Roma 4:5

4:5 But to the one who does not work, but believes in the one who declares the ungodly righteous, ¹  his faith is credited as righteousness.

Roma 8:32

8:32 Indeed, he who ²  did not spare his own Son, but gave him up for us all – how will he not also, along with him, freely give us all things?

Roma 9:1

Israel’s Rejection Considered

9:1 ³ I am telling the truth in Christ (I am not lying!), for my conscience assures me ⁴  in the Holy Spirit –

Roma 11:7

11:7 What then? Israel failed to obtain what it was diligently seeking, but the elect obtained it. The ⁵  rest were hardened,

Roma 11:13

11:13 Now I am speaking to you Gentiles. Seeing that I am an apostle to the Gentiles, I magnify my ministry,

Roma 13:12

13:12 The night has advanced toward dawn; the day is near. So then we must lay aside the works of darkness, and put on the weapons of light.

Roma 14:20

14:20 Do not destroy the work of God for the sake of food. For although all things are clean, ⁶  it is wrong to cause anyone to stumble by what you eat.

Roma 15:1

Exhortation for the Strong to Help the Weak

15:1 But we who are strong ought to bear with the failings of the weak, and not just please ourselves. ⁷ 

[4:5]  ¹ tn Or “who justifies the ungodly.”

[8:32]  ² tn Grk “[he] who.” The relative clause continues the question of v. 31 in a way that is awkward in English. The force of v. 32 is thus: “who indeed did not spare his own Son, but gave him up for us all – How will he not also with him give us all things?”

[9:1]  ³ sn Rom 9:1–11:36. These three chapters are among the most difficult and disputed in Paul’s Letter to the Romans. One area of difficulty is the relationship between Israel and the church, especially concerning the nature and extent of Israel’s election. Many different models have been constructed to express this relationship. For a representative survey, see M. Barth, The People of God (JSNTSup), 22-27. The literary genre of these three chapters has been frequently identified as a diatribe, a philosophical discussion or conversation evolved by the Cynic and Stoic schools of philosophy as a means of popularizing their ideas (E. Käsemann, Romans, 261 and 267). But other recent scholars have challenged the idea that Rom 9–11 is characterized by diatribe. Scholars like R. Scroggs and E. E. Ellis have instead identified the material in question as midrash. For a summary and discussion of the rabbinic connections, see W. R. Stegner, “Romans 9.6-29 – A Midrash,” JSNT 22 (1984): 37-52.

[9:1]  ⁴ tn Or “my conscience bears witness to me.”

[11:7]  ⁵ tn Here καί (kai) has not been translated because of differences between Greek and English style.

[14:20]  ⁶ sn Here clean refers to food being ceremonially clean.

[15:1]  ⁷ tn Grk “and not please ourselves.” NT Greek negatives used in contrast like this are often not absolute, but relative: “not so much one as the other.”