14-Introductory Verses. (1:1-17)

Introductory Verses. (1:1-17) The great Epistle opens with a sentence of what one might call ‘Ephesian’ complexity. This I do not propose to render. I would merely like to observe that the mention of the ‘Prophets’ and of ‘Holy Scriptures’ in v. 2; together with the reference to Christ’s ‘Davidic’ descent, in the verse that follows; make the modern reader think of a Jewish-Christian community, in the main, as the body addressed. Further I would like to suggest that the antecedent of the ‘ἐν οἷς,’ at the opening of v. 6, is to be looked for in the phrase εἰς ὑπακοὴν πίστεως, and not in the πᾶσι τοῖς ἔθνεσιν. Here was the meeting point of all Christians whatsoever, Jews and Gentiles: they had all ‘heard and believed.’ And, if it should be noticed, that St Paul here claims a mission to Jew as well as to Gentile-as, for my part, I believe he does; for I don’t believe the ἐλάβομεν covers more than just himself; whereas in other places, notably in 11:13 of this Epistle, he lays stress on his ‘Gentile’ apostolate-the natural answer is, that wherever he went and preached, he always addressed himself to his fellow countrymen first. The fact is, his Gentile mission did not exclude the faithful following of Christ’s precept ‘Israel first’ wherever occasion arose, in an unevangelised district. Even at Rome itself the Apostle at once established relations with the Jewish leaders, and earnestly spoke to them of Israel’s hope. For why? They were out of touch with all Christian influences-altogether beyond the reach of the members of the small and obscure community, which (all unknown to them) had arisen in the ranks of their Roman co-religionists. In v. 7 πᾶσι τοῖς οὖσιν may be taken to refer to a body, which has in it more elements than one. If Jews predominate, there are Gentile ‘brethren’ too. The next paragraph (vv. 8-16) tells us a good many things of considerable interest. The first verse, with its thanksgiving for the world-wide proclamation of their faith, would seem to have in it something of loving exaggeration. But at least it does contain a striking testimony to ‘Roman’ orthodoxy. Whether the Church were large or small, it was certainly sound and loyal. The next two verses set forth the attitude of the writer to this distant, unvisited Church. He prays for them ‘unceasingly,’ and especially for this, that “at last” (ἤδη ποτὲ), by the Will of God, a way may be found for him to come to them. Rome had been for many a year the goal of his ambitions. But he does not say so here. It is not Rome that he is thinking of; it is the Church at Rome. It is to them his heart goes out Doubtless he would have loved to have been allowed to have brought the Gospel to the capital; as he had taken it already to Ephesus and to Corinth. In this he had been forestalled, probably by years and years. Yet even so it was not wholly beyond his power to help the growing Church: for it had never been privileged to welcome an ‘Apostle.’ Still he mentions the possibility with characteristic caution. “I long (he cries) to see you”-observe, he does not claim that this ‘longing’ is a matter of years: the ἤδη ποτὲ refers to the old long-cherished ambition to visit Rome: the desire to visit them is altogether a later bore longing-“to the end I may impart to you some spiritual endowment, for your confirming.” So far the words imply that he will be the giver and they the recipients. A natural Christian humility, coupled with a reasonable desire to conciliate a body, which (maybe) had never heard of him and certainly did not know him as he was known in Galatia and Macedonia, in Greece and in ‘Asia,’ leads him to qualify this very decisive statement. The ‘giving’ is not to be all on one side. He, in the plenitude of Apostolic endowment, can help them, as none other, not being an Apostle. But they can help him too, in a very human way, by the sympathy and encouragement that spring from a common faith. Moreover he cannot conceal (whatever may be the requirements of Christian courtesy and even of Christian prudence) his very eager desire to help forward the Church at Rome, not only in the direction of strengthening its members, but also by the gathering in of large numbers of new converts. For that is his foremost duty and therein lies his special capacity.

1:13-17. “I want you to know, my brothers, that often I have purposed to come to you (though up till now without success) that I might get some fruit amongst you too” (that is, I presume, in Rome) “as I have amongst other nations”-we are not called upon to emphasise the definite article before ‘other nations.’ At this point the whole eagerness of his missionary heart flashes forth:

“To Greeks and to non-Greeks-to educated and uneducated, I have a duty.”

“So, as far as lies with me, I am eager to preach the Gospel to you too, that are in Rome.”

“Oh! I am not ashamed of the Gospel. It is a power of God, issuing in ‘salvation,’ for everyone that believes; for Jew first, but for Gentile too.”

“In it there is revealed a God-appointed ‘righteousness,’ springing from faith and leading to faith-as it stands written, The righteous shall live by faith.”^{1 [Note: (Habakkuk 2:4.)]}

It is characteristic of the Pauline method that in this short passage we should have the word ‘Greek’ employed in two different senses. In v. 16, as in ‘Acts’ not infrequently, it probably means ‘non-Jew’-a singular tribute to the range of Greek speech and Greek habit, from Rome to the Euphrates. The βαρβάροις of v. 14 makes it equally certain that it is the ‘Greek,’ in a narrower sense, who is there in view, the ‘Greek’ of Hellenic culture, if not of Hellenic birth. The σοφοῖς τε καὶ ἀνοήτοις (for the two phrases appear identical) seems to imply that he is thinking, not so much of Hellenic blood, as of Hellenic modes of thought and Hellenic civilisation. On the other hand, it is arguable that the words are used (in v. 14) in their strict and classical sense. Then the whole double phrase would mean, “I have a duty to discharge for men of every race, whether learned or unlearned.” It is the same spirit which in a later age possessed the soul of John Wesley. All races, all sorts and conditions of men, have a claim on the Apostle’s great heart. He has room for the people of Rome as well as for all the rest. In his eagerness to say it, he wholly disregards the niceties of grammar. Τὸ κατʼ ἐμὲ πρόθυμον undeniably presents a very awkward brachylogy. It would appear to mean, “I, to the best of my powers, am ready.” In v. 16 we must note a curious indication of the pain which was caused St Paul by the incessant and ruthless attacks of those who called him ‘renegade.’ “I am not ashamed” he cries. Why should he speak of ‘shame’? Plainly, because he was ever being held up to Jewish opprobrium. However loyal his heart might be to his Lord and Master, he could not escape the anguish which came from those ceaseless attacks. There was only one cure for it, to make up his brave heart to ‘glory’ in his ‘shame.’ This he does in Galatians; and this he does also here. In the latter part of the verse, though the construction of the words is not after the classical model, δύναμις Θεοῦ εἰς σωτηρίαν should be regarded as one compound expression. It means a power heaven sent, heaven ordained, issuing in σωτηρία. Whether σωτηρία should be taken in a strictly theological sense, or in the broader sense of ‘wealth,’ ‘well-being’ (as frequently in the κοινή), it is difficult to say. There is a certain attractiveness in the meaning ‘eternal weal,’ in this particular connexion. On the other hand v. 17 rather points to the stricter sense, and possibly even more so v. 18. The πρῶτον is eminently puzzling. The Jew has a right of priority, but otherwise no pre-eminence, in regard to the Gospel message. Therefore it would appear that the meaning must be temporal. But it cannot be maintained that it is phrased in-a natural way, if it means what I have set down above in paraphrase.

“A righteousness of God” must (I think) be technical. Plainly, from the words that follow, this ‘righteousness’ is a thing God appoints and man enjoys. We have nothing here to do with the ‘righteousness,’ which is God’s. For this ‘righteousness’ rests on ‘faith.’ We must then assume that it means a way of attaining God’s favour, of ‘standing well’ with Him. The prepositional phrases coupled with it, much as εἰς σωτηρίαν above, are very loosely attached. ‘Such as rests on faith, leads to faith’ would seem to be their meaning. The former statement one would expect: for ‘faith’ and δικαιοσύνη are normally coupled together, as cause and effect. But what are we to say about the “εἰς πίστιν”? The words appear to be linked with the foregoing ἐκ πίστεως, which is essential to the argument, by way of heightening and emphasis. Faith is first and faith is last, and faith is everywhere, as a means to “δικαιοσύνη”. The quotation from Habakkuk is found also in Galatians 3:11. It is employed there as an argument to establish the impossibility of attaining to God’s favour by the aid of ‘Law.’ What I would wish to say about it has been said in that connexion.