Mutual Knowledge between Paul and Roman Christians
The fact that Paul
has never been to Rome when he writes Romans is often used to argue that this
letter serves as Paul’s self-introduction to the Roman Christians. This assumption
must be reexamined. On the basis of both internal and external evidence, I
suggest that Paul actually knew much about the Roman Christians and that they
knew something of him as well.
Internal Evidence
At several points in
the letter, Paul reveals that he is aware of circumstances among his auditors.
(1) The list of
greetings in 16:3-16 demonstrates that Paul knows, or knows of, at least 27
people (Paul greets 26 people by name as well as Rufus’ mother [v. 13] who is
not named) in the city plus those who belong to families he names (vv. 10-11).
As this list shows, Paul knows individuals in Rome, and is also aware that they
meet together in homes and in whose homes they gather. This is the clearest evidence
that Paul has knowledge of the situation in Rome in some detail.
(2) In 11:13-32, Paul
directly addresses gentile believers and their arrogance regarding Jewish
believers. Unless Paul is aware of such attitudes among his listeners, this directness
would be out of order.
(3) In 13:1-5, Paul
draws upon conventional Jewish wisdom and early Christians tradition in order
to offer advice to the Roman Christians about appropriate relation to governing
authorities (Dunn lists Wis. 6:3-4 and 1 Pet. 2:13-17 as parallels [Romans
9-16, 759). His specific advice regarding taxes in vv. 6-7, however, finds
no parallel in those traditions. This suggests that in 13:1-5 Paul prepares his
audience with general guidance on relationships with governing authorities,
drawn from familiar traditions, which he then applies in vv. 6-7 specifically
to a matter he knows to be a point of controversy in Rome.
(4) In both 6:17 and
16:17, Paul speaks of the “teaching” the Roman Christians have received. Paul
can only do so if he is aware of the kind of instruction given to his hearers
by others . . . the fact that Paul can say he writes “as a way of reminding”
(15:15) the Roman believers indicates he knows something about what they have
been taught in the past.
(5) In 3:8, Paul
asks, “And why not say (as some people slander us by saying that we say), ‘Let
us do evil so that good may come’?” (NRSV). Paul’s parenthetical remark shows
that he believes his hearers know of such criticism made against him. He could
only do so on the basis of some knowledge of circumstances among the Roman Christians.
(6) Paul commends the
faith (1:8), maturity (15:14), or obedience of the Roman Christians as “known
to all” (16:19).
(7) Harry Gamble, Jr.
believes the nature of Paul’s argument in chs. 9-11 also presupposes knowledge
of his audience. Gamble asks “how the tortuous effort in chs. 9011 to
comprehend and explicate the unbelief of Israel fits into the letter
structurally and thematically; that problem is all the more intractable if it
has no relevance to the Roman church” (The Textual History of the Letter to
the Romans, SD, vol. 42 [Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 1977], 136).
In other words, there
is no reason for this detailed argument unless it has relevance for known
issues in Rome.
(8) Paul’s argument
betrays not only his knowledge of their situation, but also of their knowledge
of him. For example, Paul’s brief comments about the collection (15:26) would
hardly makes sense unless his audience knows something of his ministry in
Macedonia and Achaia. He also indicates that he is aware the believers in Rome
already know of his desire to visit them (1:-11, 13; 15:18-23) (Sam K.
Williams, “The ‘Righteousness of God’ in Romans,” JBL 99 [1980]:250-51.
Contra Fitzmyer, Romans, 246).
These factors make it
difficult to deny that Paul had at least some knowledge of the Christians and
their circumstances in Rome. In particular, once ch. 16 is accepted as part of
the original letter sent to Rome, some knowledge of the situation there becomes
certain. (James C. Miller, The Obedience of Faith, The Eschatological People
of God, and the Purpose of Romans [SBL Dissertation Series 177; Atlanta:
Society of Biblical Literature, 2000], 116-18; see pp. 118-21 for a discussion
of the external evidence)
