Original Meaning

PAUL SIGNALS THAT he is concluding his plea for unity in the Roman church by returning to the characteristic vocabulary with which he began. Just as he exhorted the strong to “accept” the weak (14:1) and rebuked both weak and strong for rejecting each other when God had “accepted” them (14:3), so now he urges them to “accept one another … just as Christ accepted you.” Through such mutual acceptance God will be praised. For God sent Christ to the Jews so that Gentiles also might be able to praise God (15:8–9a), and the Old Testament likewise predicts that Gentiles will join with Jews in worshiping God (15:9b–12). The balanced emphasis on God’s faithfulness to Jews along with the inclusion of the Gentiles sums up a key motif in Romans. In a sense, then, these verses bring closure not only to the section on the strong and the weak, but to the entire body of the letter.1

To “accept” one another means not just to tolerate other believers but to welcome them as brothers and sisters in the body of Christ (see comments on 14:1). The “just as” (kathos) introducing the next clause in 15:7 may suggest Paul is drawing a comparison: We should accept one another in the same way as Christ has accepted us.2 But kathos probably has a causal sense here: We are to welcome one another because Christ has welcomed each one of us.3 What right do we have to refuse fellowship with a person whom Christ himself has accepted into the body? “In order to bring praise to God” may be the purpose of Christ’s accepting people.4 But this phrase more likely depends on the ruling idea of the verse, namely, that we accept one another.5

Paul draws attention to the significance of what he says next with the rhetorical opening “For I tell you.” What he does in 15:8–9a is to summarize one of the key theological teachings of the letter: how the fulfillment of God’s promises in the gospel brings blessing to both Jews and Gentiles. Precisely how Paul makes this point is debated. His syntax can be construed in two different ways.

(1) I say

(a) that Christ has become a servant of the Jews on behalf of God’s truth, to confirm the promises made to the patriarchs; and

(b) that the Gentiles are glorifying God for his mercy.6

(2) I say that Christ has become a servant of the Jews on behalf of God’s truth,

(a) in order to confirm the promises made to the patriarchs; and

(b) in order that the Gentiles might glorify God for his mercy.7

This second construction, reflected in most English translations (including the NIV) is better. It beautifully captures the fine balance Paul preserves in Romans between the priority of the Jew—Christ came as a “servant of the Jews”8—and the full inclusion of the Gentiles—Christ’s ministry to the Jews fulfills God’s promises and so enables Gentiles also to “glorify God for his mercy.” As Paul puts it in the theme statement of the letter, the gospel is “first for the Jew, then for the Gentile” (1:16). The weak (mainly, if not entirely, Jewish Christians) need to accept Gentile Christians because God’s ultimate purpose is to include them, and the strong (mainly Gentile Christians) need to remember that the Jews have always been at the center of God’s concerns and promises.

Paul supports what he says in verses 8–9a with a series of Old Testament quotations (vv. 9b–12). God intends for his mercy to Israel to spill over to the Gentiles so that they can join together in praising his name. Paul cites each of the three sections of the Jewish Scriptures: the Torah (Deut. 32:43 in v. 10), the Prophets (Isa. 11:10 in v. 12), and the Writings (Ps. 18:49 in v. 9b; Ps. 117:1 in v. 11). Each quotation refers to the Gentiles, and two of them (vv. 10, 12) make clear that their presence in the people of God depends on the Jews. Two of them also speak of praising God (vv. 9, 11).

The quotation of Psalm 18:49 (see also 2 Sam. 22:50) serves Paul’s purposes because it mentions God’s being praised among the Gentiles. But if Paul thinks of the “I” as Christ, it may also suggest the Messiah’s rule over the Gentiles (see Bridging Contexts section). But not only will God’s name be praised among the Gentiles (v. 9); the Gentiles themselves are called on to “rejoice” (v. 10, quoting Deut. 32:43). Because the gospel breaks down “the dividing wall of hostility” between Jews and Gentiles (Eph. 2:14), this invitation can now be fulfilled.

In verse 11 Paul quotes yet another Old Testament verse that calls on Gentiles to join in praising God (Ps. 117:1). He rounds off the series by quoting the familiar messianic prophecy from Isaiah 11:10 about how the “the Root of Jesse” will rule over nations and be the object of hope for Gentiles.

Paul completes his exhortation to the weak and the strong with a final “prayer-wish”: an appeal to God to work among the Romans in such a way that the unity he urges on them becomes a reality. Paul beautifully incorporates into this prayer some of the key ideas from the previous chapters. “The God of hope” (or “the God who gives hope” [REB]) reminds us of the immediately preceding quotation, with its promise that the Gentiles “will hope” in the Jewish Messiah. The “joy” and “peace” he wants them to experience are two of the essential values of God’s kingdom that Paul has encouraged the strong to make a priority (14:17). The Holy Spirit, by whose “power” the Christians in Rome will be able to “overflow with hope,” is the third of the kingdom essentials listed in 14:17. Only when Jew and Gentile at Rome rejoice together in their common hope will they be able to praise God as he wants to be praised—with the united hearts and voices of a community of believers (see 15:5–6).

Bridging Contexts

ONCE AGAIN, Old Testament quotations. In this last series of Old Testament quotations in Romans (one more solitary quotation comes in 15:21), it is appropriate for us once again to dig behind the quotations to see what light they may shed on the meaning Paul gives them. As we have noted before, the apostle rarely simply lifts Old Testament verses out of their contexts. Their appropriateness for his own application usually arises not just from their own wording and meaning but from their function within the Old Testament context. We can see this procedure at work yet again in the quotations in 15:9–12.

If Paul uses Psalm 18:49 in Romans 15:9 simply because it mentions the praise of God along with the Gentiles, the text does not suit his purposes as well as it might, since it speaks only of God being praised “among” the Gentiles. But a closer look at the Old Testament context suggests a deeper and more appropriate significance. For the “I” in the quotation of Psalm 18:49 is David. Since Paul read many of the Davidic psalms typologically (see Ps. 69:9 in Rom. 15:3), he may intend us to identify this “I” as Christ.

In Psalm 18, David’s praise of God stems from the fact that God has subdued the nations under him (see 18:43: “You have delivered me from the attacks of the people; you have made me the head of nations; people I did not know are subject to me”). We can assume, I think, that Paul’s first readers knew Psalm 18 well enough to know this context. They would then have heard this quotation as a reminder of God’s plan to bring Gentiles under the umbrella of the Messiah’s rule. They would also have known that God had fulfilled this plan in Jesus of Nazareth. The weak in Rome are therefore reminded that Gentiles, as much as Jews, are now included in God’s people and deserve acceptance and welcome.

The quotation of Deuteronomy 32:43 in Romans 15:10 is interesting for two reasons. (1) The wording follows closely the LXX, which differs significantly from the standard Hebrew text (the Masoretic). The Hebrew, translated literally, reads: “Praise his people, O Gentiles” (see NRSV note). But the LXX rendering finds support in at least one medieval Hebrew manuscript and possibly in a Qumran scroll.9 This may, in fact, have been the original text of Deuteronomy 32:43—note that most English versions (including the NIV) follow this text in their translation. Thus, Paul is probably quoting the passage in its original form.

(2) This quotation comes from a chapter that Paul has used elsewhere to support the idea of Gentile inclusion among God’s people. Indeed, Deuteronomy 32:21, quoted in Romans 10:19, became the basis for Paul’s whole development of the idea of the Jews being made jealous by the Gentiles (11:11–15). Again, Paul is not just quoting at random. He is deliberately drawing our attention to passages in the Old Testament that teach the inclusion of Gentiles. He is not engaged in mere prooftexting, but in contextually sensitive biblical-theological argument.

The quotation in 15:11 comes from a short, two-verse psalm (Ps. 117) that Paul quotes nowhere else. But even here we can spot elements in the context that may have drawn Paul to this verse. For the second verse of the psalm goes on to cite God’s “love” (or “mercy,” eleos) and “faithfulness” (or “truth,” aletheia) as reasons why the Gentiles should praise the Lord. These are precisely the blessings Paul has cited in Romans 15:8–9a as reason to praise God.10

Paul’s final quotation (v. 12) comes from Isaiah 11:10. Once again, the wording in Romans reflects the LXX, which differs from the standard Hebrew text. These differences become obvious when we set down side-by-side the NIV of Isaiah 11:10 and of Paul’s quotation:

Isaiah 11:10	Romans 15:12
In that day the Root of Jesse will stand as a banner for the peoples; the nations will rally to him, and his place of rest will be glorious.	The Root of Jesse will spring up, one who will arise to rule over the nations; the Gentiles will hope in him.
	(italics added)

The key differences are found in the three verbs we have italicized. The Greek version suits Paul’s argument better than the Hebrew. Nevertheless, the basic meaning of the text is the same. Either allows Paul to make the point he wants to make, namely, that the Gentiles’ participation in the praise of God (vv. 9b–11) comes as a result of the work of “the shoot of Jesse,” a messianic designation.11 Again, Paul may cite this text partly because of its context: Isaiah 11 goes on to refer to God’s gathering of the remnant of Israel from among the nations.12

Contemporary Significance

SUMMARY OF PAUL’S ARGUMENT. Since this paragraph both completes the body of the letter that began in 1:18 and restates one of the letter’s key themes, this is an appropriate place for some summary remarks about Paul’s argument as a whole.

We must return one last time to one of the key issues in the modern interpretation of Romans: the tension between the personal focus and the community focus. Both are clearly present in Romans; both, Paul makes clear, are intrinsic to the gospel. Through the good news of Jesus Christ, God is both transforming individuals and forming a community.

The passage before us focuses on the latter, and many modern interpreters think this focus reflects Paul’s real concern in the letter. I do not totally agree. I think Paul focuses on the community in 15:7–13 because these verses conclude a section (14:1–15:13) that is about the community. But however we decide this matter, we must read Romans in such a way that we focus on both transformation of the individual and formation of the community.

Interpreters in the past were sometimes guilty of seeing in Romans only the former, so that all they talked about were justification by faith, the sanctification of the believer, and one’s duties as a believer. But some contemporary interpreters make the opposite mistake: Reading Romans in a culture obsessed with community and the need for reconciliation among races, ethnic groups, and nations, they emphasize only how we as God’s people should function as a single, united body. Justification by faith and similar themes become minimized or reinterpreted.

We must keep things in balance. The heart of the gospel is the message of God’s justifying work in Christ. The essential human problem is estrangement from God. Only when this estrangement is overcome and a person is reconciled to God by faith can we speak about God’s good news having done its work. Our preaching and teaching must therefore confront people with sin and offer them redemption in Christ.

But God also wants to form people transformed by the gospel into communities that reflect the values of the gospel. Vertical reconciliation with God must lead to horizontal reconciliation with one another. Faithfulness to the gospel demands that any of us involved in ministry should seek to maintain a balance between the two perspectives. Some pastors are marvelous proclaimers of the gospel of individual transformation. They are passionate to save souls, rescuing people lost in sin and destined for hell. I commend their passion. But they need also to make clear—as Paul does in Romans—that the gospel not only rescues people from hell but also transforms whole persons, bringing reconciliation with other people as well as with God.

But the opposite problem also exists: pastors who think that “soul-saving” is too old-fashioned and spend all their time talking about racial reconciliation, mending marriages, restoring families, and the like. God, of course, wants to do these things too. But he has chosen the way of individual transformation through a new relationship with God as the means. Focusing on horizontal reconciliation without encouraging vertical reconciliation first is to put the cart before the horse.

At Rome in Paul’s day, mutual distrust between Jews and Gentiles threatened the unity of the church. Naturally, therefore, Paul addresses these groups. The tension between Jew and Gentile is in some ways a unique one, rooted in God’s revelatory focus in the Old Testament on Jews. But Paul’s vision ultimately transcends the Jewish-Gentile debate. God wants his church to be a place that transcends any cultural, racial, or ethnic division in a unity based on the gospel.

That vision is far from being a reality. In too many ways, our praise of God is still muted by the divisions among us. Some of those divisions are based on theology. I know of anti-charismatic churches that refuse to join with charismatic churches in occasional worship services. On the other side, I have been treated as a second-class Christian (if Christian at all) in charismatic churches. Such issues of theology create the most difficult divisions to overcome.

Some theological issues, as we have argued earlier, are worth separating over. But if some churches err in including too many within the scope of those whom God has accepted, I think that many more have drawn those lines far too narrowly. We need to be willing to put our own cherished ecclesiological traditions to the test of Scripture. Even when we think Scripture validates them, we may have to admit that they are not as clear as we think or as important as we make them to be. Theological differences need not mean division in worship and service.

Race, of course, is another serious cause of disunity in the church. Churches in certain cultural contexts have been able to incorporate blacks and whites in a single congregation. But such integrated churches are rare. The church I attend is 95 percent white. I have a number of black Christian friends; they tell me that their churches are 95 percent black. There are many reasons, of course, for such segregation in our churches, and not all the reasons are bad ones. But I have to think that my own understanding of the faith and the quality of corporate worship is hampered by too homogenous a racial mix.

My church and churches like mine need to take a hard look at the underlying attitudes that foster this segregation. I still hear white Christians doing a lot of racial stereotyping, telling racial jokes, and so forth. By tolerating this kind of talk, we will not root out sinful attitudes that stand in the way of genuine racial harmony, mutual acceptance, and unified praise of God.