The Cradle, the Cross, and the Crown (126 page)

The gospel also identifies Jesus Christ as “our Lord” (1:4). Although the title “Lord” can function as a title of authority or a title of deity depending on its context, abundant evidence in this letter demonstrates that “Lord” is used of Jesus in Romans as a title of deity. This is clearest in 10:9—13 where Paul articulated the “message of faith” (10:8). Paul
argued that “if you confess with your mouth, ‘Jesus is Lord,’…you will be saved.” Paul confirmed this with a quotation of Joel 2:32: “Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.” Paul derived his statement in 10:9 from this OT text that he quoted in 10:13, and there is a close correlation between the two statements. Confessing with the mouth “Jesus is Lord” parallels calling on the name of the Lord, and “will be saved” exactly matches “will be saved.” In the OT context, “LORD”
(kyrios)
is the Greek translation of the Hebrew name Yahweh and unambiguously refers to the God of Israel. Paul's application of this OT text to clarify and confirm the necessity of confessing “Jesus is Lord” demonstrates that “Lord” functions in Christian confession as the name of the God of the OT. Thus, the gospel insists that Jesus is Yahweh, God in human flesh.
¹¹⁶
This insistence on Jesus’ deity also surfaces in 9:5 where the Messiah is described as the one “who is God over all.”
¹¹⁷

Moreover, Paul argued in 10:6 that the righteousness that comes by faith says: “Do not say in your heart, ‘Who will go up to heaven?’ that is, to bring Christ down.” Those made righteous by faith affirm Christ's heavenly origin and the fact that he has “come down” to live among sinners through the incarnation.
¹¹⁸
The righteousness that comes by faith does not ask, “Who will go down to the abyss?” to bring Christ up from the dead. Thus it not only affirms his heavenly origin and incarnation but also his bodily resurrection. The confession related to righteousness that comes by faith in 10:6—7 closely parallels the confession of Jesus as “Lord” and the affirmation of his resurrection in 10:9.

The faith required for justification in Romans is a faith in which sinners believe in Jesus’ identity as the Messiah, the Savior whose sacrificial death secures the believer's acquittal, and the eternal and almighty God. Such faith acknowledges both that Jesus died a sacrificial death and that he rose from the dead. Only this Christ-centered faith is sufficient for the gracious acquittal of the sinner.

The Death and Resurrection of Jesus Are the Bases for the Believer's Justification
Paul wrote that believers “are justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus” (3:24). The term “redemption” normally referred to a payment of a ransom that liberated a prisoner of war, a slave, or a condemned criminal. Since “justified” is a forensic term drawn from the legal proceedings of the courtroom, one would expect the noun “redemption” in this context to bear the nuance of the liberation of a condemned
criminal, rather than that of a prisoner of war or slave. This interpretation is supported by Paul's equation of redemption and the “forgiveness of sins” in the Prison Epistles (Eph 1:7 NIV; Col 1:14).

Although the noun “redemption” may refer to liberation without reference to the payment of a ransom, based on usage in the Septuagint, Josephus, and Philo, allusion to a ransom is expected here.
¹¹⁹
Moreover, in Eph 1:7 Paul described “redemption” as being accomplished “through his blood,” which identifies Jesus’ death as the ransom price. Paul's claim that believers were “bought at a price” (1 Cor 6:20; 7:23) likewise demonstrates that redemption, for Paul, involved the payment of a ransom.
¹²⁰
Although the word translated “redeem” in Gal 3:13—14 is not the same as the one used here, Paul's discussion there confirms that he could speak of redemption as a deliverance from the penalty of sin accomplished through the sufferings and sacrificial death of Jesus. Thus, justification is accomplished by God through the sacrificial death of Christ.

This is confirmed by Rom 3:25. Although many translations treat verse 25 as a separate sentence detached from verse 24, the verse begins with a relative pronoun that closely connects the two verses. The verse describes Jesus Christ “whom God presented as a propitiation through faith in his blood” (author's translation). The word “propitiation”
(hilastērion)
was used in the LXX to refer to the “mercy seat,” the cover of the ark of the covenant on which sacrificial blood was poured on the Day of Atonement in order to avert the wrath of God and to secure atonement for sins committed during that year. Several clues in the immediate context suggest that Paul intended for this term to evoke the imagery of the OT sacrificial system. First, the phrase “in his blood” compares the blood that Jesus shed during his sufferings and death to the blood poured out on the mercy seat. Jesus’ blood is mentioned, not as the object of faith but as the means through which God accomplished propitiation. Second, Paul saw this propitiation as necessary for satisfying the demands of God's justice. The argument of verse 26 is that God's justice or righteousness would be compromised if he leniently passed over sin and declared the sinner righteous apart from a substitutionary sacrifice. Only by means of the cross can the heavenly judge be just and justify believing sinners. Third, Paul's discussion of the just wrath of God that began in 1:18 highlights the need for a means to appease divine wrath.
¹²¹
Consequently, Paul not only presented Jesus’ death as a ransom that rescued condemned criminals from their deserved sentence, he also portrayed Jesus’ death as an atoning sacrifice that satisfied the justice of God so that believing sinners may be declared righteous and escape the wrath that their sins incited.

At the conclusion of his discussion of justification, Paul described Jesus as the one who “was delivered up for our trespasses” (Rom 4:25), a description that echoes Isa 53:12 (LXX). The verb “delivered up” often functioned as a technical term referring to placing someone in the custody of law enforcement officials or the court for imprisonment, trial, sentencing, and punishment.
¹²²
The idea is that Jesus was handed over to the judge in order to suffer the penalty for the believer's trespasses. It is on these grounds that the judge may pronounce the verdict that the sinner is “not guilty.” Divine justice has been fully satisfied through the substitutionary suffering of God's Son.

CONTRIBUTION TO THE CANON

• The gospel—promised through the prophets and preached by Paul (1:1—4,16—17; see Hab 2:4)
  
• Righteousness and justification by faith apart from works of the law (1:17; 3:21-5:2; see esp. 4:3,9,22-23, citing Gen 15:6)
  
• Promotion of Jew-Gentile unity on the basis of the universality of sin (1:18—3:20; 3:23); the free gift of salvation through Jesus Christ (6:23); and God's all-encompassing plan of salvation (chaps. 9—11)
  
• The impossibility of keeping the law and new life in the Spirit (chaps. 6—8)
  
• God's salvation-historical plan for Jews and Gentiles past, present, and future (chaps. 9-11)
  

STUDY QUESTIONS

1. Why is Paul's authorship of Romans so certain among scholars?
   
2. Why are Paul's travel plans so important in dating the book of Romans?
   
3. What considerations point to a likely Corinthian provenance for Romans?
   
4. What was the occasion for Paul's letter to the Romans?
   
5. Why did Paul write Romans?
   
6. On what major divisions of Romans do most scholars agree?
   
7. When Paul says in Romans 3:23 that “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,” whom does he have in mind when referring to “all”?
   
8. What are the rhetorical questions that Paul posed in Romans 6—7, and what was his succinct answer to each?
   
9. What are the possible interpretations of Romans 7?
   
10. What role does the “therefore” play in Romans 12:1?
    
11. How are individuals viewed as righteous by God in Romans?
    
12. What support is given by the authors for the following statement: “The righteousness of God is a gift which God imputes to the sinner who believes in Christ”?
    

FOR FURTHER STUDY

Bruce, F. F.
The Letter of Paul to the Romans: An Introduction and Commentary.
Tyndale New Testament Commentaries. Rev. ed. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1985.

Cranfield, C. E. B.
A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans.
International Critical Commentary. 2 vols. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1975-79.

Donfried, K. P., ed.
The Romans Debate.
Rev. and exp. ed. Peabody: Hendrickson, 1991.

Dunn, J. D. G.
Romans.
Word Biblical Commentary 38A-B. 2 vols. Dallas: Word, 1988.

Fitzmyer, J.
Romans: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary.
Anchor Bible. Garden City: Doubleday, 1993.

Gamble, H.
The Textual History of the Letter to the Romans: A Study in Textual and Literary Criticism.
Studies and Documents. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1977.

Harrison, E. F., and D. A. Hagner. “Romans.” Pages 19—237 in
The Expositor's Bible Commentary.
Rev. ed. Vol. 11:
Romans
—
Galatians.
Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2008.

Käsemann, E.
Commentary on Romans.
Translated by G. Bromiley. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980.

Moo, D. J.
Encountering the Book of Romans: A Theological Survey.
Encountering Biblical Studies. Grand Rapids: Baker, 2002.

____________.
The Epistle to the Romans.
The New International Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996.

Morris, L.
The Epistle to the Romans.
Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988.

Sanday, W., and A. C. Headlam.
A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans.
International Critical Commentary. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1922.

Schlatter, A.
Romans: The Righteousness of God.
Translated by S. Schatzmann. Peabody: Hendrickson, 1995.

Schreiner, T. R.
Romans.
Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1998.

Stuhlmacher, P.
Paul's Letter to the Romans: A Commentary.
Translated by S. J. Hafemann. Louisville: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1994.

Wright, N. T. “The Letter to the Romans.” Pages 393-770 in
The New Interpreter's Bible.
Vol. 10. Nashville: Abingdon, 2002.

¹
Augustine,
Confessions
, 8.29.

²
F. F. Bruce,
The Letter of Paul to the Romans: Introduction and Commentary
, rev. ed., TNTC (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1985), 56.

³
M. Luther,
Luther's Works
, ed. J. Pelikan and H. Lehman (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1958-86), 34:336-37.

⁴
Quoted in D. J. Moo,
The Epistle to the Romans
, NICNT (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996), 1.

⁵
Bruce,
Romans
, 58.

⁶
C. Hodge,
Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans
(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1976), 9.

⁷
C. E. B. Cranfield,
Introduction and Commentary on Romans I-VIII
, in
A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans
, ICC (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1975), 1. J. Fitzmyer (
Romans: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary
, AB [Garden City: Doubleday, 1993], 40—42) also mentioned W. C van Manen and G. Schlaeger as among scholars of the late nineteenth and early twentieth century who challenged Paul's authorship of Romans.

⁸
C. H. Dodd,
The Epistle ofPaulto the Romans
(London: Fontana Books, 1959; repr. of 1932 edition), 9.

⁹
Fitzmyer,
Romans
, 40.

¹⁰
O. Roller,
Das Formular der paulinischen Briefe: Ein Beitrag zur Lehre vom antiken Briefe
(Stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1933), 14-23, 295-300.

¹¹
Fitzmyer,
Romans
, 41.

¹²
Ibid., 42; J. H. Michel, “A Phenomenon in the Text of Romans,”
JTS
39 (1938): 150-54.

¹³
E. R. Richards,
Paul and First-Century Letter Writing: Secretaries, Composition and Collection
(Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 2004), 59-93, esp. 92-93.

¹⁴
W. Schmithals,
Der Römerhrief: Ein Kommentar
(Gütersloh: G. Mohn, 1988); J. Kinoshita, “Romans—Two Writings Combined: A New Interpretation of the Body of Romans,”
NovT 7
(1965): 258—77; J. C. O'Neill,
Paul's Letter to the Romans
(Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1975).

¹⁵
R. B. Hays, “Adam, Israel, Christ—the Question of Covenant in the Theology of Romans: A Response to Leander E. Keck and N. T. Wright,” in
Romans
, vol. 3 of
Pauline Theology
, ed. D. M. Hay and E. E. Johnson (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1995), 76.

¹⁶
H. Gamble,
The Textual History of the Letter to the Romans: A Study in Textual and Literary Criticism
, Studies and Documents (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1977),

¹⁷
K. Lake, “Shorter Form of St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans,”
ExpTim
7 (1910): 504-25; J. Knox, “A Note on the Text of Romans,”
NTS 2
(1955-56): 191-93.

¹⁸
T. W. Manson, “St. Paul's Letter to the Romans—and Others,” in
The Romans Debate
, ed. K. P. Donfried (Peabody: Hendrickson, 1991), 3-15.

¹⁹
Gamble,
Textual History
, 96—123.

²⁰
Ibid., 57-95.

²¹
Fitzmyer,
Romans
, 60.

²²
F. J. A. Hort, “On the End of the Epistle to the Romans,” in
Biblical Essays
, J. B. Lightfoot, repr. 1871 (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1979), 321—51; M.-J. Lagrange, “La Vulgate latine de l'épître aux Romains et le texte grec,”
RevBib
13 (1916): 225-39.

²³
C. W. Emmet, “Romans XV and XVI: A New Theory,”
ExpTim
8 (1916): 275-88; H. J. Frede,
Altlateinische Paulus-Handschriften
, Vetus Latina: Die Reste der Altlateinischen Bibel (Freiburg im Breisgau: Herder, 1964), 152—58.