ROMANS, EPISTLE TO THE. The Epistle to the Romans has been almost universally admitted to be the work of St. PauL The only sects which have disputed its genuineness are the Ebionites, the Encratites, and the Cerinthians, and these purely on doctrinal grounds, inasmuch as the doctrines of this Epistle were adverse to their own opinions. (Stuart's `Cowmen. on the Epis.; p. 42.) Some modern commentators, however, have supposed that the Epistle properly ends with the fifteenth chapter, a supposition which may seem plausible from the want of connection between the last chapter and the rest of the Epistle. But this want of connection may be accounted for easily enough, without any such hypothesis. (Stuart,' Introd.; p. 49.) The verses 25-27 inclusive of this last chapter are in some manu script~, as in the Codex Alexandrinus, made to follow ver. 23 of cap. xiv., and Griesbach and others give them this arrangement. But a doxology of SO sublime a character as is contained in these verses does not seem a Et conclusion for a discussion about eating meats or abstaining from them, and accordingly Hug and others agree with the received text in placing them at the close of the Epistle. Some few manuscripts omit them altogether. The words I, Tertius, &c., xvi. 22, imply that this chapter formed the end of the Epistle, and that the Epistle is owe. There are, however, indications in the last chapter that the Epistle received several unimportant additions or insertions after it was in the main completed, according as any afterthoughts occurred to the writer, before it was finally despatched.
With respect to the date of the Epistle, various years have been assigned to it, from A.D. 55 to A.D. 58. According to the moat probable opinion, it was written towards the end of 57 or in the beginning of 59, when St.. fowl was at Corinth, and on the point of setting out to Jerusalem with the "contribution made by them of Macedonia and Achaia for the poor saints which were at Jerusalem" and in Judaea (iv. 25, 26), and before he had ever visited Rome.
The Epistle was dictated in Greek by the Apostle tv Tuthill, his amanuensis (xvi. 22), and conveyed to the church at Rome by Phmbe (xvi. 1), a servant or deaconess of the church at Cenchrem, a place not far from Corinth. Another proof of the Epistle having been written from Corinth is given in xvi. 23, where St. Paul sends salutations from claims, his hat, and Erutus, the chamberlain of the city of Corinth. (Comp. 2 Timoth, iv. 20; and 1 Cor., i. 14.) The position of this Epistle in the New Testament does not depend upon its elate, for it is the seventh in order of time according to most authorities, and is placed first, either from being the " longest and moot comprehensive " of the Epistles of St. Paul, or from the importance of the church to which it WAY addressed. (Horne's Introduce; vol. iv.) With respect
to the origin of this church, we have no certain information in the Scriptures. They do not tell DA when or by whom it was fonoded. The opinion that it wu founded by St. Peter does not appear to rest on any satisfactory evidence : the chief authorities for it are, Irem•u's (' Adv. Hier.; iii. I) and Eusebius Chron. an. 2 Claud.); but If he had indeed preached the Gospel at Rome, such a circumstance would probably have been noticed in the Acts of the Apostles, nor is it likely that St. Paul would have made no allusion to it in this Epistle. Perhaps the most reasonable opinion on the subject is, that the Gospel was first preached at Rome by " the strangers from that city, the Jews and proeelytea," who were converted by Peter's preaching at Jerusalem on the day of Pentecost (Acts, ii. 10); so that, like many other churches, that at Rome was at first composed of Jews, and gradually increased by the admixture of Gentiles, till the whole Christian com munity there became so large and important, "that their faith was spoken of through the world." The fact of this combination and co existence of Jews and Gentiles as parte of one Christian church suffi ciently explain, to a careful reader the occasion and object of the Epistle. Prejudices and pretensions on one side would be met with disdain or opposition on the other. (Cap. ii. and xi.) The Jew, were attached to the 31ouie institute*, and the Levitical rites and distinctions between clean and unclean. They were impatient of subordination to or equality with the Gentiles, and wished to impose upon them a con formity to many points of the Moealc ritual, especially that of circum cision, before they were admitted to a participation in the privileges of the GotspeL The Gentiles, on the other hand, disregarded (perhaps too contemptuously) the prejudices of the Jewe, and were of course offended at their pretcoaions to superiority, for which their fallen poscitiun afforded in the eyes of the Gentiles no justification. They might not reflect with fairness on what the Jews conceived themselves to have lost by the publication of the Gospel. Such a position of parties, and such a state of feeling between them, would naturally give rise to the divisions amid offences which occasioned some of the admoni tions and cautions contained in the hortatory portion of the Epistle, and the existence of it can scarcely fail to leo observed by a careful reader.
For examples of undesigned coincidence between this Epistle and the Acta of the Apostles, the reader is referred to Paley. The writers and commentators upon this Epistle, both English and foreign, have been exceedingly numerous.