THE

§ 1. AUTHORSHIP.

'HE title of the Epistle in the
oldest manuscripts is simply pòs
Pouaiovs, "To the Romans:" but the
first word of the Epistle itself names St.
Paul as its author, and it has been uni-
versally accepted in all ages as his
genuine work.

It is quoted very early, though not, as
some have supposed, in the New Testa-
ment itself.

Thus in 2 Pet. iii. 15 there is an
allusion to St. Paul's teaching, which in
consequence of a slight resemblance in
the language has been thought to refer
especially to Rom. ii. 4; but St. Peter,
as the context clearly shows, is referring
to the moral exhortation found in all
St. Paul's Epistles, based as it commonly
is on the expectation of Christ's second
coming.

The supposed allusion in St. James

(ii. 14) to St. Paul's teaching in the Epistle

to the Romans is inconsistent with the

friendly and confidential intercourse of

these two Apostles (Acts xv. 4, 25; Gal.

ii. 9), and with the earlier date at which

St. James most probably wrote. On

this point, however, the reader must

refer to the full discussion in the Com-

mentary on St. James.

But the Epistle is certainly quoted

New Test.-Vol. III.

PAGE

20

§ 8. INTEGRITY OF THE EPISTLE.

I. Testimony of the early Fathers 20

II. Testimony of existing Manu-

scripts.

III. Internal Evidence

The Doxology

(b) Chapters xv.,

§ 9. AUTHORITIES FOR THE TEXT

§ 10. CONTENTS OF THE EPISTLE.

APPENDIX.-" THE LAW," "THE

FLESH"

before the end of the 1st century by

Clement of Rome in a passage which

will be found in the Additional Note on

i. 32: in the 2nd century it is quoted

by Ignatius, Polycarp, Justin Martyr,

and Irenæus: the last-named Father

repeatedly and expressly refers to it as

the work of St. Paul (III. xvi. 3, 9).

The internal evidence of its genuineness

has carried conviction to the minds of
the most cautious and the most sceptical
of critics. Every chapter, in fact, bears
the impress of the same mind from
which the Epistles to the Churches of
Corinth and Galatia undoubtedly pro-
ceeded; and even Baur and the critics
of his school, who make every effort to
prove the two last chapters spurious, are
obliged to admit that the rest of the
Epistle is the genuine work of St. Paul.

§ 2. TIME AND Place of WRITING.

The passages which contain definite

historical statements indicating the time

and place at which the Epistle was

written are all contained in the last two

chapters, xv. 25-31; xvi. 1, 2, 21, 23.

But the time and place of writing can

also be inferred with great probability

from indirect evidence contained in i.

IO, II, 13.

This latter proof is quite independent

Α

of the former, and when combined with it forms an undesigned coincidence between the first and last chapters of the Epistle, and a valuable confirmation of the genuineness of chapters xv. and xvi., which of late years has been much disputed.

I. Notes of Time and Place in xv., xvi.

At the time of writing this Epistle St. Paul was going to carry to the poor saints at Jerusalem a contribution made for them in Macedonia and Achaia (xv. 25, 26), and he hoped afterwards to visit Rome on his way to Spain (xv. 28). If we compare these passages with Acts xix. 21 and xx. 3, it is clear that the Epistle must have been written after the Apostle's arrival in Greece on his third missionary journey, when he spent three months in Corinth.

The same conclusion follows from comparing Romans xv. 25-28 with 1 Cor. xvi. 1-5, and 2 Cor. viii. 1–4, ix. I, 2. In presence of the hostile criticism which is directed against the historical value of the Acts, it is worth notice that this second proof is independent of St. Luke's narrative.

Assuming, however, as we justly may, the authenticity and accuracy of St. Luke's history, we can fix almost within a week the date at which our Epistle was despatched.

For we learn from Acts xx. 3 that, as St. Paul was about to sail from Corinth into Syria, the Jews laid wait for him, and on this account he changed his route at the last moment and determined to return through Macedonia.

The Epistle, if written after these incidents, would almost certainly have contained some reference to them, and especially to the plot of the Jews, which the Apostle could not have failed to notice in alluding to the enmity of his countrymen in ch. xv. 31. We may, therefore, confidently infer that the letter was despatched before St. Paul actually left Achaia, and yet not long before (xv. 25).

The winter was at an end and navigation had recommenced, for "he was about to sail into Syria" (Acts xx. 3).

Yet the spring was not far advanced, for after travelling through Macedonia to Miletus (Acts xx. 16) he still hoped to reach Jerusalem by Pentecost.

We can fix the season even more exactly: for St. Paul and his company spent "the days of unleavened bread" at Philippi (Acts xx. 6), and must therefore have left Corinth some time before the Passover.

The proof that the Epistle was written from Corinth is well stated by Theodoret: "First, he commends to them Phoebe, calling her a deaconess of the Church at Cenchreæ (xvi. 1); and Cenchreæ is a port of the Corinthians. And then he also speaks thus: Gaius mine host saluteth you' (xvi. 23). Now that Gaius was of Corinth is easy to learn from the First Epistle to the Corinthians, for he writes to them thus: 'I thank my God that I baptized none of you, save Crispus and Gaius' (1 Cor. i. 14).

To these arguments of Theodoret we may add that four of the seven persons named in Rom. xvi. 21-23-Timotheus, Sosipater, Jason, and Gaius-can be shown with great probability to have been with St. Paul during his second abode at Corinth. The conclusion from these various proofs is that the Epistle to the Romans was written from Corinth shortly before Easter A.D. 58.

II. Indications of Time in i. 10-13.

We read in this passage that the writer has not yet been at Rome, but is longing to visit the believers there, and has " oftentimes purposed" to come unto them, but has been "hindered hitherto." This purpose of visiting Rome St. Paul publicly declared during the latter part of his abode at Ephesus: "After these things were ended Paul purposed in the spirit, when he had passed through Macedonia and Achaia, to go to Jerusalem, saying, After I have been there, I must also see Rome" (Acts xix. 21).

We do not know how long the Apostle had entertained the purpose here for the first time recorded: there is no indication nor probability that it entered into the plan of his first journey to Europe