8/6/2019 Hultgren Intro

1/2

Arland J. Hultgren, Pauls Letter to the Romans: A Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,

2011.

Introduction

Hultgrens work opens with an introduction covering the usual sorts of things all introductions to

commentaries on the Bible normally cover. According to H., Romans was written at Corinth.

Phoebe, he suggests, carried the letter to Rome and

That would also mean that she was entrusted by Paul to comment

on anything in the letter that could not be understood, making her

the first exegete of the Letter to the Romans (p. 3).

Thats an intriguing supposition but it is, after all, only that- a supposition. Personally I find it

interesting but nothing more than that. First, we just dont know who carried the letter. Phoebe

may well have but so may have a number of others named in chapter 16 or not named at all.None of Pauls other letters bear the name, do they, of the carrier and so far as I know no one has

suggested any names for any of them.

Second, the idea that Phoebe was the first exegete is anachronistic. Hultgren has used a perfectly

modern category to describe an event (the act of clarifying the letter to its recipients). Thats just

simply improper. Furthermore, we dont know that the bearer of the letter would need to clarifyit any more than the recipient of a modern letter (or treatise or whatever Romans is) would need

someone to come along and explain it to us. Why would the Romans need such assistance from

whoever carried the book to them? If they had questions, they could just write Paul back and askhim (as the Corinthians obviously did).

No, it seems to me that Hultgren is trying a bit too hard here to make Phoebe sound like

something she wasnt- a Pauline scholar.

H. dates Romans to the years 55-58 A.D. (and yes, A.D. is the form he uses). And he also goes

into great detail describing the character and purpose of the Letter as well as its recipients. Hesuggests

Estimates of how many house churches existed [in Rome] have

ranged anywhere from three to eight (p. 8).

I find that remarkable.

The core of the introduction, though, is Hultgrens discussion of the purpose of the Letter. He

writes

the primary purpose for the writing of Romans, without which itcannot be explained at all, is that Paul wrote the letter to prepare

the groundwork at Rome for his mission to Spain in case a crisis

8/6/2019 Hultgren Intro

2/2

should happen in Jerusalem. If the Jerusalem church rejected him

and his collection, branding him a false apostle, repudiating histheology, and essentially declaring that his Gentile converts could

not be considered part of the people of God in the fullest sense,

that would have repercussions among the more conservative

members of the Christian community in Rome and make his hopefor support of his mission to Spain difficult, if not impossible (p.

15).

In short, it seems that Hultgren sees Pauls reason for writing as based in financial

considerations. If he couldnt raise support in Rome, his trip to Spain would be off. Paul the

apostle to the Gentiles here becomes Paul the shrewd schemer who wishes to ensure his own

plans. I think that a rather cynical view of Paul- a man who, from all indications, possessed greatfaith. Would he really wish to manipulate the Romans into supporting him even if Jerusalem

rejected him? I dont see it. Especially in light of his declaration to the Corinthians that he has

rejected manipulative methods.

Paul didnt need the Romans to pay his way- God would see to provision were he to wish Paul to

proceed at some point to Spain.

But if Hultgren is right, Paul is someone who is at the very least a stranger to us all. Yes, a total

stranger altogether. So perhaps here Hultgren is really doing us a profound service in

suggesting, or at least hinting at, a Paul we never knew.

Finally the introduction concludes with what can only be described as a rather bizarre decision to

discuss the text-critical issues concerning chapter 16. Why now? The issue is sure to beaddressed in due course when we arrive at the end of Romans. It really seems out of place, quite

frankly.

Next, chapter one.

Jim WestQuartz Hill School of Theology