Paul's Letter to the Romans: A Commentary
Paul's Letter to the Romans: A Commentary

Paul's Letter to the Romans: A Commentary

by Arland J. Hultgren

5 Rank Score: 5.16 from 1 reviews, 1 featured collections, and 2 user libraries
Pages 816
Publisher Eerdmans
Published 2011
ISBN-13 9780802826091
On the heels of Arland Hultgren’s successful commentary comes a new volume exploring one of the most significant theological documents ever written. In this commentary Arland Hultgren engages the text of Paul’s Letter to the Romans using careful theological exegesis in conversation with scores of contemporary biblical scholars. Hultgren walks readers through the letter verse-by-verse, illuminating the text with helpful comments, probing into major puzzles, and highlighting the epistle’s most inspiring features. He also demonstrates the essentially forward-looking, missional character of Paul’s letter — written, as Hultgren suggests, to introduce Paul-the-theologian to Roman believers and inspire their support for his planned missionary efforts in the Western Mediterranean. This thoughtful commentary, ideal for pastors and serious students of the Bible, includes seven appendices that discuss in detail such hot button issues as “Romans 1:26-27 and Homosexuality” and “Pistis Christou: Faith in or of Christ?”

Collections

This book appears in the following featured collections.

Reviews

Add Your Review

G Ware G Ware August 30, 2018
An outstanding, user-friendly, engaging, and helpful semi-technical commentary, geared towards pastors and students. At times Hultgren goes against the current in his conclusions, arguing that Romans 1 does not apply to covenant marriage relations between same gendered individuals, and that Romans 5 should be read as universalist. Addition comments on Romans 1 and human sexuality are developed in a really great appendix, which, in spite of what most evangelicals' knee jerk reaction will suggest, is really well argued. Even if one disagrees with his conclusions on those two passages, it's worth engaging with a different reading, and can't take away from the value of this commentary as a whole.