ROMANS. 



403 



leads the way to the discussion in chaps. vi.-viiL, in 

 which the gospel is shown to be the power of God unto 

 salvation, over against sin (chap, vi.), over against the 

 powerless la\y (chap, vii.), and as introducing a new 

 life of the Spirit over against the life of the flesh. The 

 term "flesh," here and in Galatians, is readily shown 

 to be ethical, not merely referring to the physical side 

 of man's nature ; mistakes on this point have led to 

 asceticism and to misapprehensions of Paul's anthro- 

 pology. It is implied, though not directly asserted, 

 that the life in the flesh stands related to Adam, the 

 life in the Spirit to Christ. Human nature as a whole, 

 turned away from God, constitutes the "flesh." The 

 Holy Spirit renews this human nature and it becomes 

 "spirit. " Hence it is sometimes difficult to determine 

 whether Paul refers to the personal Holy Spirit or to 

 the renewed spirit in which the Holy Spirit dwells. 

 This Holy Spirit is given to the justified believer, and 

 thus he triumphs ; nothing can separate him from the 

 love of God. Chaps, ix.-xi. discuss with profound 

 pathos the unbelief of the Jews, and rest the difficult 

 problems on the sovereignty of God in chap. ix. , but 

 in chap. x. on the unbelief of the Jews. The pros- 

 pective solution of the dark mystery is given in chap. 

 xi. ; the triumph of the gospel will yet be universal, 

 ever of grace and by faith. 



The practical exhortations have some reference to 

 special matters, notably the scruples about eating 

 (chaps, xiv.-xv. 13), which divided the Roman 

 believers into "strong" and "weak," the former 

 having no scruples, the latter disposed to judge their 

 freer brethren. The principles here laid down remain 

 of permanent validity. The conclusion of the epistle 

 (xv. 14-xvi.) reverts to the apostle's plans of visiting 

 Rome, and then follow (in chap, xvi.) a number of 

 somewhat detached passages ; greetings and doxolp- 

 gies. It is this chapter that has occasioned the main 

 critical question respecting the Epistle to the Romans. 



4. The integrity of the epistle. The doxology (xyi. 

 2")-i'T) is found at the close of chap. xiv. in one uncial 

 MS. and in many cursives, and in both places in 

 the Alexandrian MS. and a few others. No authorities 

 omit chaps, xv., xvi., though Marcion rejected them. 

 This variation in position, despite Schurcr's assertion, 

 is notsufficient toprnvotliat the doxology is not genuine. 

 The objection of Baur to chap, xv. is of no weight. That 

 Paul wrote chaps, xv. and xvi. is well-nigh certain. But 

 did they form a part of the Epistle to the Romans? 

 Certainly this is by far the most probable view. No 

 serious objection arises from the names occurring in 

 chap. xvi. Priscilla and Aquila travelled a great deal, 

 and the great number of acquaintances in Rome need 

 occasion no surprise. The view that this chapter was a 

 postscript addressed to Ephesus, intended for Phoebe, 

 or as an appendix to a copy of the Roman epistle sent 

 to that city, is plausible, but lacks proof. Bishop 

 Lightfoot thinks a briefer form (without chaps, xv. , 

 xvi.) was sent to other churches, probably by the 

 apostle himself. Other theories have been suggested, 

 but the Roman destination of the entire epistle is in 

 every way most probable, however the phenomena in 

 the Greek text are accounted for. 



II. Tlie Epixtlex of tin- annum Imprisonment. This 

 group consists of four letters : Kphesians, Colossians, 

 Philemon, and 1'hilippians ; three of them undoubt- 

 edly written about the same time, and sent by the 

 game person or persons. 



1. The three epistles, Ephesians, Colossians, and 

 Philemon, have been fully and fairly discussed in the 

 BHITANNICA. The genuineness of all is defended ; 

 the place of writing has been assigned to Rome, not 

 ('.esirea, and the questions of similarity, etc., handled 

 with fulness and candor. The main perplexity grows 

 out of the reference in Col. iv. 16 to " the epistle from 

 Laodieea," and the absence of the phrase "in Ephe- 

 BIIS" from the text of important MSS. in Eph. i. 1. 

 The current opinion now is that the Ephesian letter 

 wiw intended to be circulated in other churches, and 



that this letter is referred to in Col. iv. 1C. But that 

 it was designed for Ephesus first seems on the whole 

 most probable. These epistles give no indication of 

 the previous conflict with Judaizers, and reveal a 

 higher stage of theological thought, dwelling more on 

 Christological and ecclesiastical truths. This would 

 favor the view defended by Bishop Lightfoot, that 

 they belong to .the later period of the Roman imprison- 

 ment (see below), but the views here presented by the 

 apostle do not of themselves prove this. 



2. The Epistle to the Philippians. The occasion, 

 purpose, and contents of this epistle are fairly set forth 

 in the BIUTANNICA, but on two points supplementary 

 statements seem called for. 



(1) The date. Until recently this epistle was regarded 

 as the last one written during the first imprisonment 

 at Rome. But the influence of Bishop Lightfoot has 

 made a change in the opinion of English Biblical 

 scholars. He reverses the order, basing his argument 

 mainly upon the resemblance of Philippians to 

 Romans, and the advanced development in the church 

 implied in the other epistles. On this we may remark, 

 as in the similar question respecting Galatians, that 

 the presence of the same thoughts and language does 

 not establish nearness of date. The Epistle to the 

 Philippians indicates a more fully developed church 

 organization than do the others, and it is this, rather 

 than the development (if it may be so termed) of the 

 apostle's thought, that gives the most positive argu- 

 ment in regard to the time of writing. Bishop Light- 

 foot himself has shown the importance of this epistle 

 for questions of church polity. (See his Dissertation 

 on the Christian Ministry, Commentary on Pltil!ppitinx, 

 pp. 181-209.) In favor of the usual view, despite his 

 exceptions, there may still be urged the following 

 reasons : () the enlarged condition of the Christian 

 community at Rome ; (b) the length of time called for 

 by the various journeys alluded to in the epistle; ; (c) 

 the companions of Paul at the time of writing ; (</) the 

 tone of the epistle, indicating a sense of weariness in 

 captivity, etc. It is impossible to do more than name 

 these reasons, which have been regarded by most schol- 

 ars as convincing. 



(2) The important Christological passage in chap. ii. 

 5-1 1 is deprived of much of its force in the BRITAN- 

 NICA. The meaning is fairly given in the revised 

 version, and most of those who are not prejudiced 

 against the view commonly taken of the Person of 

 Christ will accept the following paraphrase of Light- 

 foot (vers. 6, 7), as fairly explaining the apostle's 

 statement : "Though existing before the worlds in the 

 Fteinal Godhead, yet he did not cling with avidity to 

 the prerogatives of his divine majestv, did not ambi- 

 tiously display his equality with God ; but divested him- 

 self of the glories of heaven, and took upon him the 

 nature of a servant, assuming the likeness of men." 

 This paraphrase of Lightfoot accords with the render- 

 ing (and marginal notes) of the revised version, as can 

 readily be perceived. The question respecting the 

 phrase "emptied himself" (ver. 7) has been very fully 

 discussed, and the phrase has given rise to the terms 

 " Kenosis " and " Kenotists " as applied to certain 

 views of the Incarnation. So far as the statement of 

 ver. 6 is concerned, if we are in doubt as to the apos- 

 tle's view here, we can scarcely trust the results of his- 

 torical exegesis. It is quite unfortunate that the 

 authorized version, by its faulty rendering ("thought 

 it not robbery to be equal unto God "), has made it 

 more difficult to explain the full force of the apostle's 

 argument. The divinity of the pre-incarnate Word is 

 far more fully set forth by the correct rendering: 

 " counted it not a prize to boon an equality with God." 



We may add that the genuineness of this epistle 

 cannot be denied with any good reason. 



The pastoral epistles have already been discussed 

 (see PASTORAL EPISTLES). The present article has 

 been made to cover only those epistles and questions 

 thct seemed to require supplementary remark. 



