Romans: Smyth & Helwys Bible Commentary (Smyth & Helwys Bible Commentary, 5)

Rating:
Summary: A Brilliant Contribution to the Study of Romans
Review: Smyth & Helwys has gifted the Christian Church with this cutting edge commentary series and they could not have chosen a better exegete for Romans. The reason I think Talbert was such a great choice is due simply to the fact that his work is so very unique and insightful. Talbert is the editor for the Reading the New Testament series (also published by Smyth & Helwys). His most noteworthy contributions to the series are Reading John and Reading Corinthians, both of which are outstanding. Talbert has served as President and Vice-President of the Society of Biblical Literature.

So, what is unique about this particular commentary on Romans? Well, first of all Talbert's exegesis of the letter is clearly set in its socio-historical milieu. This sets Talbert's work apart from those of Thomas Schreiner (BECNT) and Douglas Moo (NICNT) which tend to focus on doctrinal theology nearly to the exclusion of the setting of the letter. Secondly, the reader is provided with numerous extremely insightful helps in sidebars marked as Alpha & Omega Language (language and word studies), Culture/Context (Cultural and contextual details), Interpretation (Historical and contemporary interpretive helps), and Additional Resources Study (Lists of resources for further study). There are also numerous copies of fine art throughout the commentary that are helpful in conveying the sense of the commentator's interest. The binding is of fine quality and the dustcover art work is beautifully done.

Many commentators have understood Romans in an individualistic sense of "how God saves a sinner." Talbert emphasizes that we must first see that Romans was written to deal with the particular historical problem of the relations between Jewish and Gentile Christians in Rome. He tells us that "the function of Paul's gospel was to unify Jewish and Gentile Christians in Rome" and that "The content of his gospel was a theology that placed Jew and Gentile on an equal footing: both in their sin and in their salvation."

Only when we have carefully dealt with the text through this grid can we then deal with contemporary theological debates and draw out practical application of the text for our day. Talbert beautifully accomplishes the latter in his closing of each section entitled, "Connections."

Every aspect of Romans is covered in this commentary. The introduction appears thin, but after reading it one senses that it is quite profound. Talbert gives a cogent account of the social context, stated aims, and literary presentation of Romans. Talbert's account of the socio-cultural context is well written and lucid. He is comfortably familiar with the history of the Jews in Rome and this elucidates his exegesis throughout the commentary. As for the rhetorical structure of Romans, Talbert notes that "The precise rhetorical divisions of Romans are as yet un-agreed upon by interpreters." He is not convinced that a wooden application of ancient rhetoric is appropriate in analyzing the Pauline letters (contra Betz and Witherington).

However, Talbert does think that Romans is a "rhetorical act" that contains a long sustained argument running from 1:16 to 15:13. Of course, some scholars see the argument as conforming to the rules of ancient rhetoric, but Talbert points out that there is great diversity of opinion about what parts of Romans belong to what categories of ancient rhetoric. In any case, "Romans' argument is so complex that it cannot be forced into artificial categories."

Talbert prudently resists the temptation to proffer one particular theme of Romans. He agrees that theme is present in 1:16-17, but sees a combination of Paul's thoughts there as making up the general theme: The righteousness of God, the righteous shall live by faith, salvation, and the universality of the gospel. So "Romans is about the gospel of the righteousness of God revealed in the faithfulness of Jesus that issues in salvation for all who believe."

In Talbert's view, the audience of Romans is likely ascertained in light of sectional divisions. "The audience addressed in 1-8 consisted probably of Gentile Christians who thought in Jewish categories." Some will balk at this since some of this section is a debate with non-Christian Judaism. However, Talbert points out that the Gentile Christians in view were almost certainly originally God-fearers who "would have known the law and (e.g. 7:1), and would have understood non-Christian Jewish objections to Paul's gospel." The audience in 9-11 was composed of Gentile Christians. In chapters 12-15 probably both Jewish and Gentile Christians of diverse persuasion were intended. "The purpose pursued in 1-8 is the destruction of Jewish presumption and objections, in 9-11 it is the overturning of Gentile pride, and in 12-15 it is opposition to mutual arrogance."

Many will want to know where Talbert stands on recent paradigm shifts in Pauline Theology. It becomes obvious in the early chapters that Talbert has rejected the proposals of E.P. Sanders and James D.G. Dunn regarding "Works of the Law" and "Covenantal Nomism." He admits that "Middle Judaism was diverse" (pg.11), but still thinks that Paul was arguing against a Jewish legalistic merit theology (though his arguments are more nuanced than this simple statement). This might be the traditional Reformed perspective, but it seems anemic after considering more recent Pauline scholarship. However, Talbert's arguments are penetrating and must be grappled with.

An aspect of recent Pauline Theology that Talbert has wisely adopted (in my view), is a proper understanding of Paul's phrase, "the righteousness of God." Talbert rightly points out that "Any hope of understanding Romans' argument depends on one's ability to grasp what Paul meant by the righteousness of God." His treatment of this phrase is too detailed to explicate in this review, but suffice to say that along with Richard Hays and many other scholars Talbert understands the "righteousness of God" as God's covenant faithfulness. Along with this, he renders the Greek pistis Iesou Christou as subjective genitive (the faithfulness of Jesus Christ), rather than as objective (our faith in Jesus Christ). This has not yet become a majority view of scholars, but the tables seem to be turning.

So much more could be said, but I will conclude by saying that this commentary should be considered a must have. Dr. Talbert is fully abreast of the vast field of Pauline scholarship and has contributed to it himself with numerous articles and now with this great work. Smyth & Helwys are to be congratulated once again for another first-rate commentary in this series.