Romans 3:8

3:8 And why not say, “Let us do evil so that good may come of it”? – as some who slander us allege that we say. ¹  (Their ²  condemnation is deserved!)

Romans 6:4

6:4 Therefore we have been buried with him through baptism into death, in order that just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we too may live a new life. ³ 

Romans 7:7

7:7 What shall we say then? Is the law sin? Absolutely not! Certainly, I ⁴  would not have known sin except through the law. For indeed I would not have known what it means to desire something belonging to someone else ⁵  if the law had not said, “Do not covet.” ⁶ 

Romans 7:25

7:25 Thanks be ⁷  to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, ⁸  I myself serve the law of God with my mind, but ⁹  with my flesh I serve ¹⁰  the law of sin.

Romans 8:23

8:23 Not only this, but we ourselves also, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, ¹¹  groan inwardly as we eagerly await our adoption, ¹²  the redemption of our bodies. ¹³ 

Romans 8:26

8:26 In the same way, the Spirit helps us in our weakness, for we do not know how we should pray, ¹⁴  but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with inexpressible groanings.

Romans 15:14

Paul’s Motivation for Writing the Letter

15:14 But I myself am fully convinced about you, my brothers and sisters, ¹⁵  that you yourselves are full of goodness, filled with all knowledge, and able to instruct one another.

Romans 16:7

16:7 Greet Andronicus and Junia, ¹⁶  my compatriots ¹⁷  and my fellow prisoners. They are well known ¹⁸  to the apostles, ¹⁹  and they were in Christ before me.

[3:8]  ¹ tn Grk “(as we are slandered and some affirm that we say…).”

[3:8]  ² tn Grk “whose.” Because of the length and complexity of the Greek sentence, this relative clause was rendered as a new sentence in the translation.

[6:4]  ³ tn Grk “may walk in newness of life,” in which ζωῆς (zwhs) functions as an attributed genitive (see ExSyn 89-90, where this verse is given as a prime example).

[7:7]  ⁵ sn Romans 7:7-25. There has been an enormous debate over the significance of the first person singular pronouns (“I”) in this passage and how to understand their referent. Did Paul intend (1) a reference to himself and other Christians too; (2) a reference to his own pre-Christian experience as a Jew, struggling with the law and sin (and thus addressing his fellow countrymen as Jews); or (3) a reference to himself as a child of Adam, reflecting the experience of Adam that is shared by both Jews and Gentiles alike (i.e., all people everywhere)? Good arguments can be assembled for each of these views, and each has problems dealing with specific statements in the passage. The classic argument against an autobiographical interpretation was made by W. G. Kümmel, Römer 7 und die Bekehrung des Paulus. A good case for seeing at least an autobiographical element in the chapter has been made by G. Theissen, Psychologische Aspekte paulinischer Theologie [FRLANT], 181-268. One major point that seems to favor some sort of an autobiographical reading of these verses is the lack of any mention of the Holy Spirit for empowerment in the struggle described in Rom 7:7-25. The Spirit is mentioned beginning in 8:1 as the solution to the problem of the struggle with sin (8:4-6, 9).

[7:7]  ⁶ tn Grk “I would not have known covetousness.”

[7:7]  ⁷ sn A quotation from Exod 20:17 and Deut 5:21.

[7:25]  ⁷ tc ‡ Most mss (א* A 1739 1881 Ï sy) read “I give thanks to God” rather than “Now thanks be to God” (א¹ [B] Ψ 33 81 104 365 1506 pc), the reading of NA²⁷. The reading with the verb (εὐχαριστῶ τῷ θεῷ, eucaristw tw qew) possibly arose from a transcriptional error in which several letters were doubled (TCGNT 455). The conjunction δέ (de, “now”) is included in some mss as well (א¹ Ψ 33 81 104 365 1506 pc), but it should probably not be considered original. The ms support for the omission of δέ is both excellent and widespread (א* A B D 1739 1881 Ï lat sy), and its addition can be explained as an insertion to smooth out the transition between v. 24 and 25.

[7:25]  ⁸ tn There is a double connective here that cannot be easily preserved in English: “consequently therefore,” emphasizing the conclusion of what he has been arguing.

[7:25]  ⁹ tn Greek emphasizes the contrast between these two clauses more than can be easily expressed in English.

[7:25]  ¹⁰ tn The words “I serve” have been repeated here for clarity.

[8:23]  ⁹ tn Or “who have the Spirit as firstfruits.” The genitive πνεύματος (pneumatos) can be understood here as possessive (“the firstfruits belonging to the Spirit”) although it is much more likely that this is a genitive of apposition (“the firstfruits, namely, the Spirit”); cf. TEV, NLT.

[8:23]  ¹⁰ tn See the note on “adoption” in v. 15.

[8:23]  ¹¹ tn Grk “body.”

[8:26]  ¹¹ tn Or “for we do not know what we ought to pray for.”

[15:14]  ¹³ tn Grk “brothers.” See note on the phrase “brothers and sisters” in 1:13.

[16:7]  ¹⁵ tn Or “Junias.”

[16:7]  ¹⁶ tn Or “kinsmen,” “relatives,” “fellow countrymen.”

[16:7]  ¹⁷ tn Or “prominent, outstanding, famous.” The term ἐπίσημος (epishmo") is used either in an implied comparative sense (“prominent, outstanding”) or in an elative sense (“famous, well known”). The key to determining the meaning of the term in any given passage is both the general context and the specific collocation of this word with its adjuncts. When a comparative notion is seen, that to which ἐπίσημος is compared is frequently, if not usually, put in the genitive case (cf., e.g., 3 Macc 6:1 [Ελεαζαρος δέ τις ἀνὴρ ἐπίσημος τῶν ἀπὸ τής χώρας ἱερέων “Eleazar, a man prominent among the priests of the country”]; cf. also Pss. Sol. 17:30). When, however, an elative notion is found, ἐν (en) plus a personal plural dative is not uncommon (cf. Pss. Sol. 2:6). Although ἐν plus a personal dative does not indicate agency, in collocation with words of perception, (ἐν plus) dative personal nouns are often used to show the recipients. In this instance, the idea would then be “well known to the apostles.” See M. H. Burer and D. B. Wallace, “Was Junia Really an Apostle? A Re-examination of Rom 16.7,” NTS 47 (2001): 76-91, who argue for the elative notion here.

[16:7]  ¹⁸ tn Or “among the apostles.” See discussion in the note on “well known” for these options.