nero here in milk and in 64AD there was a large fire in Rome and Nero used this fire to rid Rome of many of the established Jews there and to also persecute Christians and the Christian Church. And while we are not sure how the church at Rome actually began.

Early Church in Rome

My sentiments about Romans Jews at Pentecost (Acts 2:10-11) make about as much sense as anything else. What we don’t see is evidence that it was established by Peter or any of the other apostles, as our Catholic friends maintain. In any case, there was an established church in Rome before Paul ever got there, and the fact that "All roads truly did lead to Rome" during what’s called the Pax Romana period certainly helped the church to grow and gain ground pre-Nero and his reign of terror. A number of scholars believe that a number of foreigners came from other lands and were drawn into the church at Rome at that time.

Notable Figures in Roman Church History

We will read (in Romans 16) that Paul greets several people, with the most notable of these being Priscilla and Aquila. Both Aquila and Priscilla were in Rome until about AD 49 when, according to Acts 18:19, Claudius expelled all the Jews from the city. Paul then met the couple when he came to Corinth (around 51AD). They then carried out more ministry in Ephesus (according to Acts 18:19) and around 53 AD they likely went to Rome. So it is highly unlikely that they were the ones to establish the church at this late date, and most believe that the Good News had blessed the lives of many prior to their arrival. In chapter 16 we will read, however, that Paul greets the church who were meeting in Aquila and Priscilla’s house. Of course, outside of the limited Jewish population, Rome was predominantly populated by Gentiles.

Based on verses 6-7 of chapter one, and these external factors, it is believed that (and this is really important to understanding the letter to the church at Rome) that the church there was certainly composed of converted Jews and converted Greeks. That’s salad dressing and it needs to be shaken vigorously in order to get the two parts to work together at times. So it was a recipe for trouble. And this helps us understand what Paul is speaking to when he writes this letter as he will address both Jew and Gentile in the epistle directly.

Pauline Authorship and Influence

At verse one, the letter itself claims Pauline authorship (in verse 1) and there has not been much controversy over this. Early church tradition affirms Pauline authorship. According to Norm Geisler, the Book is stated as coming from Paul by Clement of Rome (ca. AD 95-97), Polycarp (ca. 110-150), the Didache (ca. 120-150), Justin Martyr (ca. 150-155), Tertullian (ca. 150-220), and Origen (ca. 185-254). Additionally, the letter was named as authentic by Irenaeus (ca. 130-202), Clement of Alexandria (ca. 150-215), Cyril of Jerusalem (ca. 315-386), Eusebius (ca. 325-340), Jerome (ca. 340-420), and Augustine (ca. 400). And it was also included in the canons and creeds of Marcion (ca. 140), Muratorian (ca. 170), Barococcio (ca. 206), Apostolic (ca. 300), Cheltenham (ca. 360), and Athanasius (367).

As a quick refresher that I think is really important to remember, without the Old Testament we would never have understood the purpose and place of Yeshua the Messiah. And without Paul, we would never understand the way the Messiah and His life and deathSeparation from God—now overcome. Physical death remains, but it no longer separates us from life with God. would relate to the rest of the non-Jewish world. Paul authored thirteen New Testament Epistles. Some people claim they trust the New Testament but not the old. Some say that they just read Jesus' words and that that summarizes the faith to them. And while His words ultimately run down the mountain to us and give us life and truth, Paul serves as the rocky filter of that water before it reaches us at our gentile destinations.

The Importance of Paul's Writings

To try and live the Christian life without the Old Testament or the writings of Paul is to try and cross the sea in a rowboat after having removed two planks of wood from the floor. In the end, you will sink. Without Paul’s input, believers would be left reading the Gospels, and would be left trying to take and assume and assign the content of them to themselves, which presents some real issues when a person was not raised with the Law and the Prophets of the Old Testament. This is largely the issue with the LDS who, when they read the New Testament, give a serious gloss to the Pauline epistles and focus on the words of Jesus in the Gospels – who we know by now – was speaking primarily to his chosen twelve, and then to an audience of his brethren under the Law.

The Life and Mission of Paul

Paul, born as an Israelite in Tarsus of Cilicia and called Saul (Acts 22:3; Phil 3:5), studied under Gamaliel in Jerusalem (Acts 22:3), became a Pharisee (according to Philippians 3:5), and was both present at the stoning of Stephen (Acts 7:58; 8:1) and a persecutor of the church (Acts 8:1-3; Phil 3:6) before being specifically called by Yeshua to take the gospel out to the Gentile world, but only after being trained by Christ himself in the Sinai peninsula. After meeting up with Barnabas and ministering with him in Antioch (Acts 11:25-26), he embarked on a number of missionary journeys to bring the Gospel to the Gentiles before being imprisoned (in Rome—actually on two occasions) and was then martyred by Nero. Because of a problem with his eyes, it is believed that Paul had scribes write his letters for him, and this particular letter was written from Corinth while he was out on his third missionary journey. Most agree that the dating of this letter is around 56 AD.

Paul's Letter to the Romans

Paul himself identifies the recipients in this letter, saying at verse 7: “To all in Rome who are loved by God and called to be saints.” If you are a biblical literalist, and if you believe that every word of the Bible is true and must be followed, then you must conclude that this letter was NOT written to you for your benefit as a believer. I believe that the letter has proven to be a great blessing to believers everywhere, and stepping from literalism suggests that by the Spirit (which is the way all scripture must be understood), comprehension (along with context and solid support from the mouth of two or three “other” biblical references) of the Word is possible. So, Paul’s intent was for the Christians in all of Rome to read the epistle. It seems that there were multiple churches in the Empire's capital because there is made mention, as stated, of an additional church in the home of Priscilla and Aquila in Romans 16:5. And we know that there were too many believers in Rome, and it was too large a footprint to gather in one house.

So, Paul was writing to a church that he had never visited. A straight-up casual reading of the epistle does not convey the idea that he was dealing with situational issues but rather needed to lay out some Christian doctrine. And he appears to have written with regard to an overall “big picture description” on the doctrine of soteriology (which is a theological word for how people are saved). He also seems to write to help people know how they can know Christ and to inform the church regarding his future plans because those plans would involve them. At the time of writing the epistle, Paul was about to take an offering that he had collected from various churches to the poverty-stricken believers in Jerusalem. After that, he intended on going to visit the Roman churches for a time to teach the Gospel to them. His subsequent plans were then to go westward to preach the gospel in Spain.

Themes and Purpose of Romans

It is thought that Romans was a "carefully planned, doctrinal presentation of the Christian faith," but the letter is missing some important topical information on things like Christology, Communion, Ecclesiology (meaning church order), and EschatologyStudy of “last things”—TGNN teaches all biblical eschatology was fulfilled in 70 A.D. More. Professor of Theology Walt Russell at Liberty University contends that Romans was a letter of exhortation that treated the issue of Jewish/Gentile relationships and that Paul was urging them to "participate fully in God's harvest of all peoples" in that day. I tend to side with this view more than others, but there are many who believe Romans is just a typical general epistle.

All that said, the greatest and most evident theme in the epistle is the subject of “the gospel.” The Good News. In the very first verse, Paul states that he was called to be an apostle for “the gospel's sake.” Eight verses later, he maintains that he was dedicated to Christ “and his gospel” as he preached it with his whole heart. The gospel is also portrayed (in verse 16 chapter one) as “the power of God unto salvation” and that it is able “to save those who believe.” Believe the Good News. We will read in chapter 10 how Paul admits that this Gospel was not accepted by all the Israelites but how it was then graciously extended to all other peoples (15:16). Also, in the first chapter (at verse 17), we will read how “God's righteousness” is being revealed.

Faith in the Epistle to the Romans

In this gospel from "faith to faith" (1:17). Paul will certainly make it clear that the only way God’s righteousness can be accessed is through "faith," that human beings can never make themselves righteous, nor will a single ounce of merit do anything in regards to their salvation (which is supported by the contents of passages like Ephesians 2:8-9).

Paul admits right off the bat that those who are deemed righteous are those who live by faith. (verse 17) So let me stop right here and make a statement: Christians live and walk by faith. We do not know much of anything. We trust in the promises of God. Period. We grow in faith and knowledge of his promises and his person but we receive them both, in the end, by faith.

Justification by Faith

I am not ashamed of faith, my faith, or of being a man of faith. We do not have all the answers and we cannot intellectualize all the questions about life. We walk by faith, it is a choice, and we make no excuses for it. Why? Because the living God relative to his creations LOVES people who choose faith. This we know. Not bad faith, but faith non-the-less.

And it is in this epistle that Paul shows why it is necessary to be justified by faith; that due to the sinMissing the mark of faith and love—no punishment, just lost growth or peace. of Humankind, man is in need of justification before the living God, and once justified, life eternal is granted to them (which is defined in no other terms than by life in the presence of the Lord God Almighty).

This might be summarized by Paul in chapter 6:23 when he writes: “For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.”

So, to me, as Paul addresses the mixed Roman audience of believers, he takes a large stump called salvation, and steps around it with an axe and blade, and forms a figure that in the end could represent, “How God saved the world, Jew and Gentile alike, through Christ.”

Historical Context

As an aside, while the Epistle was received with great uniformity and attributed to the apostle Paul and received into sacred canon later, the only ones who ever challenged it as authentic were three ancient sects later deemed heretical – the Ebionites, the Encratites, and Cerinthians. But even these never denied that it was written by the apostle Paul but instead rejected it because they could not balance its contents with their other beliefs.

If you are seriously interested in a breakdown of the Epistle to the Romans consider reading “Horae Paulinae” by one Dr. Paley, an English pastor born in the late 1700’s. It is agreed by most that the original was written in Greek. This might seem odd as the church to receive it was in Rome and accustomed to Latin. But the Greek language was then understood at Rome, and extensively spoken.

In Roman youth were taught Greek and it was the fashion of the times to study it, even so much so as to make it matter of complaint that the Latin was neglected for it by the Roman youth. Roman historian Cicero said that “Greek was spoken in almost all nations but Latin confined to very narrow borders.” Tacitus remarked that, “An infant born now is committed to a Greek nurse.” It is also believed that the Jews in Rome would have been better acquainted with Greek than Latin as they had at that time a Greek translation of the Tanakh but not a Latin version.

Finally, it is probable that Paul was far more acquainted with Greek than Latin. Of course and again we will soon see that part of the presentation in this letter from Paul was to address what would be the natural differences the Jewish converts had with the Gentile, especially relative to reconciling varied opinions relative to observances of the Jewish law; the advantage of the Jew; and the way of justification.

The epistle itself is full proof that the church to whom it was addressed was composed of Jews and Gentiles. No small part of it is an argument expressly with the Jews, including chapters

Introduction to Romans

2, 3, 4, 9, 10, and 11. And no small part of the epistle also is designed to state the true doctrine about the character of the Gentiles, and the way in which they could be justified before God.

By the way, the Roman Catholic Church have maintained that the church at Rome as founded by Peter and from this position thence drawn their argument for claims of infallibility of a consistent papal line. Regarding this subject they appeal to the opinions of some of the early church leaders (whom they call fathers). But there is some really strong evidence to the contrary.

For instance, Paul himself (herein), and from the Acts, did not seems to regard Peter as having any such primacy or ascendency in the Roman church as is claimed by the Catholics today. Frankly, there is no mention of Peter at all in any part of the epistle itself – which it seems Paul would have mentioned had Peter had a hand in the establishment of the church there. Also, in the historical book plainly called the Acts of the Apostles there is no mention of Peter having ever gone to Rome – so I see the view as a convenient fiction.

It goes without saying that Romans is the most theologically rich of all of Pauls letters and has played an instrumental role in many great movements of the Christian church.

Dive into Romans

All of that being said, there is no better way to really comprehend Romans than to just read it. So, let’s walk out to the end of the ten meter board, set our feet, and take the plunge.

Romans 1:1 Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated unto the gospel of God, Okay then, back to verse 1

Romans 1:1 Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated unto the gospel of God, First word, “Paul,” the name Saul was Hebrew; the name Paul was Roman. In addressing an epistle to the Romans, he would naturally make use of the name to which they were accustomed. There was an ancient custom to begin an epistle with the name of the writer where we write our names at the end. It is believed that the placing of the name at the opening was a sign of authority, like, writing:

“I, King George decree the following!”

And we see this practice followed in some places in the Old Testament. “Paul, a servant,” which was a customary title many of the apostles used and a name Jesus himself told his apostles to use a few times in the Gospels. Interestingly, the term in Greek best means “slave” or one who is not free and we of course come to one of the most fascinating things about the faith –

Christian Liberty

“being a Christian grants the utmost liberty to people by people choosing to be in bondage to Christ.” Like many of you I have tried the counterfeits that promise freedom and liberty but in the end only enslave. Only by a willing submission to the person of Christ Jesus can a human being truly become paradoxically free – and the reality of this lies in the fact that he emancipates those who are his from sin, the trappings of the flesh, and gives those who seek (and are willing) the otherworldly ability to love – which is the consummate prescription for personal freedom. Agape loveSelfless love marked by patience, mercy, and humility—central to living in spiritual liberty..

Wanna be free from anger? Love. Wanna be free from envy? Love. Wanna be free from prejudice, fear, worry? Love. The ultimate liberator. The paradox is that we are willingly in bondage (even servitude to Him) but the most devoted and dedicated we allow ourselves to be the more liberated we become. I could talk about this for hours it is such a fascinating subject.

But, Paul begins the letter right out of the gates by taking a position of authority as a servant of Christ and an apostle by acknowledging Christ as His master with him as His servant or slave.

Even in the first three or so words of scripture we are offered the ability to apply its contents to ourselves: Who is your Master, and to whom or what are you a slave? Dylan sang that we all have to serve somebody – the Devil, the Lord, money, fame, careers, ambitions, self, pleasure, intellect – the question is, whom do you serve?

Allow yourself to picture a throne sitting on your brain, or on your heart – what do you see sitting

Paul's Calling and Apostleship

on that throne seat? It will be the being or thing that directs your thoughts, dictates your actions, and controls the majority of your life.

For Paul, it was Christ. For Christians we hope that it is Christ. Paul who was

“Called to be an apostle.”

This word “called” here means more than “an invitation” but moreover means an appointment. He did not assume the title himself but was called out and appointed by Christ to take the Good News out to the Gentiles, as was prophesied anciently to happen and was an indicator that the former age was near an end. This was important for Paul to state in this introduction because:

1.) the other apostles had been called or chosen to the same work by Jesus in the same way (John 15:16,19 Matthew 10:1 Luke 6:13) and,

2.) due to the fact that Paul was not one of those originally appointed he had to frequently affirm that he had not taken this high office to himself, but that he had been called to it by the authority of Jesus Christ post his death and resurrection. Frankly, Paul mentions this six or seven times in his letters including in 1st Corinthians 9:1; Galatians 1:12-24; 2nd Corinthians 12:12; 1st Timothy 2:7; 2nd Timothy 1:11; and Romans 11:13.

Apostleship: A Special Calling

Note that there is a HUGE difference between being an apostle and being an apostle chosen and sent forth by Jesus Christ. Anyone can be an apostle – a kid on an errand to the supermarket for mom is an apostle (or one sent).

But to have been called and sent by Jesus Christ to first (go out to the House of Israel alone – these were the original twelve) or second, to go out to the Gentiles (as in Paul) was a very special limited event – relegated to that time then, and it is an affront for men today in the Mormon Church to assign that title to themselves as they do not meet the biblical qualifications of an Apostles called by Yeshua the Lord in the least. Paul says: “. . . called to be an apostle, separated unto the gospel of God,”

The word translated “separated” speaks to the idea of boundaries or fixed limitations. Sort of like we would separate a black sheep from the rest of the white flock. It is a designation for being “separated out and made unique to the rest.” In Galatians 1:15 Paul used the term again, saying,

"God, who separated me from my mother's womb, and called me by his grace;" inferring that the call on his life was from birth, and is similar to what God says of Jeremiah the prophet when he said “Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations.”

This speaks to a conversation we had a few weeks back on election – and the fact that it is a biblical principle (for some) and that when it occurs it always includes an election to do something that will benefit those who come along later (which is what Paul certainly did) and it includes suffering (which Paul certainly experienced).

Paul's Devotion and Gospel Mission

I sustain Paul as legitimate based on the following factors: His writings and understanding of the Gospel relative to the Law is really amazing. His ability to speak the truth to varying audiences, and giving application to them which even at times seem contradictory.

And his sacrificial devotion to the cause which relative to where he came from makes zero sense – zero sense – if he was not convinced of Yeshua.

Here Paul says that he was separated “unto the Gospel of God.” In other words, he was to make it his life to preach, teach, guide, and lead relative to “the gospel of Jesus Christ,” which he calls, the “gospel of God” because it is his, God’s appointment; it was originated by him, and has his authority – from the foundation of the World. It has subsequently been called the Gospel of Jesus Christ, which is one in the same, so no biggie.

So, Paul was separated out from a life previously planned of splendor, wealth, and ease (he came from the height of Jewish preparation) to the call of proclaiming the good news that God had reconciled the world to Himself through His Son and wants all to receive this fact by faith. (verse 2)

2 (Which he (God) had promised afore by his prophets in the holy scriptures,)

Trust in the Old Testament

On the Old Testament and our trust of it, God spoke through inspiration to prophets in what Paul refers to as “In the holy Scriptures.” They were called holy because they were inspired of the Holy Spirit and were regarded as separated from all other writings while being worthy of all reverence. The apostle here declares that he was not about to advance anything new, meaning that his doctrines and views would be in accordance with the acknowledged oracles of God written or advanced before in the Holy Scriptures – referring to the Old Testament. Here he affirms

1. That all this was before promised, and no small part of the epistle is employed to show this.

2. That it was confirmed by the authority of holy and inspired men.

3. That the scripture was dependant on no vague and loose tradition, but was recorded, so that men might examine for themselves.

Paul and the Church at Rome

It appears that the reason why Paul was so anxious to show that his doctrine coincided with the Old Testament was, because the church at Rome was made up in part of Jews and he wished to show them, and the remainder of his countrymen, that the Christian religion was built on the foundation of their prophets, and their acknowledged writings. This would disarm their prejudice, and furnish a proof of the truth of religion anciently. It was a constant position with the apostle that he advanced nothing but what was maintained by the best and holiest men of the nation, or as Acts confirms he would

"Say none other things than those which the prophets and Moses did say should come."

There was a further reason here for his appealing so much to the Old Testament. Paul had never been at Rome. He was therefore personally a stranger, and it was proper for him to show his regard for the doctrines of the prophets. So, he appeals here so often to the Old Testament; and defends every point he makes by the authority of the Bible.

Reverence for the Old Testament

The particular passages of the Old Testament on which he relied will come before us in the course of the epistle – but we will see reference especially in chapters 3, 4, 9, 10 and 11. In all of this we see automatically: the reverence which Paul showed for the Old Testament. He never undervalued it. He never regarded it as obsolete, or useless or a fiction. He manifestly studied it; and never fell into the impious opinion that the Old Testament is of little value. But one thing that Paul does do with the Old Testament, which must be admitted here and now, is he uses passages to his own devices and not always the way that they were originally intended! Fascinating.

And we will stop here and pick our study up of Romans next week.

Questions/Comments
Prayer