Romans 16

Romans 16:1-2

1, 2. In all probability Phœbe was the bearer of the Epistle, as stated in the (rec.) subscription.

διάκονον] Deaconess. See 1 Timothy 3:11, note. Pliny in his celebrated letter to Trajan says, “necessarium credidi, ex duabus ancillis quæ ministræ dicebantur, quid esset veri et per tormenta quærere.” A minute discussion of their office, &c., in later times may be found in Suicer, Thesaurus, sub voce; and in Bingham, book ii. chap. 22, § 8. Neander, Pfl. u. Leit., ed. 4, pp. 265–267, shews that the deaconesses must not be confounded with the χῆραι of 1 Timothy 5:3-16, as has sometimes been done.

KENCHRֶֻ, the port of Corinth (τῶνΚορινθίωνἐπίνειον, Philo in Flacc. § 19, vol. ii., p. 539: κώμητιςτῆςΚορίνθουμεγίστη, Theodoret, h. l.) on the Saronic gulf of the Ægean, for commerce with the east (Acts 18:18): seventy stadia from Corinth, Strabo viii. 380. Pausan. ii. 2, 3. Livy xxxii. 17. Plin. iv. 4. The Apostolical Constitutions (vii. 46, p. 1053, Migne) make the first bishop of the Cenchrean church to have been Lucius, consecrated by Paul himself (Winer, Realw.). The western port, on the Sinus Corinthiacus, was Leche (Paus.), Lecheæ (Plin.), or Lecheum (Strab., Ptol.).

Romans 16:2

2. ἐνκυρίῳ, in a Christian manner,—as mindful of your common Lord: ἀξίωςτ. ἁγίων, ‘in a manner worthy of saints;’ i.e. ‘as saints ought to do,’—refers to προσδέξησθε, and therefore to their conduct to her;—not, ‘as saints ought to be received.’

παραστῆτε] Her business at Rome may have been such as to require the help of those resident there.

προστάτιςπολλῶν] This may refer to a part of the deaconess’s office, the attending on the poor and sick of her own sex.

κ. ἐμοῦαὐτοῦ] when and where, we know not. It is not improbable that she may have been, like Lydia, one whose heart the Lord opened at the first preaching of Paul, and whose house was his lodging.

Romans 16:3-4

3, 4. The form Prisca is also found 2 Timothy 4:19. On Prisca and Aquila see note, Acts 18:2. They must have returned to Rome from Ephesus since the sending of 1 Cor.:—see 1 Corinthians 16:19; and we find them again at Ephesus (?), 2 Timothy 4:19.

Their endangering of their lives for Paul may have taken place at Corinth (Acts 18:6 ff.) or at Ephesus (Acts 19). See Neander, Pfl. u. Leit., p. 441. “ὑποτιθέναι est pignori opponere. Demosth. in Aphobum: ἀπέτισατὴνλειτουργίαν, ὑποθεὶςτὴνοἰκίανκαὶτἀμαυτοῦπάντα. Æschines: ὑπέθησαναὐτῷτοῦταλάντουτὰςδημοσίαςπροσόδους.” Wetst.

The ‘churches of the Gentiles’ had reason to be thankful to them, for having rescued the Apostle of the Gentiles from danger.

It seems to have been the practice of Aquila and Priscilla (ref. 1 Cor.) and some other Christians (reff. Col., Philem.) to hold assemblies for worship in their houses, which were saluted, and sent salutations as one body in the Lord. Some light is thrown on the expression by the following passage from the Acta Martyrii S. Justini, in Ruinart, cited by Neander, Church Hist. i. 330, Rose’s trans. “The answer of Justin Martyr to the question of the prefect (Rusticus) ‘Where do you assemble?’ exactly corresponds to the genuine Christian spirit on this point. The answer was; ‘Where each one can and will. You believe, no doubt, that we all meet together in one place; but it is not so, for the God of the Christians is not shut up in a room, but, being invisible, He fills both heaven and earth, and is honoured every where by the faithful.’ Justin adds, that when he came to Rome, he was accustomed to dwell in one particular spot, and that those Christians who were instructed by him, and wished to hear his discourse, assembled at his house. (This assembly would accordingly be ἡκατʼ οἶκοντοῦἸουστίνουἐκκλησία.) He had not visited any other congregations of the Church.”

Romans 16:5

5. Epænetus is not elsewhere named.

ἀπαρχή, the same metaphor being in the Apostle’s mind as in ch. Romans 15:16,—the first believer.

On Ἀσίας see var. readd.

εἰςχρ., elliptical: the full construction would be τῆςπροσφορᾶςεἰςχρ.

Romans 16:6

6. None of the names occurring from Romans 16:5-15 are mentioned elsewhere (except possibly Rufus: see below).

De Wette remarks, that, notwithstanding the manuscript authority, εἰςἡμᾶς is perhaps the more likely reading, (1) because the Apostle would hardly mention a service done to themselves as a ground of salutation from him, and (2) because κοπιᾷν without being expressly followed by λόγῳ (1 Timothy 5:17; see Philippians 2:16; Colossians 1:29), said of women, most likely implies acts of kindness peculiar to the sex.

Romans 16:7

7. Ἰουνιᾶν may be fem. (Ἰουνίαν), from Ἰουνία (Junia), in which case she is probably the wife of Andronicus,—or masc., from Ἰουνιᾶς (Junianus, contr. Junias). It is uncertain also whether συγγενεῖς means fellow-countrymen, or relations. Aquila and Priscilla were Jews: so would Maria be, and probably Epænetus, being an early believer. If so, the word may have its strict meaning of ‘relations.’ But it seems to occur Romans 16:11; Romans 16:21 in a wider sense.

συναιχμ.] When and where, uncertain.

ἐπίσημοιἐντ. ἀποστ.] Two renderings are given: (1) ‘of note among the Apostles,’ so that they themselves are counted among the Apostles: thus the Greek ff. (τὸἀποστόλουςεἶναι, μέγατὸδὲκαὶἐντούτοιςἐπισήμουςεἶναι, ἐννόησονἡλίκονἐγκώμιον, Chrys.), Calv., Est., Wolf, Thol., Kölln., Olsh., al.: or (2) ‘noted among the Apostles,’ i.e. well known and spoken of by the Apostles. Thus Beza, Grot., Koppe, Reiche, Meyer, Fritz., De W.

But, as Thol. remarks, had this latter been the meaning, we should have expected some expression like διὰπασῶντῶνἐκκλησιῶν (2 Corinthians 8:18). I may besides remark, that for Paul to speak of any persons as celebrated among the Apostles in sense (2), would imply that he had more frequent intercourse with the other Apostles, than we know that he had; and would besides be improbable on any supposition. The whole question seems to have sprung up in modern times from the idea that οἱἀπόστολοι must mean the Twelve only. If the wider sense found in Acts 14:4; Acts 14:14; 2 Corinthians 8:23; 1 Thessalonians 2:6 (compare Romans 1:1) be taken, there need be no doubt concerning the meaning.

οἳκαὶ …] refers to Andr[125] and Jun., not to the Apostles. In the use of γέγοναν, there is a mixed construction—“who have been longer than me,” and “who were before me.”

[125] Andreas of Crete, 635

Romans 16:8

8 ff.] Ampliatus = Amplias: see v. r.

ἀγ. ἐνκυρ. beloved in the bonds of Christian fellowship.

συνεργ. ἐνχρ., fellow-workman in (the work of) Christ.

Origen and others have confounded Apelles with the well-known Apollos, but apparently without reason. Cf. Hor. Sat. i. 5. 100.

δόκιμ. ἐνχρ., approved (by trial) in (the work of) Christ. It does not follow that either Aristobulus or Narcissus were themselves Christians. Only those of their familiœ (τοὺςἐκτῶν) are here saluted who were ἐνκυρίῳ: for we must understand this also after Ἀριστοβούλου.

συγγ., see above. Grot., Neander, al., have taken Narcissus for the well-known freedman of Claudius. But this can hardly be, for he was executed (Tac. Ann. xiii. 1) in the very beginning of Nero’s reign, i.e. cir. 55 A.D., whereas (see Prolegg. § iv. 4, and Chronol. Table) this Epistle cannot have well been written before 58 A.D. Perhaps, as Winer (Realw.) suggests, the family of this Narcissus may have continued to be thus known after his death (?).

Romans 16:13

13. Rufus may have been the son of Simon of Cyrene, mentioned Mark 15:21; but the name was very common.

ἐκλεκτόν—not to be softened, as De W., al., to merely ‘eximium,’ a sense unknown to our Apostle;—elect, i.e. one of the elect of the Lord.

καὶἐμοῦ the Apostle adds from affectionate regard towards the mother of Rufus: ‘my mother,’ in my reverence and affection for her. Jowett compares our Lord’s words to St. John, John 19:27.

Romans 16:14

14. These Christians of whom we have only the names, seem to be persons of less repute than the former. Hermas (= Hermodorus, Grot.) is thought by Origen (in loc. “Puto, quod Hermas iste sit scriptor libelli istius qui Pastor appellatur”), Eus[126] H. E. iii. 3, and Jerome, Catal. script, eccl., c. x., vol. ii., p. 846, to be the author of the ‘Shepherd.’ But this latter is generally supposed to have been the brother of Pius, bishop of Rome, about 150 A.D.

[126] Eusebius, Bp. of Cæsarea, 315–320

The σὺναὐτοῖςἀδελφοί of Romans 16:14, and σὺναὐτοῖςπάντεςἅγιοι of Romans 16:15, have been taken by De W. and Reiche to point to some separate associations of Christians, perhaps (De W.) assemblies as in Romans 16:5; or (Reiche) unions for missionary purposes.

Romans 16:16

16. The meaning of this injunction seems to be, that the Roman Christians should take occasion, on the receipt of the Apostle’s greetings to them, to testify their mutual love, in this, the ordinary method of salutation, but having among Christians a Christian and holy meaning, see reff. It became soon a custom in the churches at the celebration of the Lord’s Supper. See Suicer under ἀσπασμός and φίλημα, and Bingham, xv. 3.3.

ἀσπάζ. ὑμ. αἱἐκκλ. π.] This assurance is stated evidently on the Apostle’s authority, speaking for the churches; not implying as Bengel, “quibuscum fui, c. xv. 26. His significarat, se Romam scribere,” but vouching for the brotherly regard in which the Roman church was held by all churches of Christ. The above misunderstanding has led to the exclusion of πᾶσαι.

Romans 16:17

17. σκοπεῖν = βλέπειν, Philippians 3:2.

The διδαχή here spoken of is probably rather ethical than doctrinal; compare Ephesians 4:20-24.

Romans 16:18

18. χρηστολογία, κολακεία, Theophyl. Wetstein cites from Julius Capitolinus, in Pertinace, 13, “omnes, qui libere conferebant, male Pertinacem loquebantur, chrestologum eum appellantes, qui bene loqueretur et male faceret.”

εὐλογίας, fairness of speech: so Plato, Rep. iii. 400 D, εὐλογίαἄρακ. εὐαρμοστίακ. εὐσχημοσύνηκ. εὐρυθμίαεὐηθείᾳἀκολουθεῖ—or perhaps ‘eulogies’ (flatteries), as Pind. Nem. Romans 4:8, οὐδὲθερμὸνὕδωρτόσον | γεμαλθακὰτεύχει | γυῖα, τόσσονεὐλογίαφόρ | μιγγισυνάορος.

Romans 16:19

19. See ch. Romans 1:8. Their obedience being matter of universal notoriety, is the ground of his confidence that they will comply with his entreaty, Romans 16:17.

Some slight reproof is conveyed in χαίρω, θέλωδὲκ.τ.λ. They were well known for obedience, but had not been perhaps cautious enough with regard to these designing persons and their pretended wisdom. See Matthew 10:16, of which words of our Lord there seems to be here a reminiscence.

Romans 16:20

20. ἐπειδὴγὰρεἶπετοὺςτὰςδιχοστασίαςκ. τὰσκάνδαλαποιοῦντας, εἶπενεἰρήνηςθεόν, ἵναθαρσήσωσιπερὶτῆςτούτωνἀπαλλαγῆς. Chrys. Hom. xxxii. p. 755: and so most Commentators. De W. prefers taking ὁθ. τῆςεἰρ. more generally as ‘the God of salvation;’ and the usage of the expression (see reff.) seems to favour this.

συντρ. τ. σατ. is a similitude from Genesis 3:15.

συντρίψει, not as Stuart, ‘for optative,’ nor does it express any wish, but a prophetic assurance and encouragement in bearing up against all adversaries, that it would not be long before the great Adversary himself would be bruised under their feet.

ἡχάριςκ.τ.λ.] It appears as if the Epistle was intended to conclude with this usual benediction, but the Apostle found occasion to add more. This he does also in other Epistles: see 1 Corinthians 16:23-24; similarly Philippians 4:20, and Philippians 4:21-23 after the doxology,—2 Thessalonians 3:16-18:—1 Timothy 6:16-17 ff.:—2 Timothy 4:18-19 ff.

Romans 16:21

21. Lucius must not be mistaken for Lucas (= Lucanus),—but was probably Lucius of Cyrene, Acts 13:1, see note there.

Jason may be the same who is mentioned Acts 17:5; Acts 17:7, as the host of Paul and Silas at Thessalonica.

A ‘Sopater (son) of Pyrrhus of Berœa’ occurs Acts 20:4, but it is quite uncertain whether this Sosipater is the same person.

οἱσυγγενεῖς, see above, Romans 16:7. These persons may have been Jews; but we cannot tell whether the expression may not be used in a wider sense.

Romans 16:22

22. There is nothing strange (as Olsh. supposes) in this salutation being inserted in the first person. It would be natural enough that Tertius the amanuensis, inserting ἀσπάζεταιὑμ. Τέρτ. ὁγρ. τ. ἐπ. ἐνκυρ., should change the form into the first person, and afterwards proceed from the dictation of the Apostle as before. Beza and Grot. suppose him to have done this on transcribing the Epistle. Thol. notices this irregularity as a corroboration of the genuineness of the chapter. On the supposed identity of Tertius with Silas see note on Acts 15:22.

Romans 16:23

23. Gaius is mentioned 1 Corinthians 1:14, as having been baptized by Paul. The host of the whole church probably implies that the assemblies of the church were held in his house:—or perhaps, that his hospitality to Christians was universal. Erastus, holding this office (οἰκονόμος, the public treasurer, ὁἐπὶτῆςδημοσίαςτραπέζης, arcarius, Wetst., who quotes from inscriptions, ΝείλῳοἰκονόμῳἈσίας,—Secundus, arkarius Reip. Armerinorum), can hardly have been the same who was with the Apostle in Ephesus, Acts 19:22. It is more probable that the Erastus of 2 Timothy 4:20 is identical with this than with that other.

ὁἀδελφός, our brother [see 1 Corinthians 1:1],—the generic singular; one among οἱἀδελφοί, ‘the brethren.’ The rest have been specified by their services or offices.

[24. The benediction repeated; see above on Romans 16:20. The omission (see var. read.) has perhaps been by the caprice of the copyists.]

Romans 16:25

25. κατά, in reference to, i.e. ‘in subordination to,’ and according to the requirements of.

κήρυγμαἸησοῦχρ. can hardly mean, as De W. and Meyer, ‘the preaching which Jesus Christ hath accomplished by me’ (ch. Romans 15:18),—nor again as Chrys., ὃαὐτὸςἐκήρυξεν,—but the preaching of Christ, i.e. making known of Christ, as the verb is used 1 Corinthians 1:23; 1 Corinthians 15:12 al. fr. So Calv., and most Commentators.

κατὰἀποκ.] This second κατά is best taken, not as co-ordinate to the former one, and following στηρίξαι, nor as belonging to δυναμένῳ, which would be an unusual limitation of the divine Power,—but as subordinate to κήρυγμα,—the preaching of Jesus Christ according to, &c. The omission of τό before κατὰἀποκ. is no objection to this.

μυστ.] The mystery (see ch. Romans 11:25, note) of the gospel is often said to have been thus hidden from eternity in the counsels of God—see Ephesians 3:9; Colossians 1:26; 2 Timothy 1:9; Titus 1:2; 1 Peter 1:20; Revelation 13:8.

Romans 16:26

26. See ch. Romans 1:2. The prophetic writings were the storehouse out of which the preachers of the gospel took their demonstrations that Jesus was the Christ: see Acts 18:28;—more especially, it is true, to the Jews, who however are here included among πάντατὰἔθνη.

κατʼ ἐπιταγ. may refer either to the prophetic writings being drawn up by the command of God,—or to the manifestation of the mystery by the preachers of the gospel thus taking place. The latter seems best to suit the sense. αἰωνίου refers back to χρ. αἰωνίοις [the word should have been kept scrupulously the same in English, not as here and in Matthew 22:46 rendered by two different English terms].

The first εἰς indicates the aim—in order to their becoming obedient to the faith:—the second, the local extent of the manifestation.

Romans 16:27

27. διὰἸης. χρ. must by the requirements of the construction be applied to μόνῳσοφῷθεῷ, and not (as Aug[127] [and E. V.]) to δόξα, from which it is separated by the relative ᾧ. The quantity of intervening matter, especially the datives μόνῳσοφῷθεῷ, prevent it from being referred (as Œc[128], Theophyl.) to στηρίξαι. It must then be rendered to the only wise God through Jesus Christ, i.e. Him who is revealed to us by Christ as such.

[127] Augustine, Bp. of Hippo, 395–430

[128] Œcumenius of Tricca in Thrace, Centy. XI.?

On the construction of ᾧ see above. It cannot without great harshness be referred to Christ, seeing that the words μόνῳσοφῷθεῷ resume the chief subject of the sentence, and to them the relative must apply.