Editing Epistle to the Romans (section)

== Authorship and dating ==
{{Main|Authorship of the Pauline epistles}}

The scholarly consensus is that Paul wrote the Epistle to the Romans.<ref>"Finally, there are seven letters that virtually all scholars agree were written by Paul himself: Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, 1 Thessalonians, and Philemon. These 'undisputed' epistles are similar in terms of writing style, vocabulary, and theology. In addition, the issues that they address can plausibly be situated in the early Christian movement of the 40s and 50s of the Common Era, when Paul was active as an apostle and missionary." Bart Ehrman (2000, 2nd ed.). ''The New Testament: A Historical Introduction to the Early Christian Writings.''</ref> [[C. E. B. Cranfield]], in the introduction to his commentary on Romans, says:

{{blockquote|The denial of Paul's authorship of Romans by such critics [...] is now rightly relegated to a place among the curiosities of NT scholarship. Today no responsible criticism disputes its Pauline origin. The evidence of its use in the Apostolic Fathers is clear, and before the end of the second century it is listed and cited as Paul's. Every extant early list of NT books includes it among his letters. The external evidence of authenticity could indeed hardly be stronger; and it is altogether borne out by the internal evidence, linguistic, stylistic, literary, historical and theological.<ref>Cranfield, C. E. B. The Epistle to the Romans 1–8 (Vol. 1), International Critical Commentary Series. King's Lynn: T&T Clark Ltd, 2004, pp. 1–2</ref>}}

[[File:PaulT.jpg|thumb|right|A 17th-century depiction of Paul writing his epistles. Romans 16:22 indicates that Tertius acted as his [[amanuensis]]. ]]

The letter was most probably written while Paul was in [[Ancient Corinth|Corinth]], probably while he was staying in the house of [[Gaius (biblical figure)|Gaius]], and transcribed by [[Tertius of Iconium|Tertius]], his [[amanuensis]].{{sfn|Dunn|1988a|p=xliv}}{{sfn|Stuhlmacher|1994|p=5}}<ref>{{Bibleverse|Romans|16:22}}</ref> There are a number of reasons why Corinth is considered most plausible. Paul was about to travel to [[Early centers of Christianity#Jerusalem|Jerusalem]] on writing the letter, which matches [[Acts]]<ref>{{Bibleverse|Acts|20:3}}</ref> where it is reported that Paul stayed for three months in [[Early centers of Christianity#Greece|Greece]]. This probably implies Corinth as it was the location of Paul's greatest missionary success in Greece.{{sfn|Dunn|1988a|p=xliv}} Additionally, [[Phoebe (biblical figure)|Phoebe]] was a deacon of the church in [[Kechries|Cenchreae]], a port to the east of Corinth, and would have been able to convey the letter to [[Early centers of Christianity#Rome|Rome]] after passing through Corinth and taking a ship from Corinth's west port.{{sfn|Dunn|1988a|p=xliv}} [[Erastus of Corinth|Erastus]], mentioned in Romans 16:23,<ref>{{Bibleverse|Romans|16:23}}</ref> also lived in Corinth, being the city's commissioner for public works and city treasurer at various times, again indicating that the letter was written in Corinth.{{sfn|Bruce|1983|pp=280–281}}{{sfn|Dunn|1988a|p=xliv}}

The precise time at which it was written is not mentioned in the epistle, but it was obviously written when the collection for Jerusalem had been assembled and Paul was about to "go unto Jerusalem to minister unto the saints", that is, at the close of his second visit to Greece, during the winter preceding his last visit to that city.{{sfn|Easton|1897}}<ref>{{Bibleref2|Rom|15:25|KJV}}; cf. {{Bibleref2|Acts|19:21|KJV}}; {{Bibleref2|Acts|20:2–3|KJV}}, {{Bibleref2-nb|Acts|20:16|KJV}}; {{bibleref2|1Cor|16:1–4|KJV|1 Cor 16:1–4}}</ref> The majority of scholars writing on Romans propose the letter was written in late 55/early 56 or late 56/early 57.{{sfn|Bruce|1983|p=12}}{{sfn|Dunn|1988a|p=xliii}} Early 55 and early 58 both have some support, while German New Testament scholar [[Gerd Lüdemann]] argues for a date as early as 51/52 (or 54/55), following on from Knox, who proposed 53/54. Lüdemann is the only serious challenge to the consensus of mid to late 50s.{{sfn|Dunn|1988a|pp=xliii–xliv}}