III. Occasion and Purpose.—The opinions on this head differ according to the various suppositions of those who think that the object of the letter was supplied by the occasion, or the supposition that the apostle selected his subject only after an op portunity for writing was offered. In earlier times the latter opinion prevailed, as, for instance, in the writings of Thomas Aquinas, Luther, Melanch than, Calvin. In more recent times the other opinion has generally been advocated—as, for in stance, by Hug, Eichhorn, and Flatt. Many writers suppose that the debates mentioned in ch. xiv. and xv. called forth this epistle. Hug, there fore, is of opinion that the theme of the whole epistle is the following :—.7ews and Gentiles have equal claim to the kingdom of God According to Eichhorn, the Roman Jews, being exasperated against the disciples of Paul, endeavoured to de monstrate that Judaism was sufficient for the salva tion of mankind ; consequently Eichhorn supposes that the polemics of St. Paul were not directed against Judaising converts to Christianity, as in the Epistle to the Galatians, but rather against Judaism itself. This opinion is also maintained by De \Vette (Einleitung ins Nene Testament, 4th ed., sec. IA. According to Credner (Einiedung, sec. 140 the intention of the apostle was to render the Roman con,gregation favourably disposed before his arrival in the chief metropolis; and be therefore en deavoured to show that the evil reports spread con- , cerning himself by zealously Judaising Christians were erroneous. This opinion is nearly related to that of Dr. Baur, who supposes that the real object of this letter is mentioned only in ch. bc. to xi. According to Dr. Baur, the Judaising zealots were displeased that by the instrumentality of Paul such numbers of Gentiles entered the kingdom of God, that the Jews ceased to appear as the Messianic people. Dr. Baur supposes that these Judaisers are more especially refuted in ch. ix. to xi., after it has been shown in the first eight chapters that it was in general incorrect to consider one people better than another, and that all had equal claims to be justified by faith. Against the opinion that the apostle, in writing the Epistle to the Romans, had this particular polemical aim, it has been justly observed by Riickert (in the 2c1 ed. of his Com mentar), Olshausen, and De Wette, that the apostle himself states that his epistle had a general scope. Paul says in the introduction that he had long entertained the wish of visiting the metro polis, in order to confirm the faith of the church, and to be himself comforted by that faith (ch. i. 12). He adds (i. 16), that he was prevented from preach ing in the chief city by external obstacles only. He says that he had written to the Roman Chris tians in fulfilment of his vocation as apostle to the Gentiles. The journey of Phoebe to Rome seems to have been the external occasion of the epistle : Paul made use of this opportunity by sending the sum and substance of the Christian doctrine in writing, having been prevented from preaching in Rome. Paul had many friends in Rome who com municated with him ; consequently he was the more induced to address the Romans, although he manifested some hesitation in doing so (xv. 15). These circumstances exercised some Influence as well on the form as upon the contents of the letter ; so that, for instance, its contents differ considerably from the Epistle to the Ephesians, although this also has a general scope. The especial bearings of the Epistle to the Romans are particularly mani fest in ch. xiii. to xvi. ; Paul shows to both Jews and Gentiles the glory of Christianity as being absolute religion, and he especially endeavours to confirm the faith of the converts from Judaism (iv.); Paul refers to the circumstance that in Rome the number of Gentile Christians was much greater than that of the converted Jews, and he explains how this was consistent with the counsel of God. He endeavours to re-establish peace between the contending parties ; consequently he had to pro duce many arguments which might be converted into polemics (Polemik) against the Jews ; but it does by no means follow that such polemics were the chief aim of the apostle.
IV. Contents of the Efistle.—It belongs to the characteristic type of St. Paurs teaching to exhibit the gospel in its historical relation to the human race. In the Epistle to the Romans, also, we find that peculiar character of St. Paul's teaching which induced Schelling to call St. Paul's doctrine a philosophy of the history of man. The real pur pose of the human race is in a sublime manner stated by St. Paul in his speech in Acts xvii. 26, 27 ; and he shows at the same time how God had, by various historical means, promoted the attain ment of his purpose. St. Paul exhibits the O. T. dispensation under the form of an institution for the education of the whole human race, which should enable men to terminate their spiritual minority, and become truly of age (Gal. iii. 24, and iv. 1-4). In the Epistle to the Romans, also, the apostle commences by describing the two great divisions of the human race—viz., those who under
went the preparatory spiritual education of the Jews, and those who did not undergo such a pre paratory education. We find a similar division indicated by Christ himself ( John x. 16), where he speaks of one flock separated by hurdles. The chief aim of all nations, according to St. Paul, should be the Sikatoo-thn7 epciiirtov roc) 060'0, righteoui ness before the face of God, or absolute realisation of the moral law.' According to St. Paul, the hea then also have their v6/..tos, law, as well religious as moral internal revelation (Rom. i. 19, 32 ; 15). The heathen have, however, not fulfilled that law which they knew, and are in this respect like the Jews, who also disregarded their own law (ii.) Both Jews and Gentiles are transgressors, or by the law separated from the grace and sonship of God (Rom. ii. 12 ; 111. zo) ; consequently, if blessedness could only be obtained by fulfilling the demands of God, no man could be blessed. God, however, has gratuitously given righteousness and blessedness to all who believe in Christ (iii. 21-31) ; the O. T. also recognises the value of religious faith (iv.) ; thus we freely attain to peace and sonship of God presently, and have before us still greater things—viz., the future development of the kingdom of God (v. r-rr). The human race has gained in Christ much more than it lost in Adam (v. 12, 21). This doctrine by no means encourages sin (vi.) ; on the contrary, men who are conscious of divine grace fulfil the law much more energetically than they were able to do before having attained to this knowledg,e, because the law alone is even apt to sharpen the appetite for sin, and leads finally to despair (vii.); but now we fulfil the law by means of that new spirit which is. given unto us, and the full development of our sal vation is still before us (viii. 1-27). The sufferings of the present time cannot prevent this develop ment, and must rather work for good to them whom God from eternity has viewed as faithful believers ; and nothing can separate snch believers from the eternal love of God (viii. 28-39). It causes pain to behold the Israelites themselves shut out from salvation ; but they themselves are the cause of this seclusion, because they wanted to attain salvation by their own resources and exer tions, by their descent from Abraham, and by their fulfilment of the law : thus, however, the Jews have not obtained that salvation which God has freely offered under the sole condition of faith in Christ (ix.) ; the. Jews have not entered upon the way of faith, therefore the Gentiles were preferred, which was predicted by the prophets. However, the Jewish race, as such, has not been rejected ; some of them obtain salvation by a selection made, not according to their works, but according to the grace of God. If some of the Jews are left to their own obdumcy, even their temporary fall serves the plans of God—viz., the vocation of the Gentiles. After the mass of the Gentiles shall have entered in, the people of Israel also, in their collective capacity, shall be received into the church (xi.) V. Authenticity and Intesrity of the Epistle.— The authenticity of this epistle has never been questioned. The Epistle to the Romans is quoted as early as the 1st and 2d century by Clemens Romanus (Ad Cor., i. 35) and Poly carp (Ari Phil., 6). [It is also cited by Theophilus of Antioch (Ad Autol., 2o ; 14 [ed. J. C. Wolf, Hamb. 17241)2 by Irenaeus (Adv. .1Iaer., iii. 16. 3), by Clement of Alexandria (Paea'ag., p. 117 ; Strom., iii. p. 457), by Tertullian (Adv. Prax., 13), etc. It is alluded to in the Epistle to Diognetus (c. 9), by Justin Martyr (Dial., c. 23), by Athenagoras (p. 13), and by others. It stands in the Muratori Canon ; it had a place in that of Marcion ; and it is found in the Syriac and Itala versions. With this copious external evidence the internal fully accords : in manner of thought, style, language, and allusion, it is wholly Pauline.] Its integrity has lately been attacked by Dr. Baur, who pretends that ch. xv. and xvi. are spurious, but only, as we have observed above, because these chapters do not harmonise with his supposition that the Christian church at Rome consisted of rigid Judaisers. Schmidt and Reiche consider the doxology at the conclusion of ch. xvi. not to be genuine. In this doxology the anacolouthical and unconnected style causes some surprise, and the whole has been deemed to be out of its place (ver. 26 and 27). We however, observe, in reply to Schmidt and Reiche, that such defects of style may be easily explained from the circumstance that the apostle hastened to the conclusion, but would be quite inexplicable in additions of a copyist who had time for calm consideration. The same words occur in different passages of the epistle, and it must be granted that such a fluctuation sometimes indicates an interpolation. In the Codex i., in most of the Codices Minusculi, as well as in Chry sostom, the words occur at the conclusion of ch.