Rufus and His Mother (Verse 13)

Romans 16:13

Greet Rufus, chosen in the Lord, and his mother, who has been a mother to me, too.

Greet Rufus, chosen in the Lord: In this case, "chosen in the Lord" probably means more than chosen as a Christian; it suggests a specially selected and distinguished believer in Christ. The same word "eklektos" describes the chosen or elect lady (possibly figurative for the ecclesia itself) addressed by John in 2 John 1:1. A related word "ekloge" is used of Paul at the time of his baptism:

"The Lord said to Ananias, 'Go! This man is my chosen instrument to carry my name before the Gentiles and their kings and before the people of Israel. I will show him how much he must suffer for my name' " (Acts 9:15,16).

However,"eklektos" and other related words may also describe all believers who are "chosen" in Christ, to be "holy and blameless in his sight" (Eph 1:4). But this is probably not the meaning here, where Paul seems to set Rufus apart from his other fellow-believers.

It is quite likely that this Rufus was a son of Simon the Cyrenian, the man who was compelled to carry the cross for Jesus to the place of his execution:

"A certain man from Cyrene, Simon, the father of Alexander and Rufus, was passing by on his way in from the country, and they forced him to carry the cross" (Mark 15:21).

From the same evidence it may be assumed, quite reasonably, that Simon's wife (and then Rufus' mother) is mentioned also in Romans 16:13, as a sterling character.

The man who carried Christ's cross

It is obvious that Rufus was a special believer, as was his mother. It is quite likely that the process by which son and mother became special — not only in the eyes of Paul but also in the eyes of the whole ecclesia — began a generation earlier, before Saul of Tarsus was even a believer, and possibly before Rufus was even born.

J.J. Blunt has done a great piece of investigative work to draw the threads together by which such a connection may be made:

Clement of Alexandria, who lived about the end of the second century, declares that Mark wrote this Gospel on… Peter's authority at Rome. Jerome, who lived in the fourth century, says that Mark, the disciple and interpreter of Peter, being requested by his brethren at Rome, wrote a short Gospel.

Now this circumstance may account for his designating Simon as the father of Rufus at least; for we find that a disciple of that name, and of considerable note, was resident at Rome, when Paul wrote his Epistle to the Romans. "Salute Rufus," says he, "chosen in the Lord" [Rom 16:13]. Thus, by mentioning a man living upon the spot where he was writing, and amongst the people whom he addressed, Mark was giving a reference for the truth of his narrative, which must have been accessible and satisfactory to all; since Rufus could not have failed knowing the particulars of the Crucifixion (the great event to which the Christians looked), when his father had been so intimately concerned in it as to have been the reluctant bearer of the cross.

Of course, the force of this argument depends on the identity of the Rufus of Mark and the Rufus of Paul, which I have no means of proving; but admitting it to be probable that they were the same person (which, I think, may be admitted, for Paul, we see, expressly speaks of a distinguished disciple of the name of Rufus at Rome, and Mark, writing for the Romans, mentions Rufus, the son of Simon, as well known to them) — admitting this, the coincidence is striking, and serves to account for what otherwise seems a piece of purely gratuitous and needless information offered by Mark to his readers, namely, that Simon was the father of Alexander and Rufus; a fact omitted by the other Evangelists, and apparently turned to no advantage by himself.

Undesigned Scriptural Coincidences, pp. 280,281

The story of Simon the Cyrenian is an extraordinary one. Evidently, he was a Jew who traveled a long distance — all the way from North Africa — to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover. He had no idea of adventures that would come his way, events which seem to have changed his life dramatically and absolutely. Never again would he see the world and himself in the same way.

We can assume that Simon entered the city with great anticipation. The Jerusalem of Passover would be an exciting and festive place, when many thousands of Jews from all over the Roman Empire had converged to remember the Lord God's deliverance of His people out of bondage in Egypt into freedom in the Land of Promise.

But Simon had scarcely joined the crowds on their way to Herod's magnificent Temple before he found himself drafted into service by a Roman soldier. It looked as though it would be a short task, but a very distasteful one. He found himself carrying a criminal's cross, trudging along under its weight and following an extraordinary figure on the way to the hill of execution, called Golgotha. He must have been so angry, and yet he dared not show it — to have come so far to worship the One true God, in the one special place out of the whole earth where He had chosen to place His Name and His Presence. And now, out of nowhere, he was suffering this terrible and shameful thing — to walk along with a condemned man and watch him die.

But something happened along the way. He felt strangely drawn to the solitary figure he was following, how he submitted to all the indignities heaped upon him, almost like a lamb mute before its butcher, uttering no word of complaint. What kind of man was this?

When his duty was discharged, Simon must have stayed to watch the awful scene unfold. He must have heard the captain of the Roman soldiers, the centurion, say in wonder that this crucified man could be, might be, the son of God! He may have heard the words, almost whispered by the dying man, forgiving those who gleefully or callously tortured this extraordinary man, and then watched him suffer and die.

That chance encounter on the road to Golgotha changed Simon's life. He came to celebrate the Jewish Passover, but he may well have stayed right through the seven weeks leading up to Pentecost. Before he left Jerusalem, he must have met a number of the disciples of Jesus, and heard the news, perhaps even seeing the evidence, of the empty tomb, the resurrection, and the last words of the risen Lord to his followers. In a short time, as such things are measured, Simon came to see the Passover in a new perspective — "Behold, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!" His life would never be the same again. What he had first thought to be the most horrific experience imaginable had turned into a truly transcendent honor: 'I was the one — and not even one of his disciples then — chosen to follow the Savior to the place where he sought, and achieved, my redemption. When he said those words, "It is finished", it was then I knew it was only beginning for me!'

In time to come, the great revolution during Simon's time at Jerusalem would touch his wife and influence his sons, Rufus and Alexander.

Simon's conversion is poetically interpreted in a brief poem by an unknown author:

There is no mark of course, but I can feel Here on my shoulder to this very day The grinding weight where that rough timber lay And left, an hour or two, its vivid seal. I had no thought, no patriotic zeal, That morning there a hero's part to play; Only, I saw his eyes which, as he lay Down in the dust, held mine in mute appeal. "A curse on you, Roman dogs," I cried, And never felt the lash the soldier swung; Then we went together side by side, My back bent double as we climbed the hill To Calvary where on the cross he hung; And I am proud to say I feel its burden still.

What Simon saw and felt on the fateful day — and the weeks that followed — changed not only himself. It also changed his family and many, many others. And it changes men and women even today. No wonder that Simon's son, Rufus, and Simon's wife (was she by now his widow?), became extraordinary disciples of the Lord Jesus Christ, and great friends of Paul the Apostle.

And his mother, who has been a mother to me, too: Paul had a number of "mothers" in the Truth (see Matt 12:49,50; Mark 3:35; 1Tim 5:2)! Perhaps this special woman perceived his unique loss when he became a follower of Christ, at the same time "losing all things" (Phil 3:8), and she attempted to minister to him by providing what he was now lacking: a warm and loving family.

Let Christian mothers find here a great field for that wonderful heart of instinctive loving care given by God to mothers, that they extend their maternal care beyond their own family circle, to all Christians, and especially to all laborers for Christ. The Lord will remember it at his coming!

Newell, Romans Verse-by-Verse

Joseph Bland writes:

The truth breaks down barriers of wealth and position, and unites as one those who truly love our Lord Jesus Christ. The mere fleshly relationship is as nothing compared with the higher spiritual relationship begotten by the word of truth. We feel something of the spirit of Jesus when he asked the question, "Who is my mother, and who are my brethren?" and when asking the question, and beholding his disciples, "he stretched forth his hands towards them, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren! For whosoever shall do the will of my Father who is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother" (Matt 12:48-50). These are the experiences that should be ours towards each other.

"The Salutations in Romans 16", The Fraternal Visitor, Vol. 12, pp. 271,272

Epenetus, Mary, Andronicus and Junia (Verses 5-7)

Romans 16:5

Greet also the church that meets at their house. Greet my dear friend Epenetus, who was the first convert to Christ in the province of Asia.

Greet also the church that meets at their house: Churches normally met in houses at this time (cp v 23, and possibly vv 14,15; see also 1Cor 16:19; Col 4:15; Philemon 1:2). One such church met at the house of Aquila and Priscilla (Rom 16:4), and here Paul greets them especially.

It is quite possible that even large ecclesial groups at this time met in private houses also. Joseph Lightfoot writes,

There is no clear example of a separate building set apart for Christian worship within the limits of the Roman Empire before the third century, though apartments in private houses might have been specially devoted to this purpose.

Paul's Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon, p. 243

There may be a very good reason why, in the early centuries of the Christian faith, a building was not set apart for Christian worship. Such a "church building" would have been advertised and known for what it was, and once its presence was known in a city or community, it would have provided a great temptation for rogues and vandals of every sort, not to mention an easy target for city authorities who were determined to silence the public witness of believers.

Greet my dear friend Epenetus: His name signifies "praiseworthy". It is understandable that Paul should speak of him as "my dear friend" (literally, "my beloved"), since this man was the first convert to Christ in connection with the preaching in the province of Asia, of which Ephesus was the leading city. Actually Paul calls him the firstfruits of that area, which hints that many more were expected to follow as the full harvest, and this indeed came to pass. This individual, however, naturally held a special place in the heart of the apostle.

Who was the first convert to Christ in the province of Asia: "Who is the firstfruits of Achaia unto Christ" (KJV). "Firstfruits" (KJV, ASV) or "first convert" (NET, NEB, RSV, NIV) translates the Greek "aparche", which literally means the first of any crop or flocks or herds offered to God before the rest is used. Paul uses this word in several ways:

Of Christ the "firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep" (1Cor 15:20,23);
Of "the household of Stephanas [who were] the first converts in Achaia" (1Cor 16:15);
Of "the firstfruits of the Spirit" (Rom 8:23); and
Of Israel in general, being the "firstfruits" of those offered to God (Rom 11:16, notes).

Under the Law of Moses, worshippers offered the firstfruits of their produce to the Lord God (Exod 23:16,19; 34:22,26; Lev 2:12,14; 23:17,20; Deut 18:4; 26:2,10). Paul saw himself and other preachers as "priests" according to the Melchizedek priesthood of Jesus Christ. Symbolically, these priests showed their devotion by accepting and then offering to God the "firstfruits", that is, the first converts, of a city or region (cp 1Cor 15:20,23; James 1:18; Rev 14:4).

Paul expressed the same thought in 2 Thessalonians 2:13, but there it is translated differently: "From the beginning God chose you [the Thessalonians] to be saved." There, "aparche" is translated by the three words "from the beginning". In other words, Paul sees the Thessalonian believers as the "firstfruits" of the area which have been offered to God.

The province of Asia: The KJV has "Achaia". "So many of the oldest manuscripts and versions, however, read 'Asia', instead of 'Achaia', in this verse, that the great majority of editors have adopted that reading" (Hodge).

In the New Testament [Asia] always refers to the Roman province of Asia, made up of about one-third of the west and southwest end of modern Asia Minor. Asia lay to the west of the region of Phrygia and Galatia. The words "the province of" are supplied to indicate to the modern reader that this does not refer to the continent of Asia.

NET Notes

Mentioning the first convert, or those who were among the first converts, of "Asia" suggests that Aquila and Priscilla may have converted and baptized Epenetus while they were in Ephesus, and that later he may have accompanied them or followed them to Rome.

Romans 16:6

Greet Mary, who worked very hard for you.

Mary (Miriam) is the Hebrew name of several women in the New Testament, although some scholars say it is possible that this refers to a woman with the Latin name Maria, and thus a Roman. The name is common enough in the New Testament that it is impossible to tell if this particular Mary is only mentioned here, or is actually one of the other women called Mary in the Bible.

Either way, Paul knew of this Mary, testifying to her hard work for the saints, but without any hint as to the nature of the work. He simply emphasizes her willingness to grow weary in serving them.

The Greek words translated "worked very hard" ("ekopiasen" and "polla") indicates work sufficiently heavy to produce weariness and fatigue.

The word translated "labor" ["worked": NIV] ("kopian") is a favorite of [Paul's] for describing Christian service, whether his own or that of others (see Rom 16:6,12; 1Cor 4:12; 15:10; 16:16; Gal 4:11; Col 1:29; 1Thes 5:12); its implication of resulting weariness is conveyed in John 4:6, where Jesus at noonday sits down by Jacob's well because he is "tired" ("kekopiakos") by his journey.

New International Bible Commentary

This is also the same word used by Jesus when he says:

"Come to me, all you who are weary ['kopiao'] and burdened, and I will give you rest" (Matt 11:28).

For you: The KJV has "us" instead of "you". Opinion is equally divided as to whether "you" or "us" is correct. The ASV and KJV have "us", while the NIV, RSV, NEB and NET have "you". It is more reasonable that Paul would mention Mary's service to "us" (including Paul and his companions) rather than to "you" (the Roman Christians).

Romans 16:7

Greet Andronicus and Junias, my relatives who have been in prison with me.

Greet Andronicus and Junias: These are Latin and Greek names respectively. The second name may be either Junias (masculine) or Junia (feminine). Based on the pairing of the two believers, it is most likely that the proper name is Junia, and that she was the wife of Andronicus. There appear to be several husband-wife couples in this chapter (see vv 3,15).

My relatives: The Greek word is "syggenes", literally: "having the same birth, or the same ancestors". It is sometimes translated "relatives" and sometimes "kinsmen" (cp vv 11,21). It could mean one of three things:

very close blood relatives of Paul, i.e., from his same immediate family;
members of the same tribe, i.e., Benjamites (Phil 3:5); or
simply Jews, since every descendant of Abraham through Isaac and then Jacob might easily think of all other descendants as "relatives" (cp Rom 9:3).

Who have been in prison with me: The term is "synaichmalotos", meaning to share in captivity. When listing his labors in 2 Corinthians 11:23, Paul says he was "in prison more frequently… flogged more severely, and… exposed to death again and again." Being so often incarcerated, Paul would have had many fellow-prisoners. Elsewhere, Paul calls Aristarchus a fellow prisoner (the same word) in Colossians 4:10, and Epaphras the same in Philemon 1:23.

It has been estimated that Paul may have spent as much as 25% of his time as a preacher and missionary in prison. We know of his brief lock-up in Philippi (Acts 16:22-40), two years' imprisonment in Caesarea (Acts 24), and at least another two years in Rome (Acts 28:30). Paul says he had been "in prison more frequently" than his critics. To understand Paul, we need to understand where he spent so much time.

Roman imprisonment was preceded by being stripped naked and then flogged. It was a humiliating, painful and bloody ordeal. The bleeding wounds went untreated. Prisoners sat in painful leg or wrist chains. Torn and blood-stained clothing was not replaced, even in the cold of winter. In his final imprisonment, Paul asked for a cloak, presumably because of the cold (2Tim 4:13).

Most cells were dark, especially the inner cells of a prison, like the one where Paul and Silas spent some time in Philippi. Unbearable cold, lack of water, cramped quarters, and sickening stench from toilets made sleeping difficult and waking hours miserable.

Male and female prisoners were sometimes locked up together, which could lead to sexual immorality and abuse. Prison food, when available, was scarcely edible. Most prisoners had to provide their own food from outside sources. When Paul was in prison in Caesarea, the procurator Felix gave orders to the centurion to "permit his friends to take care of his needs" (Acts 24:23).

Because of the miserable conditions, many prisoners begged for a speedy death. Others simply grasped any chance to commit suicide.

They are outstanding among the apostles: "Outstanding" is "episemos", which means prominent or well-known; the KJV has "of note".

What is meant by "the apostles"?

There are two possible answers to this deceptively simple question:

In the Gospels, the Twelve early disciples — who are listed in Matthew 10:2-4; Mark 3:14-18; and Luke 6:13-16 — are called "apostles" about nine times. Eleven of the Twelve are also listed in Acts 1:13, minus Judas Iscariot, who had committed suicide. They were meeting together, with other believers, to select a replacement for Judas. Two candidates were put forward, chosen from among those men who had been with the Lord Jesus from the time of John's baptism to Jesus' ascension, since they would have been witnesses to his resurrection (vv 21,22). (This requirement would limit the candidates for the position, and thus the number of such apostles.)

Of the two put forward, "the lot fell to Matthias; so he was added to the eleven apostles" (v 26). The only other mention of "twelve apostles" is in Revelation 21:14, corresponding to the "twelve foundations" in the wall surrounding the Holy City, Jerusalem (vv 10-13).

Finally, Paul seems to have been commissioned by the Lord himself as another very special "apostle", with a status similar to the Twelve. However, in Paul's case, he was a special "apostle" sent, not to the Jews especially, but to the Gentiles in particular (Gal 2:8).

Secondly, this very same term "apostles" (literally, "ones who are sent") is used often in the Letters to describe a whole range of representatives, messengers or missionaries. As time went by, the number of these apostles increased dramatically, to meet the needs of the ecclesias.

These "apostles" were sent out (Greek "apostello") as traveling preachers or emissaries of Christ. Examples of this type of apostle would be the 72 (or 70) "others" (Luke 10:1, NIV or KJV) sent out "two by two" (perhaps sometimes as husband and wife?) by Jesus, to prepare people for his arrival.

And so Paul himself speaks of the faithful Epaphroditus, sent by the Philippians as their personal "messenger" ("apostolos") to see to Paul's needs (Phil 2:25). This seems to be the category of "apostles" with whom Andronicus and Junia (his wife?) were numbered (Rom 16:7).

Among: Since "among" is the Greek "en", this might mean that Andronicus and Junia were notable in ("en") the estimation of the apostles. That is, the apostles held them in great esteem or high opinion. The NET, as an example, renders this phrase: "They are well known to the apostles." Nevertheless, the most common usage of the Greek "en" makes it much more likely that the couple were actually numbered "among" the apostles, as part of that group. But which group, (a) the original, relatively small group or (b) the more general, much larger group?

And they were in Christ before I was: If the couple were held in high repute by the apostles in Jerusalem, or even considered part of a group which included the original apostles, then they may have been among the 70 or 72 disciples sent out by Jesus (Luke 10:1).

The fact that Adronicus and Junia were in Christ before Paul also suggests that they would have first known him as Saul of Tarsus, the relentless enemy of the earliest Christians, before they ever knew him as Paul the great apostle. If not personally, they would surely have known him by reputation, and yet they still helped, supported and cared for him during their shared imprisonment.

Surprisingly, this verse, Romans 16:7, has attracted a great deal of attention in scholarly circles, due to the question: Was Junia a woman and an apostle, that is, a woman of equal rank with the original apostles of the Lord? However, in order to make the case that Junia was the wife of Andronicus and thus also a member of the relatively small group — which included Peter, Andrew, James, John, and Paul — one must prove at least three things:

that Junia was a woman;
that the preposition "en" truly means "among" (as in being one of a group), and does not mean "in" as "in the opinion of" (see note above); and
that "apostles" here means only those who had seen the Lord and were explicitly appointed to the office by him, that is, the Twelve as well as Paul, and perhaps one or two others.

If any of these three propositions is uncertain, then the contention that a woman was a member of the most special apostolic group fails also. How do we evaluate the evidence?

Almost certainly but not definitely, Junia was a woman and the wife of Andronicus.
Quite probably, "en" means "among" rather than "in the estimation of".
But it is much less likely that "apostles" here means (a) those with a special and official position which was conferred directly by Christ (a very small and exclusive group — scarcely more than a dozen disciples), instead of (b) those who were messengers, representatives, or preachers of Christ (a much larger group, of perhaps hundreds of disciples).

Putting all the probabilities together, we may conclude:

that the sister named Junia and her husband Andronicus were almost certainly not apostles in the more exclusive sense (definition a above), but also
that they were almost certainly apostles in the broader sense (definition b above).

Introduction

At the very beginning, we must ask ourselves, What should we make of the long lists of names in Romans 16? Why are they there? What possible benefit do they confer on us, the readers?

The minister and essayist F.W. Boreham told the following story:

A census-taker was working among New York tenements crowded with children. He inquired of one woman, “How many children do you have?” She started in, “There’s Mary and Ella and Delia and Susie and Tommy…” And the “and’s” kept on coming until the census-taker interrupted, “Just give me the number.” To this remark the woman became incensed: “We ain’t got to numbering 'em yet. We ain’t run out of names!”

The Golden Milestone, pp. 165,166

On that story hangs a moral, which is our theme. There are indeed lots of names in some sections of the Bible. But they are more than just names, and they deserve a better fate than being submerged and swallowed up in a total number. We can be assured that each one of those who were righteous have been written in the Lamb's Book of Life (Phil 4:3; Rev 3:5; 13:8; 17:8; 20:12,15; 21:27), and each one is precious to their Creator. Not one of them is a mere statistic, at least not to the Lord God who knows all their names. And here, with Paul as His messenger, He shares some of those names with us:

"Then those who feared the Lord talked with each other, and the Lord listened and heard. A scroll of remembrance was written in his presence concerning those who feared the Lord and honored his name. 'They will be mine,' says the Lord Almighty, 'in the day when I make up my treasured possession. I will spare them, just as in compassion a man spares his son who serves him' " (Mal 3:16,17).

"Those who are wise will shine like the brightness of the heavens, and those who lead many to righteousness, like the stars for ever and ever" (Dan 12:3).

"He determines the number of the stars and calls them each by name" (Psa 147:4).

And His Son feels exactly the same way:

"The man who enters by the gate is the shepherd of his sheep… and the sheep listen to his voice. He calls his own sheep by name and leads them out" (John 10:2,3).

"Can a mother forget the baby at her breast and have no compassion on the child she has borne? Though she may forget, I will not forget you! See, I have engraved you on the palms of my hands" (Isa 49:15,16).

The engraving here is probably intended to be symbolic. Nevertheless, we can surely recognize that what is (symbolically) written upon the palms is a name, or names, not merely a number!

Lists of names may seem quite boring, unless we know someone on the list. If we know all the people on the list, then what was otherwise boring can become quite interesting. And if we happen to find our own name on the list, then — before we know it — that same list has become fascinating. Finally, if that list appears in the pages of Scripture, as a list of those who have God's approval, then there may be nothing else in the whole wide world that is more important. I'm sure that, when he learned of it, Epenetus would have considered what we call Romans 16:5 to be his favorite verse in the whole Bible. Likewise, Ampliatus with Romans 16:8, and Stachys with verse 9, etc. — through the whole of Paul's detailed list.

To be mentioned even once in the Scripture is quite an honor, if it is a list of friends of the Apostle Paul or Jesus or God, and a list of those to be commended. It is a Book in which we all want to have our names enrolled.

In this last chapter of Romans, the personal quality of Paul's letter comes into sharp focus. When we first read it, this may seem like a dull recitation of names, with dozens of people totally unknown to us. But as we consider this section, we begin to understand that Paul wrote his letter to people, not just to a church, and that faith is a personal matter as well as a collective one. We may live out our lives of faith within a group or a congregation — a spiritual family — but even in a family we each experience our faith as an individual. When our family has troubles, we have troubles too. It also works both ways. Our successes, if there are such, may be enjoyed by our family too. In Christ we do not really live or die to ourselves, but as parts of a Body to which we belong. The family sustains us, and we sustain the family.

The poet John Donne wrote:

No man is an island entire of itself; Every man is a piece of the continent, A part of the main. If a clod be washed away by the sea, Europe is the less, As well as if a promontory were, As any man's death diminishes me, Because I am involved in Mankind. And therefore never send to know For whom the bell tolls; It tolls for thee.

The personal nature of Paul's letter

On Romans 16 William R. Newell writes:

This sixteenth chapter is neglected by many to their own loss. It is by far the most extensive, intimate and particular of all the words of loving greeting in Paul's marvelous letters. No one can afford to miss this wonderful outpouring of the heart of our apostle toward the saints whom he so loved — which means all the real church of God!

Romans Verse-by-Verse

In "The Roman Christians in Romans 16" (The Romans Debate, pp. 227-229), Peter Lampe writes:

This last chapter is very letter-like in its spontaneous arrangement of material. Paul evidently related matters as they occurred to him. He named 35 persons in this chapter. Nine of these people were with Paul, and the rest were in Rome. He identified 17 men and seven women. In addition he referred to at least two households (vv 10,11) and three house churches (vv 5,14,15), plus some other unnamed brethren (v 14) and two other women (vv 13,15). Most of the names are Gentile, reflecting the mainly Gentile population of the church in Rome, and most are those of slaves and freedmen and freedwomen.

There is, in fact, almost a complete lack of Semitic names — Mary in verse 6 is an exception. However, there is more than a little evidence from papyri and inscriptions which indicates that both in the diaspora as well as in Palestine, the changing of personal names was a common practice. The Jews acquired not only Greek, but Latin and Egyptian names as well. Paul's relatives [mentioned in vv 7,11] were of course Jews, but do not bear Jewish names.

For Christadelphians, Romans 16 is the best example in the Bible of what we today call "ecclesial news" (or, using the old-fashioned term: "intelligence"). And the "news" is not about the whole ecclesia nearly so much as it is about the individuals who make up that ecclesia.

House churches, or ecclesias

In the chapter of greetings, Paul mentions perhaps as many as five "house churches", or groups of believers who meet together in a household, in Rome:

"the church that meets at [Priscilla and Aquila's] house" (vv 3,5);
"those who belong to the household of Aristobulus" (v 10);
"those in the household of Narcissus who are in the Lord" (v 11);
"Asyncritus, Phlegon, Hermes, Patrobas, Hermas and the brothers with them" (v 14); and
"Philologus, Julia, Nereus and his sister, and Olympas and all the saints with them" (v 15).

Smaller house meetings such as these made it possible for those nearby to meet regularly with fellow-believers, even when they could not travel greater distances to other larger meetings. Some members of such house churches/ecclesias may have been slaves or other servants who could not get any time off to travel, even a mile or two. Such house churches probably served as satellite churches for the larger groups which met at more central locations in Rome, and their members would have benefited from occasional visits by brothers and sisters from the larger group.

When Paul writes to "all in Rome who are… called to be saints" (Rom 1:7), he is including the members of the small house churches as well as those who might attend larger or more centrally located ecclesias. Paul's view of "the ecclesia" is at least fourfold. Considering this from the smallest to the largest:

There are the smallest groups of believers who meet regularly with one another, in private houses (cp Rom 1:7 with Rom 16:5,10,11,14,15; cp 1Cor 1:2 with 1Cor 16:19; cp Col 1:2 with Col 4:15; and also cp Phil 4:22 and Philemon 1:2,22).
Then there are the larger churches or ecclesias meeting in more central locations (though they may be private houses as well).
There is what might be called the regional ecclesia, consisting of all the smaller groups in a region or metropolitan area, i.e., "all in Rome" (Rom 1:7), "the church of God in Corinth" (1Cor 1:2; 2Cor 1:2), "the churches of Judea that are in Christ" (Gal 1:22), "the saints in Ephesus, the faithful in Christ Jesus" (Eph 1:1; etc.; cp also Acts 8:1; 9:31).
At last, there is the worldwide "ecclesia" of all believers, no matter with which single congregation they may meet on a regular basis (Matt 16:18; Acts 8:3; 1Cor 10:32; 12:28; 15:9; Gal 1:13; Eph 1:22; 3:10,21; 5:23-32; Phil 3:6; Col 1:18,24; Heb 12:23).

It is useful to keep all these variations in mind when we think or speak of the church or ecclesia. Perhaps there are lessons to be learned when considering all the possibilities:

The smallest congregation has meaning and purpose, even if others scarcely notice it. When several believers meet together in the name of the Lord, we are assured that he is with them in spirit, just as much as if they were part of a meeting numbering in the hundreds.

Members of larger ecclesias may, without even realizing it, think less of someone who meets with a small group. They should remember that the first-ever group of believers who broke bread together was quite small in numbers, and they met in an out-of-the-way upper room — but Christ was the center and focus of their meeting nonetheless.

To paraphrase 1 Corinthians 12, every church is part of the greater Body, and members of larger and better situated groups should never say to those from a small cluster of believers, 'We have no need of you!" We are all important to our Savior, large groups or small, and the Lord knows all our names.

Membership in a "more important" ecclesia may bring certain benefits, but it by no means confers special blessing upon an individual, and certainly no guarantee of salvation in the Day of Judgment. Each of us must stand, individually, upon our own personal faith and the way in which we have put that faith into practice.

Finally, since Paul writes of a universal "ecclesia" of all believers, we must remember that the actions of an individual or the decisions of a single ecclesia can make an impact on the worldwide Body of Christ. Even though we understand that every ecclesia has a measure of independence from others, such a liberty should not be mistaken for license. An ecclesia placing its own unique restrictions upon members or visitors can damage its inter-ecclesial fellowship with others. Likewise, relaxing requirements which are generally followed by other ecclesias can do the same. Not just as individuals, but as ecclesias, we should be careful not to put stumbling blocks in the paths of others: "Be careful… that the exercise of your freedom does not become a stumbling block to the weak" (1Cor 8:9). “ 'Everything is permissible' — but not everything is beneficial. 'Everything is permissible' — but not everything is constructive" (1Cor 10:23).

The place of women in the first-century ecclesia

Notice that the ministry of women in the Roman church is quite evident in this chapter. Paul refers to nine prominent women: Phoebe (vv 1,2), Priscilla (vv 3,4), Mary (v 6), Tryphena, Tryphosa, Persis (all in v 12), Rufus' mother (v 13), Julia, and Nereus' sister (both in v 15). There may be other female names in his list also.

Emil Brunner writes:

The impression which these salutations [in Romans 16] make is that of a great family on the one hand and of a working community on the other, both of which are based not on natural relations but solely "in Christ" and his message. One also notices nothing of a depreciation of women such as, for instance, has been read out of 1 Corinthians 14; for the apostle expressly emphasizes that Phoebe rendered assistance not only to many others but also to himself, and he also calls the mother of Rufus his own "mother". Prisca, ready for martyrdom [Rom 16:4], he salutes as his fellow-worker before her husband Aquila, together with whom she presides at a house church; along with these two most important women he also mentions Mary, Persis, Tryphosa and Tryphena as industrious workers "in the Lord" and besides them, with or without name, individually or together with men, he refers to a number of others… The recommendation with which he introduces his fellow-worker, Phoebe, to the community of Rome allows us also to catch a glimpse of the mutual relations of foresight and provident care within the young church as a world-embracing fellowship. All in all, what a new aspect of the world at that time this catalogue of greetings reveals to us! What a mirror it holds up before our present day church!

The Letter to the Romans, pp. 127,128

Outline of Romans 16

The commendation of Phoebe (vv 1,2)
Various greetings to the believers in Rome (vv 3-16)
A warning against false teachers (vv 17-20)
Greetings from Paul's companions (vv 21-24)
A final doxology, or praise of God (vv 25-27)

Showing Love By Helping Others

"How Do We Love Thee?"

The poet Elizabeth Barrett Browning wrote a sonnet to her beloved husband Robert Browning — a sonnet which blended her love for him with Biblical allusions and expressions of a more spiritual love. She began the sonnet in this way:

How do I love thee? Let me count the ways. I love thee to the depth and breadth and height My soul can reach, when feeling out of sight For the ends of being and ideal grace. I love thee to the level of every day's Most quiet need, by sun and candlelight. I love thee freely, as men strive for right. I love thee purely, as they turn from praise.

I believe it is appropriate to use similar language to describe how the saints who are named in Romans 16 — brothers and sisters alike — found so many ways to express their love for their Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. Let us, then, count the ways in which these believers showed their love — to the depth and breadth and height their souls could reach — in their efforts, both individually and collectively, to attain the same depth and breadth and height of the love which Christ had shown for them, and to find the same fullness of grace which he found, sufficient for each day's needs (Eph 3:18,19).

They showed their love for their Lord in their loving service to the apostle Paul and his friends. They showed their love freely, for the Lord loves a cheerful giver (2Cor 9:7), and purely, as the giver of such a gift does not ask for praise (Matt 6:1-4).

In doing so, they received the most wonderful reward: the great apostle to the Gentiles knew their names, Christ knew their names, and those names were written in his Book of Life, never to be blotted out.

So we shall consider the ways in which these disciples — little known by us, but nonetheless loved by Paul and by Christ — showed such love.

How can we show our love for Christ?

"Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me" (Matt 25:40, KJV).

We might all ask ourselves: How can we, as brothers and sisters of Jesus Christ, show our love for our Savior? His words in the Matthew 25 passage answer this question: We love Jesus by loving others, and we help Jesus by helping others, just like those who lived in Paul's day showed their love for their Lord by helping the apostle and his companions. We can serve and help our Lord by serving and helping other believers, no matter their status. Perhaps we may look upon some of these believers as "the least" of his brethren, and — may God forgive us! — hardly worth our effort. However, as we have seen in Romans 16 if nowhere else, the least of his brethren — and the least of the help which we can offer, even a simple drink of water — is just as important as a service to Christ:

"And if anyone gives even a cup of cold water to one of these little ones because he is my disciple, I tell you the truth, he will certainly not lose his reward" (Matt 10:42).

Nevertheless, we need not stop here. In another place, Paul has said that doing good to other believers certainly does not preclude doing good to all people!:

"Let us not become weary in doing good, for at the proper time we will reap a harvest if we do not give up. Therefore, as we have opportunity, let us do good to all people, especially to those who belong to the family of believers" (Gal 6:9,10).

And in another place, our Savior has said:

" 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself' " (Matt 22:37-39).

If the second greatest commandment is to love our neighbor, whoever he or she might be, then it is just as plain that we may show our love for God and His Son by acts of love toward any and all of humanity — even our enemies:

"Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you. You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous" (Matt 5:42-45).

The closer we look at this whole question, the larger grows the field in which we can show our love for our Savior. There is no end to his love for us. He loved us when we did not even know enough to love him! So there should be no end to the ways in which we can show our love for him. Everywhere we turn, everywhere we look, the opportunities are there for the taking, and our light can shine before all men:

"You are the light of the world. A city on a hill cannot be hidden. Neither do people light a lamp and put it under a bowl. Instead they put it on its stand, and it gives light to everyone in the house. In the same way, let your light shine before men, that they may see your good deeds and praise your Father in heaven" (Matt 5:14-16).

It is obvious that "light" in the Bible can symbolize the preaching of the gospel to a world in darkness; there is no disputing this — Bible passages to this effect abound. But here, in his great statement about how we should live, our Lord Jesus Christ distinctly says that our "light shining before men" can also be demonstrated by our "good deeds".

Simple acts of kindness

Obviously, it is good for a believer to give a cup of water to another believer, but it should be equally obvious that believers should show the same kindness to anyone in need, no matter how close we are to them, or what their religious beliefs. "Your Father in heaven… sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous," Jesus says (Matt 5:45).

He also says:

"Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back. Do to others as you would have them do to you. If you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? Even 'sinners’ love those who love them. And if you do good to those who are good to you, what credit is that to you? Even ‘sinners’ do that… But love your enemies, do good to them, and lend to them without expecting to get anything back. Then your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High, because he is kind to the ungrateful and wicked. Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful… Give, and it will be given to you… For with the measure you use, it will be measured to you" (Luke 6:30-33,35-38).

A cup of water

Janie Forsyth grew up on the outskirts of Anniston, Alabama, where her father owned a small grocery store. It was a time and place where the Ku Klux Klan was a powerful force. This racist organization routinely terrorized and beat African Americans, mostly with impunity. Their stated intention was to keep them "in their place". So when it became known that Freedom Riders would be on an integrated Greyhound Bus traveling across segregated Alabama, there were whispers of trouble waiting for them when they passed through Anniston.

On May 14, 1961, Janie, aged 12, learned from her father that, when the bus arrived in Anniston, the local chapter of the KKK would be prepared. In his words, "We will give them a little surprise."

That day, Janie had her own surprise when the bus, riding on tires that had been slashed, was finally halted by 200 angry white men just in front of her father's store. Hearing the uproar, she came from the back of store and stood out front, to see what was happening. She watched as the mob surrounded the bus and the white bus driver left the bus and walked away. Then the mob broke out the back window of the bus, and someone threw an incendiary device inside. The bus was instantly filled with black smoke. The people on the bus, 13 Freedom Riders and other unsuspecting passengers, were gagging and suffocating in the smoke. With cries of "Burn them… alive!", parts of the mob held the bus doors shut to prevent anyone from escaping. Then the fuel tank exploded, setting the bus on fire but also forcing the mob to move back.

This gave the passengers a chance to break out of the burning vehicle and find air to breathe. Now they came spilling out of the bus, crawling on the ground, gasping for air, vomiting, and pleading for water, while the gang of white men went from one to another, beating them with baseball bats and pipes.

Janie, watching nearby, could think of only one thing to do. She ran to fill a clean bucket with water, grabbed some cups, and ran into the crowd. Going from one victim to another, she washed their faces and then gave each of them a cup of water. She realized she was putting herself in danger by venturing into the mob, but she hoped they wouldn't harm her because, as she put it, "I wasn't grown up yet." And she remembered what she had learned in church and Sunday school, that Jesus had said, "Whatever you do to the least of my brothers, you do to me." So the 7th-grader Janie Forsyth carried on, washing faces and handing out cups of water, until she had helped everyone as best she could.

She went unharmed that day, but she could not know then how close she came to suffering serious consequences for her actions. She found out later that the local KKK met to decide whether she should be punished for her act of kindness. They decided against punishing her because, as one member put it, she was "too young and silly to know any better."

She was never physically harmed, but there were other forms of suffering that awaited her in the years to come. At school, she was ostracized by some of the children, who called her ugly names. And, in her own words, "This was such a black mark on my family that nobody — not even my father — would talk about it. I was the black sheep."

It wasn’t until years later, after her father had died, that Janie Forsyth (now Janie McKinney) learned the full truth. When Pearl, the beloved black housemaid who had helped raise her, lay dying, Janie visited her.

“I said, ‘Pearl, Daddy never got over being mad at me about that bus, did he?’ She said, ‘No, child. That’s not right. He told me he had never been prouder of you than he was that day.' ”

It was such a simple act that day, even if a threat hung over the head of that 12-year-old girl. A simple act of humanity — a simple recognition of humanity, that, for all the perceived differences among one people and another, we are all much more alike than we are unalike. There is a sameness in everyone, and an underlying fellowship of need that should bind every human to every other human. We are all in this together! And at one time or another, we all need someone else:

"[God] hath made of one blood all nations… For in him we live, and move, and have our being… For we are also his offspring" (Acts 17:26,28, KJV).

Sources:

1. "American Experience: Freedom Riders", PBS documentary, 2011. 2. "A Single Act of Kindness", Cynthia Lee, UCLA Today, May 10, 2011.

Phoebe (Verses 1,2)

"Phoebe" means "bright" or "radiant", a name perhaps intended originally to honor the Greek sun god Apollo.

The early Christians retained their names, although they were derived from the names of false gods, because they had lost all religious significance and reference. In like manner we retain the use of the names of the days of the week, without ever thinking of their derivation.

Charles Hodge, Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, p. 692

These verses were Paul's commendation of Phoebe, who evidently was carrying his letter to the church in Rome.

There seems little doubt that [Phoebe] was the bearer of the letter; as some business of her own was causing her to go to Rome, the opportunity was taken of sending the epistle with her.

John Carter, The Letter to the Romans, p. 154

This view is held by practically all commentators. While all the other believers who were said to be in Rome had actually been living there, Phoebe must have been newly arrived there, bringing with her Paul's letter. In his letter, the apostle had commended her to the Roman believers as a sister to be received "in a way worthy of the saints" (Rom 16:2). Plainly, the logical deduction is that Phoebe had delivered the letter herself.

Ernest Renan writes in his book, Saint Paul, that Phoebe "carried under the folds of her robe the whole future of the Christian theology — the writing which was to regulate the fate of the world."

Although Phoebe is called a "deacon" (v 1), or servant, this does not necessarily mean that she held a formal office (see the citations and comments below on verse 1). Paul stressed her service, not her office. She was his sister in the Lord, which seems clear from his referring to her as "our" sister.

Romans 16:1

I commend to you our sister Phoebe, a servant of the church in Cenchrea.

I commend to you our sister Phoebe: "Commend" is "sunistemi", literally to stand with, to speak for, and therefore to support or recommend. Letters of commendation were common in Paul's day (2Cor 3:1; see Acts 18:27; 1Cor 16:3,10,11; 2Cor 8:16-24), and they were useful for identification, introduction and character reference.

There is also good reason today for believers who relocate to a new area to be commended to their new home ecclesia, and thus to formally join that local meeting. However, this is sometimes neglected. Some who move to a new area may be reluctant to involve themselves fully in the worship and work of the new congregation, perhaps because they disapprove of some practice or procedure there. Others may simply want to float around with no strings attached. Yet others may want to remain loyal to their old congregation. None of these are good reasons for remaining aloof from the local assembly. Believers, wherever they live, need a family and a home. Without such an anchor, they are more susceptible to drift away from the Truth and finally fall into spiritual ruin.

A servant of the church in Cenchrea: "Servant" is the Greek word "diakonos", from which we derive our English word deacon. This is the only time in the New Testament that this word is applied to a woman. When used of a man, it appears sometimes to refer to a specific office in an ecclesia, and at other times to one who is generally a servant or helper of others.

Very plainly, then, Phoebe was described as a "servant" in her hometown ecclesia in Cenchrea. Cenchrea was a port city serving nearby Corinth (Acts 18:18; 2Cor 1:1), where Paul was staying with his host Gaius (Rom 16:23; see 1Cor 1:14).

So what should we make of the fact that Phoebe, a woman, is actually referred to as a "servant" or deacon of an ecclesia? Was this an officially recognized position for a sister?

Regarding this commendation of Phoebe, Robert Roberts states that Paul's mention of her to the Romans:

…implies a prominent, active, if not official position on the part of the sister in question… [Paul] entreats the whole Roman ecclesia on her behalf, saying of her that "she hath been a succourer of many, and of me also" [Rom 16:2, KJV].

Seasons of Comfort, No. 18: "Spiritual Ignorance and Woman's Position"

Some other comments:

Within the New Testament, the "diakon" word group rarely functions with a technical nuance. In any case, the evidence is not compelling either way.

NET Notes

There were no instructions given in the New Testament for the appointment of women as deacons; and, since there are instructions for the appointment of both elders and deacons, this omission is conclusive.

James B. Coffman, Coffman's Bible Commentary

Phoebe came from Cenchrea which was the port of Corinth. Sometimes she is called a deaconess, but it is not likely that she held what might be called an official position in the church. There can have been no time in the Christian church when the work of women was not of infinite value. It must have been specially so in the days of the early church. In the case of baptism by total immersion… in the visitation of the sick, in the distribution of food to the poor, women must have played a big part in the life and work of the church, but they did not at that time hold any official position.

William Barclay, Daily Study Bible: Romans

Leon Morris offers some of the same reasons for sisters to serve the ecclesia, more or less officially. This would be when certain tasks were required which might seem inappropriate for brothers to undertake:

The social conditions of the time were such that there must have been the need for feminine church workers to assist in… the baptism of women or anything that meant contact with women's quarters in homes.

The Epistle to the Romans, p. 529

Even today in western societies, there may be times when one or more sisters can visit or assist or attend to the needs of other women much more effectively than could male deacons or elders.

When Paul wrote to Timothy, who was in Ephesus, he mentioned a group of widows who were "well known" for their "good deeds, such as bringing up children, showing hospitality, washing the feet of the saints, helping those in trouble and devoting [themselves] to all kinds of good deeds" (1Tim 5:9,10). This does not necessarily refer to an officially sanctioned order of sisters, but rather to a generally recognized group of sisters who — because of their circumstances, age and experience — could devote themselves to good works within the brotherhood. All the above was probably true of Phoebe, whom the apostle esteemed most highly.

To summarize the above citations and thoughts: it would be difficult to make the case, from this one example, that the official position of church deacon, or ecclesial servant, was open to women. Nevertheless, in all the areas of ecclesial service mentioned above, capable and willing sisters could do great work, both then and now.

Cenchrea: Cenchrea was one of the seaports for the city of Corinth, on the eastern side of the Isthmus of Corinth, on the Aegean Sea. It was seven miles east of Corinth. (The other seaport was Lechaeum, a mile and a half to the west on the Corinthian Gulf.) Goods flowed across the isthmus on a road by which small ships could be hauled fully loaded from one side to the other, and by which cargoes of larger ships could be transported by wagons the same distance. In this way, goods flowed through the city of Corinth from Italy and Spain on the west and from Asia Minor, Phoenicia and Egypt on the east.

Trade and commerce made Corinth a wealthy city, and sailors and traveling business people contributed to the general air of cosmopolitan life, with some attendant immorality. The worship of Aphrodite supported prostitution in the name of religion. It is reasonable that Cenchrea, as one of Corinth's seaports, could be characterized in much the same way.

[Cenchrea's] international prominence and prosperity probably peaked in the second century A.D. Although damaged by earthquakes and seismic sea waves in 365 and 375 A.D., the port revived and continued to play a significant role until Cenchrea was finally destroyed by marauding Slavs in the 580s.

Anchor Bible Dictionary

Romans 16:2

I ask you to receive her in the Lord in a way worthy of the saints and to give her any help she may need from you, for she has been a great help to many people, including me.

I ask you to receive her in the Lord in a way worthy of the saints and to give her any help she may need from you: These were traits which Paul advocated and exemplified:

"If it is encouraging, let him encourage; if it is contributing to the needs of others, let him give generously; if it is leadership, let him govern diligently; if it is showing mercy, let him do it cheerfully… Share with God's people who are in need. Practice hospitality" (Rom 12:8,13; see Heb 13:2).

Joseph Bland was a Christadelphian who lectured and spoke extensively in England in the late 19th and early 20th century. This was extracted from one of his exhortations to fellow-believers:

This is a duty for the ecclesias to consider. Do they cordially receive those who visit them from a distance? Do they welcome into their midst visitors from other towns, those who are well reported of, those who come to reside in their midst? Do they cordially receive them and make them at home, or do they receive them coldly and suspiciously, and show none of that affection which the truth should develop? For my own part, I can say I have received nothing but kindness from brethren and sisters elsewhere, and to me it is one of the unique features of the brotherhood that such hospitality is manifested on every hand to those of like precious faith, perfect strangers though brethren may be to each other.

"The Salutations in Romans 16", The Fraternal Visitor, September, 1897, Vol. 12, p. 270

For she has been a great help to many people: "She hath been a succourer of many" (KJV). The Greek word is "prostatis"; it refers to a patron, or a benefactor, suggesting a generous woman of means. This word occurs only this once, and probably describes one whose job in secular society was to make sure that visitors were well treated when they visited a city. This implies that she was the sponsor of a house church in Cenchrea near Corinth, which perhaps met in her residence, and in that capacity she welcomed and cared for many visiting brothers and sisters also.

The fact that she was able to carry the apostle's letter from the area of Corinth to Rome suggests independence and freedom to travel, which in turn implies that Phoebe was a woman of some wealth and status.

Just as Phoebe had been a generous helper of others, Paul asks the Roman brethren to be generous helpers of her, giving her every possible assistance in her work.

Including me: Paul knew of whom he spoke, since Phoebe had been of great help to him in the past, as well as here one more time, by acting as Paul's emissary. In similar ways, women such as Mary Magdalene, Joanna, Susanna, and others must have helped Jesus also (Luke 8:2,3).

In Acts of the Apostles, page 285, Harry Whittaker suggests that Phoebe had nursed others back to health, including Paul. He adds:

It seems fairly likely that Paul had one of his recurrent attacks of malaria — "weakness and much trembling" (1Cor 2:3; cp Acts 27:3, RV). This fight against ill-health makes all the more admirable the dedicated efforts of the apostle in his zealous propagation of the gospel.

All God’s Children Have Names

Introduction

At the very beginning, we must ask ourselves, What should we make of the long lists of names in Romans 16? Why are they there? What possible benefit do they confer on us, the readers?

The minister and essayist F.W. Boreham told the following story:

The Golden Milestone, pp. 165,166

On that story hangs a moral, which is our theme. There are indeed lots of names in some sections of the Bible. But they are more than just names, and they deserve a better fate than being submerged and swallowed up in a total number. We can be assured that each one of those who were righteous have been written in the Lamb’s Book of Life (Phil 4:3; Rev 3:5; 13:8; 17:8; 20:12,15; 21:27), and each one is precious to their Creator. Not one of them is a mere statistic, at least not to the Lord God who knows all their names. And here, with Paul as His messenger, He shares some of those names with us:

“Then those who feared the Lord talked with each other, and the Lord listened and heard. A scroll of remembrance was written in his presence concerning those who feared the Lord and honored his name. ‘They will be mine,’ says the Lord Almighty, ‘in the day when I make up my treasured possession. I will spare them, just as in compassion a man spares his son who serves him’ ” (Mal 3:16,17).

“Those who are wise will shine like the brightness of the heavens, and those who lead many to righteousness, like the stars for ever and ever” (Dan 12:3).

“He determines the number of the stars and calls them each by name” (Psa 147:4).

And His Son feels exactly the same way:

“The man who enters by the gate is the shepherd of his sheep… and the sheep listen to his voice. He calls his own sheep by name and leads them out” (John 10:2,3).

“Can a mother forget the baby at her breast and have no compassion on the child she has borne? Though she may forget, I will not forget you! See, I have engraved you on the palms of my hands” (Isa 49:15,16).

The engraving here is probably intended to be symbolic. Nevertheless, we can surely recognize that what is (symbolically) written upon the palms is a name, or names, not merely a number!

Lists of names may seem quite boring, unless we know someone on the list. If we know all the people on the list, then what was otherwise boring can become quite interesting. And if we happen to find our own name on the list, then — before we know it — that same list has become fascinating. Finally, if that list appears in the pages of Scripture, as a list of those who have God’s approval, then there may be nothing else in the whole wide world that is more important. I’m sure that, when he learned of it, Epenetus would have considered what we call Romans 16:5 to be his favorite verse in the whole Bible. Likewise, Ampliatus with Romans 16:8, and Stachys with verse 9, etc. — through the whole of Paul’s detailed list.

In this last chapter of Romans, the personal quality of Paul’s letter comes into sharp focus. When we first read it, this may seem like a dull recitation of names, with dozens of people totally unknown to us. But as we consider this section, we begin to understand that Paul wrote his letter to people, not just to a church, and that faith is a personal matter as well as a collective one. We may live out our lives of faith within a group or a congregation — a spiritual family — but even in a family we each experience our faith as an individual. When our family has troubles, we have troubles too. It also works both ways. Our successes, if there are such, may be enjoyed by our family too. In Christ we do not really live or die to ourselves, but as parts of a Body to which we belong. The family sustains us, and we sustain the family.

The poet John Donne wrote:

No man is an island entire of itself; Every man is a piece of the continent, A part of the main. If a clod be washed away by the sea, Europe is the less, As well as if a promontory were, As any man’s death diminishes me, Because I am involved in Mankind. And therefore never send to know For whom the bell tolls; It tolls for thee.

The personal nature of Paul’s letter

On Romans 16 William R. Newell writes:

This sixteenth chapter is neglected by many to their own loss. It is by far the most extensive, intimate and particular of all the words of loving greeting in Paul’s marvelous letters. No one can afford to miss this wonderful outpouring of the heart of our apostle toward the saints whom he so loved — which means all the real church of God!

Romans Verse-by-Verse

In “The Roman Christians in Romans 16” (The Romans Debate, pp. 227-229), Peter Lampe writes:

There is, in fact, almost a complete lack of Semitic names — Mary in verse 6 is an exception. However, there is more than a little evidence from papyri and inscriptions which indicates that both in the diaspora as well as in Palestine, the changing of personal names was a common practice. The Jews acquired not only Greek, but Latin and Egyptian names as well. Paul’s relatives [mentioned in vv 7,11] were of course Jews, but do not bear Jewish names.

For Christadelphians, Romans 16 is the best example in the Bible of what we today call “ecclesial news” (or, using the old-fashioned term: “intelligence”). And the “news” is not about the whole ecclesia nearly so much as it is about the individuals who make up that ecclesia.

House churches, or ecclesias

In the chapter of greetings, Paul mentions perhaps as many as five “house churches”, or groups of believers who meet together in a household, in Rome:

“the church that meets at [Priscilla and Aquila’s] house” (vv 3,5);
“those who belong to the household of Aristobulus” (v 10);
“those in the household of Narcissus who are in the Lord” (v 11);
“Asyncritus, Phlegon, Hermes, Patrobas, Hermas and the brothers with them” (v 14); and
“Philologus, Julia, Nereus and his sister, and Olympas and all the saints with them” (v 15).

When Paul writes to “all in Rome who are… called to be saints” (Rom 1:7), he is including the members of the small house churches as well as those who might attend larger or more centrally located ecclesias. Paul’s view of “the ecclesia” is at least fourfold. Considering this from the smallest to the largest:

There are the smallest groups of believers who meet regularly with one another, in private houses (cp Rom 1:7 with Rom 16:5,10,11,14,15; cp 1Cor 1:2 with 1Cor 16:19; cp Col 1:2 with Col 4:15; and also cp Phil 4:22 and Philemon 1:2,22).
Then there are the larger churches or ecclesias meeting in more central locations (though they may be private houses as well).
There is what might be called the regional ecclesia, consisting of all the smaller groups in a region or metropolitan area, i.e., “all in Rome” (Rom 1:7), “the church of God in Corinth” (1Cor 1:2; 2Cor 1:2), “the churches of Judea that are in Christ” (Gal 1:22), “the saints in Ephesus, the faithful in Christ Jesus” (Eph 1:1; etc.; cp also Acts 8:1; 9:31).
At last, there is the worldwide “ecclesia” of all believers, no matter with which single congregation they may meet on a regular basis (Matt 16:18; Acts 8:3; 1Cor 10:32; 12:28; 15:9; Gal 1:13; Eph 1:22; 3:10,21; 5:23-32; Phil 3:6; Col 1:18,24; Heb 12:23).

It is useful to keep all these variations in mind when we think or speak of the church or ecclesia. Perhaps there are lessons to be learned when considering all the possibilities:

The smallest congregation has meaning and purpose, even if others scarcely notice it. When several believers meet together in the name of the Lord, we are assured that he is with them in spirit, just as much as if they were part of a meeting numbering in the hundreds.

Members of larger ecclesias may, without even realizing it, think less of someone who meets with a small group. They should remember that the first-ever group of believers who broke bread together was quite small in numbers, and they met in an out-of-the-way upper room — but Christ was the center and focus of their meeting nonetheless.

To paraphrase 1 Corinthians 12, every church is part of the greater Body, and members of larger and better situated groups should never say to those from a small cluster of believers, ‘We have no need of you!” We are all important to our Savior, large groups or small, and the Lord knows all our names.

Membership in a “more important” ecclesia may bring certain benefits, but it by no means confers special blessing upon an individual, and certainly no guarantee of salvation in the Day of Judgment. Each of us must stand, individually, upon our own personal faith and the way in which we have put that faith into practice.

Finally, since Paul writes of a universal “ecclesia” of all believers, we must remember that the actions of an individual or the decisions of a single ecclesia can make an impact on the worldwide Body of Christ. Even though we understand that every ecclesia has a measure of independence from others, such a liberty should not be mistaken for license. An ecclesia placing its own unique restrictions upon members or visitors can damage its inter-ecclesial fellowship with others. Likewise, relaxing requirements which are generally followed by other ecclesias can do the same. Not just as individuals, but as ecclesias, we should be careful not to put stumbling blocks in the paths of others: “Be careful… that the exercise of your freedom does not become a stumbling block to the weak” (1Cor 8:9). “ ‘Everything is permissible’ — but not everything is beneficial. ‘Everything is permissible’ — but not everything is constructive” (1Cor 10:23).

The place of women in the first-century ecclesia

Notice that the ministry of women in the Roman church is quite evident in this chapter. Paul refers to nine prominent women: Phoebe (vv 1,2), Priscilla (vv 3,4), Mary (v 6), Tryphena, Tryphosa, Persis (all in v 12), Rufus’ mother (v 13), Julia, and Nereus’ sister (both in v 15). There may be other female names in his list also.

Emil Brunner writes:

The impression which these salutations [in Romans 16] make is that of a great family on the one hand and of a working community on the other, both of which are based not on natural relations but solely “in Christ” and his message. One also notices nothing of a depreciation of women such as, for instance, has been read out of 1 Corinthians 14; for the apostle expressly emphasizes that Phoebe rendered assistance not only to many others but also to himself, and he also calls the mother of Rufus his own “mother”. Prisca, ready for martyrdom [Rom 16:4], he salutes as his fellow-worker before her husband Aquila, together with whom she presides at a house church; along with these two most important women he also mentions Mary, Persis, Tryphosa and Tryphena as industrious workers “in the Lord” and besides them, with or without name, individually or together with men, he refers to a number of others… The recommendation with which he introduces his fellow-worker, Phoebe, to the community of Rome allows us also to catch a glimpse of the mutual relations of foresight and provident care within the young church as a world-embracing fellowship. All in all, what a new aspect of the world at that time this catalogue of greetings reveals to us! What a mirror it holds up before our present day church!

The Letter to the Romans, pp. 127,128

Outline of Romans 16

The commendation of Phoebe (vv 1,2)
Various greetings to the believers in Rome (vv 3-16)
A warning against false teachers (vv 17-20)
Greetings from Paul’s companions (vv 21-24)
A final doxology, or praise of God (vv 25-27)

Beloved Brothers and Sisters, Fellow Workers and Friends (Verses 8-12)

Romans 16:8-10

Historians tell us that Ampliatus, Urbanus, Stachys and Apelles are all common slave names found in the staff of the imperial household.

When writing to the Philippian church, Paul — who was probably in Rome — sent them greetings from "all the saints… especially those who belong to Caesar's household" (Phil 4:22). The phrase "Caesar's household" might refer only to the actual relatives of Caesar, but would generally refer to a much larger number which included the staff — servants and freedmen in the imperial household — as well as the relatives.

J.B. Lightfoot made a study of burial inscriptions of imperial establishments available in his time (St. Paul's Epistle to the Philippians, London, 1879, pp. 171-178). He determined that a number of the names found in Romans 16 were also found in those inscriptions. Since Philippians 4:22 mentions "saints… who belong to Caesar's household", it is reasonable that some of the lesser-known saints mentioned from this point forward in Romans 16 may have been slaves in Caesar's royal household.

Romans 16:8

Greet Ampliatus, whom I love in the Lord.

This is "Amplias" in the KJV, which is a contraction of Ampliatus — the latter being the reading in the best New Testament texts. The Latin name means "enlarged", similar to the English word amplify. Again, as in the mention of Epenetus (v 5), Paul expresses his very warm personal attachment. This demonstrates the reality and depth of Christian friendship which developed between him and others who remain rather obscure to us. Paul was a man who gave himself in love to the people among whom he served and to those who worked alongside him. If for no other reason, they encouraged and strengthened him merely by returning his love!

William Barclay writes:

Behind the name of Ampliatus may well lie an interesting story. It is a quite common slave name. Now in the cemetery of Domatilla, which is the earliest of the Christian catacombs, there is a decorated tomb with the single name Ampliatus carved on it in bold and decorative lettering. The fact that the single name Ampliatus alone is carved on the tomb — Romans who were citizens would have three names… — would indicate that this Ampliatus was a slave; but the elaborate tomb and the bold lettering would indicate that he was a man of high rank in the church. From that it is plain to see that in the early days of the church the distinctions of rank were so completely wiped out that it was possible for a man at one and the same time to be a slave and [an elder] of the church. Social distinctions did not exist. We have no means of knowing that Paul's Ampliatus is the Ampliatus in the cemetery of Domatilla, but it is not impossible that he is.

Daily Study Bible: Romans 16

In the Lord: Perhaps we read this simple phrase so often that we lose the impact of it. "In the Lord [Greek 'kyrios']" occurs frequently, particularly in Paul's writings, and means the same as "in Jesus Christ":

Paul affirms and exhorts "in the Lord" (Eph 4:17);
he loves "in the Lord" (Rom 16:8);
people are received "in the Lord" (Rom 16:2; Phil 2:29);
the ecclesia rejoices "in the Lord" (Phil 3:1);
it stands firm "in the Lord" (Phil 4:1);
it works "in the Lord" (Rom 16:12); and
it greets one another "in the Lord" (Rom 16:22; 1Cor 16:19).
Believers are to marry "in the Lord" (1Cor 7:39);
they are to be strong "in the Lord" (Eph 6:10); and
to walk "in the Lord" (Col 2:6).
Paul was a prisoner “in the Lord” (Eph 4:1).
Our work is not in vain "in the Lord" (1Cor 15:58).
The believer has eternal life "in the Lord" (Rom 6:23); etc.

For believers in Jesus Christ, the whole of life, both in the present and the future, is organized around his absolute supremacy. Paul and his friends knew they were always standing in the presence of, and under the protection of, their risen Lord — as though he were (which he was) the only eternal and immovable place of safety in a transient and dying world.

I am sure we would all agree that, of all the saints we know, Paul is the man whose example we might best follow. Surely those whom Paul loved "in the Lord" we should also love "in the Lord"! Those whom Paul greeted, received, exhorted, walked with, and worked with "in the Lord", on the way to the Kingdom… we would surely have treated those same brothers and sisters in the same way Paul did. Do any of us doubt that this should be so?

Yet today we have factions — political parties, almost — in our brotherhood. We choose sides, and force others to choose sides also, on the basis of relatively minor differences: what Bible versions they read; how old they believe the earth to be; which interpretations they embrace of future events outlined in Revelation or Daniel or Ezekiel; how they dress; what holidays they observe; or what they eat, or do not eat!

Then we treat brothers and sisters on the "other side" of our pathetic little self-imposed divides as something less than truly "in the Lord", certainly not nearly so much "in the Lord" as our own specially favored ones — with whom we agree 100%! "My brethren, such things ought not so to be" (James 3:10, KJV). I have no doubt at all that the great apostle, if he were in our midst this very day, would never cease to remind us that we should "destroy not him with thy meat, for whom Christ died" (Rom 14:15, KJV). Nor should we "destroy" our brothers and sisters "in the Lord" with our clothing requirements, or with our prophetic predictions, or our Bible versions, or our specialized use of Hebrew and Greek, or any of a hundred minor issues, or else we will be like those whom Christ said "neglected the most important matters of the law — justice, mercy, and faithfulness… [so that they might] strain out a gnat but swallow a camel" (Matt 23:23,24).

Romans 16:9

Greet Urbanus, our fellow worker in Christ, and my dear friend Stachys.

Greet Urbanus, our fellow worker in Christ: The KJV renders this as "Urbane". This is another Latin name, meaning "refined" or "elegant". Paul seems to indicate that this man helped him at some time in the past and that he assisted others also in the work of the Lord. He is the only believer in Rome other than Aquila and Priscilla (v 3) whom Paul expressly called a "synergos", i.e., a fellow worker or co-worker.

And my dear friend Stachys: This name signifies "ear of grain". Was this brother a farmer? Otherwise, we know nothing else about this believer, except that he was dearly loved ("agapetos") by the great apostle.

Romans 16:10

Greet Apelles, tested and approved in Christ. Greet those who belong to the household of Aristobulus.

Greet Apelles: The word means "separate".

Tested and approved: "Tested and approved" translates one word in the Greek text here: "dokimos" (see Rom 14:18; 1Cor 11:19; 2Cor 10:18; 13:7; 2Tim 2:15). In 1 Peter 1:7 a related word, "dokimazo", is used of gold that has been put through the smelting fire, and purified (see also Rom 12:2; 1Cor 3:13; 11:28; 2Cor 8:8; etc.). Had Apelles come through some severe persecution with his faith intact, or even strengthened?

Greet those who belong to the household of Aristobulus: There is no Greek equivalent for "household", either here or in verse 11. The literal phrase is "those of Aristobulus", or "those of Narcissus" (see also 1Cor 1:11).

"Aristobulus" signifies "great counselor", which sounds like a government official. Those of his household were probably his slaves. Since Paul did not greet Aristobulus himself — even as he did not greet Narcissus personally in verse 11 — this man may have been an unbeliever, or may have died by this time.

Lightfoot identified Aristobulus as the grandson of Herod the Great, who lived in Rome and apparently died there. If this is correct, Aristobulus was either not a believer or had died before Paul wrote, since he is not personally greeted. Those addressed would then be his slaves and employees who had become Christians. On the other hand, if this identification is incorrect, we must think of an otherwise unknown figure whose family is mentioned here. The former alternative is somewhat favored by the fact that the next person to be greeted (v 11) is Herodion, a name suggestive of association with, or admiration for, the family of Herod. Even though no actual relationship may have existed, the placing of the two names with Herodian association so close together may support Lightfoot's thesis.

Everett F. Harrison, Expositor's Bible Commentary

Romans 16:11

Greet Herodion, my relative. Greet those in the household of Narcissus who are in the Lord.

Greet Herodion, my relative: Here "relative" ("kinsman": KJV; Greek "suggenes", meaning: same family) may simply mean a Jew, or perhaps a Benjamite.

Greet those in the household of Narcissus: Again, as with "the household of Aristobulus" (v 10), this phrasing suggests that Narcissus was not a believer, but that some of his "household" of slaves and servants were "in the Lord". Obviously, what William Barclay says below can only be, as he admits, speculation — but it is possible:

"The household of Narcissus" may have [an] interesting story behind it. Narcissus was a common name; but the most famous Narcissus was a freedman who had been secretary to the Emperor Claudius and had exercised a notorious influence over him. He was said to have amassed [an enormous] private fortune. His power had lain in the fact that all correspondence addressed to the Emperor had to pass through his hands and never reached him unless he allowed it to do so. He made his fortune from the fact that people paid him large bribes to make sure that their petitions did reach the Emperor. When Claudius was murdered and Nero came to the throne, Narcissus survived for a short time, but in the end he was compelled to commit suicide, and all his fortune and all his household of slaves passed into Nero's possession. It may well be his one-time slaves who are referred to here. If Aristobulus really is the Aristobulus who was the grandson of Herod, and if Narcissus really is the Narcissus who was Claudius' secretary, this means that many of the slaves at the imperial court were already Christians. The leaven of Christianity had reached the highest circles in the Empire.

Who are in the Lord: This phrase modifies the previous phrase, that is: Paul is greeting, not the whole of Narcissus' household, but all those who were "in the Lord". This indicates a divided household, with some "in the Lord", i.e., giving allegiance to Christ, while others had no connection with Christ.

Romans 16:12

Greet Tryphena and Tryphosa, those women who work hard in the Lord. Greet my dear friend Persis, another woman who has worked very hard in the Lord.

Greet Tryphena and Tryphosa, those women who work hard in the Lord: Similar in name, these two were probably sisters, maybe even twins if judged by the similarity of their names. It was not uncommon then, as now, to give children, especially twins, similarly sounding names (e.g., Jean and Joan). Possibly they belonged to an aristocratic family, since "dainty" and "delicate" (or "luxuriating"), as their names mean, would seem to fit this category. If so, their Christian convictions led them to put aside any tendency to live a life of ease. Ironically, Paul praises these two sisters for not living up — or down — to their given names, but rather for being hard workers in the Lord's cause:

"And whatever you do, whether in word or deed, do it all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him" (Col 3:17).

Greet my dear friend Persis, another woman who has worked very hard in the Lord: Her name simply means "a Persian lady", so this could well be a nickname or title: 'the woman from Persia'. "Dear friend" is the Greek "agapetoi", meaning one who is especially beloved.

The same words for "work hard" (Greek "ekopiasen" and "polla") are used in verse 6 of Mary, and again here in verse 12 of three other women, sisters in the Lord. Is it coincidental that in this chapter Paul uses it of four believers, and they are all sisters?

In congregations of believers, women are often the hardest workers. Men may spend much of their time pondering deep and meaningful Scriptural things, and those are certainly very important. At the same time, women may often ponder such matters too, while at the same time they are also occupied with caring for the household, the children, the meals, and various other needs of believers and acquaintances.

Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers were a song and dance team in movies and stage productions from the 1930s to the 1950s. Astaire was the headliner, with Ginger Rogers generally perceived as following his lead. Their partnership inspired a famous line, which described their relative roles, as well as the effort expended by Rogers to keep up with her male partner. It was said that Ginger Rogers did everything that Fred Astaire did, except she did it backwards and in high heels! There are quite a number of wives who fill a similar role with their husbands in the ecclesias: both may be working hard in the Lord, but we may be certain that one partner in the relationship is working harder than the other!

A Suggested Reason for Paul Writing to the Romans

Paul summarized his policy regarding preaching in Romans 15:20:

"It has always been my ambition ['I have strived': cp KJV] to preach the gospel where Christ was not known, so that I would not be building on someone else's foundation."

Since that was his avowed intention, why did he choose to write his most comprehensive statement about the gospel to an ecclesia which he had not yet visited?

The church at Rome contained an extremely volatile mix of members in the first century. There were Jews, some who were still quite committed to the observance of the Law of Moses. There was also a large number of Gentile converts from the gross idolatry of the Roman world. In a number of cases, such Gentiles were from influential Roman families, but considering the makeup of Rome's population at that time, many more would probably have been slaves.

Harry Whittaker describes what he calls "the strange social situation" in Rome:

The Jewish Christians had lived all their days following the strict food laws and prohibitions which all through the centuries have done more than anything else to maintain Jewish separatism. These Jews would inevitably be infected with the spiritual snobbery which was very much a characteristic of Jewry at that time… They knew themselves to be the chosen race, "beloved for the fathers' sakes". [To these Jews] Gentiles were mere "dogs", ignorant idolaters, steeped in all kinds of abomination. Even believing Gentiles would be seen to be religiously much inferior to themselves, and accordingly many (or most) of these Jewish believers would look down on their Gentile brethren, who had not grown up in the nurture of the Scriptures, as though they were of lower status in the Faith.

On the other hand some of these Gentiles were from some of the highest families in the Empire. And practically all of them would be accustomed to thinking of themselves as members of the Master Race, the nation which had built the strongest Empire the world had ever known. Especially were they used to looking down their noses at Jews who [had] somehow managed to get themselves disliked by most Gentiles. Here, then, was a situation which from earliest days was fraught with difficulty. Oil and water do not mix. Then how much less the hope that Jews and Romans would join together in a fullness of fellowship so as to adorn the doctrine of Christ!

Bible Studies, p. 304

It was in this ecclesial environment that Aquila the Jew and Priscilla the Roman lived. They may have seen real evidence of the Body of Christ being split into two cliques organized according to nationality. What could be done about it? Since this married couple represented both sides of the great divide in their own marriage, and since they had been close associates and coworkers with the apostle Paul, it seems likely that they decided on a course of action designed to bring the Roman ecclesia or church closer together as One Body. They may even have requested that Paul write a letter to the Roman brethren in order to lay out the full gospel of Jesus Christ. But at the same time, his Letter to the Romans would also present that gospel in the context of the perceived differences between the two parts of the ecclesia (Romans 9-11), along with strong exhortations to develop and maintain true unity in the bond of the Spirit (Romans 12-15), despite those differences.

A microcosm of the Roman ecclesia

The "mixed" marriage of devoutly Jewish Aquila and aristocratic Roman Priscilla is a microcosm of the "mixed" ecclesia in Rome. It is evident from our previous article (#3: "Priscilla and Aquila") that this mismatched couple did remarkably well in blending their diverse backgrounds and experiences into "one body" ("A man will leave his father and mother and be united with his wife, and they will become one flesh": Gen 2:24; cp Matt 19:5; Mark 10:8; Eph 5:31).

This particular "one body" or "one flesh" of Aquila and Priscilla achieved extraordinary success in preaching, guiding, and caregiving — quite literally because, wherever they went throughout the Empire, they never encountered a believer or a prospective believer with whom they had nothing in common. When Paul wrote: "Unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews… to them that are without law, [I became] as without law… that I might gain them that are without law" (1Cor 9:20,21, KJV), he could well have been describing the partnership of Aquila and Priscilla. Their respective heritages and upbringings had prepared this couple to be all things to all men and women — in one convenient package!

To develop such an effective "unity" between two very different people would not have been easy. It would have required an extended, concentrated effort — never mind a profound love for the Lord, the gospel, and one another.

However, once such a status was reached — and remembering the need to nurture and strengthen that unity — Aquila and Priscilla must have realized how much the Roman believers needed that same unity, but on a much wider scale. I think this is what they hoped the apostle Paul would help them to achieve.

As with a marriage, so with an ecclesia — whether that "ecclesia" is a single meeting, several congregations, or the broader body consisting of all individual believers who share a common faith and hope, wherever they live. One ingredient is especially necessary to bring together diverse elements, and that is the ability to overlook and then to live with the minor differences of opinion or practice which are naturally found in a community of likeminded but individual believers. We must remember that, as believers in Christ, we are all instructed to examine the Scriptures, to think for ourselves, and to prove all things (1Thes 5:21). If these guidelines are actually followed, then we may expect that a community based on such instructions will readily agree on the fundamentals of the faith, which by definition are supported by not one or two, but many passages. At the same time, we may also expect that its members would learn to tolerate the relatively minor differences of opinions on doubtful matters, because they have also been instructed to distinguish between what Robert Roberts called "true principles" and "uncertain details". *

How Paul dealt with the problem in Rome

The background of Paul's Epistle to the Romans is suggested in his introductory statement of purpose:

"I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile" (Rom 1:16).

Jews and Gentiles were in the same situation regarding salvation: they were all sinners, and all in need of God's mercy (Rom 1:18-3:20). The Jews were the "first" to believe the gospel, because the Law's inability to save weak and sinful mankind had prepared them to accept a Savior. "Then" the Gentiles began to realize, through the preaching of Jewish converts, that they had the same need for a Messiah as did the Jews. Given their respective circumstances, how could either group look down upon or feel superior to the other? Each needed the grace of God in equal portions.

"Is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles too? Yes, of Gentiles too, since there is only one God, who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through that same faith" (Rom 3:29,30).

In many cases, Jewish and Gentile believers had followed very different paths to accept the same gospel. As Paul also explained, God had indeed promised that Abraham would be the spiritual father not just of Jews, but of all who had faith. In fact, he was destined to become "the father of many nations" (Rom 4:17) — Gentiles as well as Jews. No matter where they started, Jews and Gentiles heard the call to repent and, led by faith, they followed — until they all arrived at the same destination: the mercy seat, where salvation was found in Jesus Christ.

Going on from the earlier chapters of Romans (chapters 1-5), Paul led his readers on through baptism, the beginning of a new life, and to the great joys of belonging to the family of God in Christ (Romans 6-8). These steps were what all believers held in common with one another — no matter their ethnicity or language, social standing or background. And thus, Paul arrived at the section mentioned above (Romans 9-11), where he analyzed the respective situations of Jews and Gentiles. In doing so, Paul assured all believers that, no matter how far away any believers might think to remove themselves from the mercies of God, He is able to graft them back into His own "tree", His own spiritual family, and include them in the One Hope again.

Then finally, Paul led the Roman believers — the formerly devout Jews as well as formerly idolatrous Gentiles — to Romans 12:3-8, and the wonderful allegory of the One Body (which he developed even further in 1 Corinthians 12). In both Romans and Corinthians he painted the beautiful picture of disparate elements brought together, against all expectation, to create a new and glorious unity. In such a unity, all the components miraculously worked together for the benefit of the whole, and with a greater energy than the sum of the parts.

Finally Paul brought his audience to the powerful and practical exhortations of the last major section of the letter (Rom 12:9-15:13) — exhortations about hope and love, prayer and peace, patience in affliction, decency and restraint, kindness toward all mankind, help and comfort for those whose faith was weak, respect for those with slightly different ideas and emphases, restraint in judging and criticizing others, and — no matter what — joy in sharing fellowship with one another.

It is instructive for us modern readers to see how all of Paul's exhortations in these chapters were intended to lead that odd collection of first-century Roman believers to a greater unity with one another. It was perfectly obvious that, left to themselves, they had nothing in common; they were Jews and Gentiles, poor and rich, slave and free. They had different customs, different traditions, different foods, and different perspectives on the world. Left to themselves, they were aliens to one another and — perhaps most telling of all — they simply did not like each other!

How could this be changed? What could make sworn enemies like Jewish rebels and Roman soldiers come to respect and even love one another? What could make the richest and poorest elements of Mediterranean society live together in goodwill and unity of mind? The answer, I believe, was love. One Man lived, taught, healed, and finally died, only to be raised from the dead — all to show the world what an absolute self-sacrificing love could achieve. And in doing this, he called upon all mankind to follow his example.

Is it enough, however, to study the first-century church from a safe distance? Should we not also ask ourselves: Is there a lesson in all this for believers in modern times? And if there is a lesson for us, what does it mean in practical terms?

Perhaps we can consider those questions in our next article.

* Note: “True Principles and Uncertain Details; or, The Danger of Going Too Far in our Demands on Fellow-Believers” is a lengthy article written by Robert Roberts, one of the last articles he wrote before his death. It first appeared in the magazine which he edited, The Christadelphian, Vol. 35, No. 407 (May 1898), pp. 182-189. This article has been reprinted at least twice, by later editors of the same magazine: by C.C. Walker (Vol. 60, No. 708 — June 1923, pp. 248-256) and by John Carter (Vol. 92, No. 1097 — Nov. 1955, pp. 414-418).

Lessons for the “Mixed” Ecclesia Today

The apostle Paul will help us modern believers to do what the "mixed" Roman ecclesia did in the first century, and that is to distinguish between "true principles" and "uncertain details". Meanwhile, I will endeavor to add a few thoughts of my own along the way.

Passing judgment on doubtful matters

Among the practical exhortations alluded to in the last article (Romans 12-15), Paul warns us against judging one another in doubtful, or disputable, matters:

"Accept him whose faith is weak, without passing judgment on disputable matters" (Rom 14:1).

The "weak" brethren of Paul's day wanted everyone to refrain from certain practices which they deemed to be displeasing to God, even while others (the "strong" brethren?) found those same practices acceptable and, in some cases, even supported by Scripture.

In the first century, these doubtful matters often involved Jewish traditions such as dietary rules and ritual customs from the Law of Moses, which were no longer necessary for Jewish Christians. Nevertheless, "serious" Jews strongly felt the emotional and psychological pull of long-held practices. They may have known intellectually that such practices were no longer necessary, nor even important, but on an emotional level they found it difficult if not impossible to let them go.

The principle still applies today. A modern list of such doubtful matters of preference and conscience might include:

Which Bible translations are "acceptable", and which should be read in Bible classes and services;
Whether Bible commentaries or studies by non-Christadelphians should be used;
Observing Christmas, Easter, and other less religious holidays;
Attending sporting events, or allowing children to participate in organized team sports or social clubs;
Using tobacco or alcohol (that is, anything stronger than wine);
What is suitable clothing at memorial meetings, and in general;
Whether musical instruments other than piano and organ should be used in ecclesial services;
Which hymns should be sung, and which hymnbooks should be used;
Whether sisters should wear makeup or jewelry, and if so, how much;
Which novels, books, movies, and other entertainments are suitable;
Whether we should watch television at all, or how much, or what particular programs, etc.;
Being involved in social media, and if so, to what extent;
Participating in gambling of any form;
What sort of head coverings, if any, should be worn, and when;
Whether believers should seek higher education, and the business or professional life which that education might lead to;
Entering into partnerships with non-believers;
How ecclesias should deal with those who marry outside the Truth; and
How ecclesias should handle every variation and circumstance of divorce and/or remarriage.

This list is based on my own experience, but the point is that we can all think of certain doubtful matters where opinions vary from one believer to another, and about which there is no established consensus.

The above list does not even address doubtful matters of Bible interpretation. Some examples:

The age of the earth;
Whether Genesis days of creation were 24-hour periods, or longer "days";
Whether Noah's flood was universal or local;
Specific interpretations, or unknowable details — of prophecies yet to be fulfilled;
Whether or not Ezekiel's prophecy of a temple pertains to the Kingdom Age; and if so, what interpretation of Ezekiel 40-48 should be followed;
The location of Christ's judgment seat, the duration of his judgment, and details of its outworking; and — perhaps most troubling of all —
Precisely how the Lord Jesus Christ benefited by his own sacrifice, and precisely how that sacrifice benefits all believers.

I mention this last item not because the atonement is unimportant, but because it is so important that it commands our attention. This means that, too often, otherwise serious Bible students subject the questions — of how Christ benefited, and how we benefit, by his sacrifice — to such intense scrutiny that they develop what can only be called obsessions and/or phobias. Some students may even treat small details and distinctions as though they are first principles, when they are no more than minor quibbles or personal points of view. The technical process of the atonement ('how does it work?') can come to overshadow its moral component ('what does it do for me?'), which can get lost in the weeds. In this all-too-common scenario, debates about "the legality" of the sacrifice choke the life out of much more important qualities such as grace, mercy and love, about which the sacrifice of Christ should teach us so intimately.

You could probably compile your own separate list of such questions too — not that I'd recommend the exercise to anyone! These lists are put forward for a specific purpose — and it is most definitely not to start more arguments! Instead, I'm suggesting that the reader should try to keep in mind the two lists above while reading what follows here. I do not mean this to be a theoretical exercise but rather a practical one. Ask yourself as you read:

'What is my reaction upon reading or hearing about differing opinions regarding the topics on the list? Can I find the grace and strength to refrain from passing judgment on my brethren who hold opinions contrary to mine on these non-fundamental topics? Can I think of them as my brethren in every way, even when they disagree with me? And can I allow them the freedom, not only to think but also to talk about such ideas which I believe to be wrong?'

Paul's advice, regardless of what is on your list or mine, is simple but relevant:

"Accept him whose faith is weak, without passing judgment on disputable matters" (Rom 14:1).

The Greek for "accept" is "proslambano", which means to take, receive or accept into one's company. More specifically, it means to take another aside, to hold him close, and to confide in him. It is a warm, inviting, comforting word, and conveys a sense of fullness of fellowship — literally, wholeheartedness in sharing. The verb here is in the middle voice, and continuous, that is: go on receiving. The RSV is even more gracious: "Welcome him." This is no grudging, grumbling, wary acceptance ('Let's just wait and see if this one measures up, but I have my doubts'). Instead, this is a positive, open-hearted and open-armed full fellowship — with no reservations.

On the other hand, those who consider themselves to be "strong" must accept those who are "weak" in their faith, because God has accepted them (Rom 14:3). The strong must go the extra mile in receiving and helping the weak (Rom 15:1,2). Again, Paul exhorts:

"Accept one another, just as Christ accepted you, in order to bring praise to God" (Rom 15:7).

Have you ever stopped to realize that absolutely every person whom Christ has accepted as his brother or sister has been inferior — vastly inferior — to Christ himself? This is not just true of every adulterer (like David) or murderer (David again, and Saul of Tarsus) or prostitute (Rahab, Mary Magdalene?). It is true of the apostles Peter and James and John, true of John Thomas and Robert Roberts, and — by the way — it's true of you and me!

Going back to Romans 14:1: the NIV word "disputable" ("without passing judgment on disputable matters") translates the Greek "dialogismos". The KJV and RV both have "doubtful disputations". According to the best lexicons and textual commentaries, the Greek word suggests arguments or debates about matters which are inherently doubtful in the first place. To put it simply, Paul seems to be saying: 'Do not argue endlessly about arguments which have never been settled.'

In my opinion, Paul might well have added… 'and likely never will be settled until the Kingdom, if then.' Other translations of Paul's phrase — and there are many — highlight this very point:

The RV margin has: "decisions of doubts"; the phrasing suggests that every doubt must be resolved one way or another — when of course they need not be!
The ASV has: "decisions of scruples", presumably meaning: 'Don't try to pass judgment on someone else's scruples';
The RSV: "quarreling over opinions"; so why not just leave it this way: 'You have your opinion and I have mine, but we know our shared Faith is the same'?
The NEB: "attempting to settle doubtful points"; and
The NET has: "disputes over differing opinions", with the accompanying NET note adding: "The qualifier 'differing' has been supplied [i.e., by the translators] to clarify the meaning."

The ecclesia ought to welcome, warmly and lovingly, everyone who shares the same faith, even if some may have a more tenuous grasp than others, while others may have a quite peculiar perspective on some minor issue. All who share the same faith should be welcomed as equals in the family of believers, without condemning or censuring them, even in thought, much less publicly.

As we've discussed in the previous article (#4: "A Suggested Reason…"), the question of which foods were acceptable was quite a troublesome issue in the first century, because mixed communities of believers would be expected to share meals together. Jews were traditionally scrupulous while Gentiles were usually flexible about diet, yet they were all supposed to come together to share a meal and together to remember their Savior. The memorial meeting itself, the very heart of their worship, was generally part of a communal meal. The Anchor Bible Dictionary discusses this aspect of first-century Christian life:

Food was a focal problem in early Christianity (Mark 7:1–30; Acts 15:12–29; 1Cor 8:1–13; Gal 2:12; Col 2:16; Rev 2:20). The issue of table fellowship between (Christian) Jews and (Christian) Gentiles is one prominent aspect of this problem (e.g., Gal 2:11–14), one which was particularly emphasized by the author of Luke–Acts (Acts 10:1–11:18; 16:31–34). Just as the meals Jesus shared with those of various social classes who responded to his message symbolized his full acceptance of them, so in early Christianity, meals shared by Jewish Christians and Hellenistic Christians dramatized the fact that they "are one body, for we all partake of one bread" (1Cor 10:17).

David E. Aune, "Worship, Early Christian", Anchor Bible Dictionary, Vol. 6

In Paul's day, dietary differences and scruples about foods had a serious impact upon much of Christian fellowship. Today, believers may share small portions of bread and wine at a memorial meeting, but they do not necessarily have regular meals together around the same table. And even if they do, no one seems to be troubled by another's preferences for food, and each may choose what he wishes from the table. Nevertheless, there can be other differences of practice or Bible interpretation, as extensively listed above, which introduce unnecessary arguments into an ecclesia. For this reason, we still need Paul's words of advice today:

"Who are you to judge someone else's servant? To his own master he stands or falls. And he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand (Rom 14:4).

Remember: keep my lists — or yours — in mind as you read this. Try to examine yourself, not others! And then remember to whom your brother — and you! — are responsible, and learn to be content to leave the judgment to God and His Son.

Even when it is truly necessary to judge some situation, there are safeguards against going too far in our demands upon others. The first safeguard is, as above, to look at yourself at least as severely as you look at the supposed sinner. The second is to keep in mind that there ought to be a clear distinction between:

matters of essential, fundamental, first principle importance, and
non-essential matters where no such issues are at stake.

As we have seen, the second point, about non-essential matters, is what Paul calls "disputable" (NIV) or "doubtful" (KJV) matters (Rom 14:1). While such matters may be studied and discussed, they should never be allowed to rise to the level of "first principles", where they most surely do not belong! No matter how seriously we think about them, or how important they may seem to be to us — if they are not fundamental and essential to our grasp of the first principles, then we should not "pass judgment" upon those whose ideas differ from ours.

A third point is worth mentioning here: the act of passing judgment on the motives of others. Those who expect to have the best of motives attributed to themselves (as surely we all do) must be ready, even eager, to give others the same benefit of the doubt, and attribute only the best possible motives to them (Matt 6:14,15; 7:1,2). When our Lord was confronted with a woman allegedly taken in the act of adultery, he asked for other witnesses. When they did not come forward, he concluded the matter with, "Neither do I condemn you" (John 8:11). The woman may very well have been guilty as alleged, but the Lord would not join in a rush to judgment.

Give the benefit of the doubt when you do not know all the facts of a case. It is often all too easy to know part of a story, and then make educated guesses to fill in what is not known. You may be correct in assuming the worst interpretation of the story, but you may also be wrong. So why risk making a wrong judgment? Leave it alone, and know that Christ will judge righteously, when necessary.

Any two believers may study the Bible carefully but still arrive at very different opinions upon non-essential matters. Then again, any two believers may well choose quite different lifestyles or philosophies, as regards doubtful practices. On matters such as these, no one should be forced to think or act so as to please someone else's conscience.

Elsewhere, Paul provides us with several useful guidelines, which can be easily summarized:

In essential things, the ecclesia should be characterized by unity (Phil 1:27).
In doubtful things, the ecclesia should be characterized by liberty (Rom 14:6).
In all things, the ecclesia should be characterized by love (1Cor 13:1,5).

The result of these guidelines, if truly internalized, is remarkable:

"For none of us lives to himself alone and none of us dies to himself alone. If we live, we live to the Lord; and if we die, we die to the Lord. So, whether we live or die, we belong to the Lord. For this very reason, Christ died and returned to life so that he might be the Lord of both the dead and the living. You, then, why do you judge your brother? Or why do you look down on your brother? For we will all stand before God’s judgment seat" (Rom 14:7-10; cp 2Cor 5:10; also see 1Cor 3:10-15; 4:5; 1 Pet 5:4).

Let us always remember on which side of the judgment seat we belong.

Final Praise to God (Verses 25-27)

The concluding doxology (praise to God), though briefer, is similar to the previous doxologies in Romans 8:31-39 and 11:33-36.

Romans 16:25

Now to him who is able to establish you by my gospel and the proclamation of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery hidden for long ages past…

Now to him who is able to establish you by my gospel: The apostle was confident that God could do for his readers whatsoever they needed (cp Rom 1:11; Eph 3:20; Phil 4:13). The gospel is God's primary instrument to accomplish that end. Paul called it "my gospel" because he had preached it widely and had explained it in this letter.

And the proclamation of Jesus Christ: The "proclamation, or preaching, of Jesus Christ" is another name for the gospel (good news) with the emphasis on its subject: the gospel is about Jesus Christ. The phrase may also mean: "the preaching by Jesus Christ", but the first option is more reasonable here.

The gospel first had to be revealed, in its fullness, after which it could be proclaimed to the Gentiles. The gospel had been hidden ("sigao": more literally, "kept silent") in past times until God spoke of it first in the Old Testament and then more fully in the New Testament.

According to the revelation of the mystery: Revelation" translates the Greek "apokalupsis": to uncover or reveal. It is of course the name of the last book in the New Testament, but — more than that — it is also another way of describing the preaching and teaching of the gospel.

Elsewhere, the mystery plainly has to do with the gospel which would be proclaimed to and believed by the Gentiles as well as the Jews. This is stated in the following:

"Israel has experienced a hardening in part until the full number of the Gentiles has come in" (Rom 11:25).
"The unsearchable riches of Christ" were to be "preached to the Gentiles" (Eph 3:3,4,8,9).
God gave Paul a commission to preach the word of God, which consists of "the mystery that has been kept hidden for ages and generations, but is now disclosed to the saints. To them God has chosen to make known among the Gentiles the glorious riches of this mystery, which is Christ in you, the hope of glory" (Col 1:25-27).
"The mystery of godliness" includes Christ being "preached among the nations [the Gentiles], and believed on in the world" (1Tim 3:16).

Hidden for long ages past: As noted above, the Greek word for "hidden" literally means 'kept secret (i.e., KJV) or silent'. However, when the same theme is discussed by Paul in Ephesians 3:9 and Colossians 1:26, he uses a different word ("apokrypto"), which really does mean 'kept hidden' — compare the English word "cryptic". "Apokrypto" (to conceal away from sight, and thus to hide) is the opposite of "apokalupsis" (to take the cover away, and thus to reveal).

Romans 16:26

…but now revealed and made known through the prophetic writings by the command of the eternal God, so that all nations might believe and obey him — …

…but now revealed and made known through the prophetic writings: Even though the Old Testament prophets revealed the gospel to some extent, they did not always grasp all of its implications (1Pet 1:10-12; see Rom 1:2). It remained for Jesus, the apostles, and the New Testament to "reveal" this gospel more fully. The word is "phaneroo", which means to display, disclose, or "make manifest" (KJV).

…by the command of the eternal God: God, through His Son, commanded this revealing or making known of the gospel to all nations, in what is often called "the Great Commission" — a commission which embraces all nations in the divine purpose which it proclaims:

"Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age" (Matt 28:19,20).

This emphasis recalls the language which Paul used in speaking of his own commission or calling as an apostle (Rom 1:1,5; Titus 1:3). Colossians 1:25-27, quoted above (see v 25), is in the same vein. Paul had a special commission and concern to reach the Gentiles, as their special apostle (Rom 11:13).

…so that all nations might believe and obey him — …: Paul is stating plainly that the "mystery" of verse 25 has to do with the gospel being proclaimed to "all nations", that is, all non-Jews, referred to in the Bible as "Gentiles", or nations — "goyim" in Hebrew, and "ethnos" in Greek.

Romans 16:27

…to the only wise God be glory forever through Jesus Christ! Amen.

God is described under two terms, "only" and "wise":

(1) "Only" (cp 1Tim 1:17) recalls the line of thought in Romans 3:29,30. He is the only God of both Jew and Gentile — there cannot possibly be any other — who offers salvation to both groups through the good news of His Son. The simple fact that one God is the Father and Savior of all mankind should encourage love and brotherhood among all people, as much as is possible. After all, all human beings "are his offspring" (Acts 17:28), and we are, all together, "neighbors" of one another (Matt 22:39; Mark 12:31; Luke 10:27-37).

(2) "Wise" invites the reader to recall Paul's outpouring of praise to God in His wisdom (Rom 11:33), which brings to a close the long review of His dealings with Israel in relation to His purpose with the Gentiles. Wisdom is also allied to the hidden/revealed tension noted in verse 25, as we gather also from 1 Corinthians 2:6,7:

"We do, however, speak a message of wisdom among the mature, but not the wisdom of this age or of the rulers of this age, who are coming to nothing. No, we speak of God’s secret wisdom, a wisdom that has been hidden and that God destined for our glory before time began."

So the one God — whose eternal purpose has been described as first hidden, and then manifested in the gospel of His Son — draws to Himself through His Son the praise that will occupy the redeemed saints during all the ages to come. The silence that for so long held the divine mystery has given way to open and unending praise. This songs of praise will accompany the consummation of all human history, when God will become "all in all" (1Cor 15:28):

"And they sang a new song: 'You are worthy to take the scroll and to open its seals, because you were slain, and with your blood you purchased men for God from every tribe and language and people and nation. You have made them to be a kingdom and priests to serve our God, and they will reign on the earth' " (Rev 5:9,10).

"Then I looked and heard the voice of many angels, numbering thousands upon thousands, and ten thousand times ten thousand. They encircled the throne and the living creatures [literally, living ones] and the elders. In a loud voice they sang: 'Worthy is the Lamb, who was slain, to receive power and wealth and wisdom and strength and honor and glory and praise!' Then I heard every creature [literally, all creation] in heaven and on earth and under the earth and on the sea, and all that is in them, singing: 'To him who sits on the throne and to the Lamb be praise and honor and glory and power, for ever and ever!' The four living creatures [living ones] said, 'Amen,' and the elders fell down and worshiped" (Rev 5:11-14).

"Then I looked, and there before me was the Lamb, standing on Mount Zion, and with him 144,000 who had his name and his Father’s name written on their foreheads. And I heard a sound from heaven like the roar of rushing waters and like a loud peal of thunder. The sound I heard was like that of harpists playing their harps. And they sang a new song before the throne and before the four living creatures and the elders. No one could learn the song except the 144,000 who had been redeemed from the earth" (Rev 14:1-3).

"I saw what looked like a sea of glass mixed with fire and, standing beside the sea, those who had been victorious over the beast and his image and over the number of his name. They held harps given them by God and sang the song of Moses the servant of God and the song of the Lamb: 'Great and marvelous are your deeds, Lord God Almighty. Just and true are your ways, King of the ages. Who will not fear you, O Lord, and bring glory to your name? For you alone are holy. All nations will come and worship before you, for your righteous acts have been revealed' " (Rev 15:2-4).