The Greek of this verse is much shorter than the Good News Translation rendering, because there are implicit elements in the Greek which must be made explicit for the sake of English readers. Literally this verse may be rendered something like the following: “As far as the Good News is concerned, enemies because of you, but as far as choice is concerned, friends because of the patriarchs.” The Good News Translation takes the phrase “as far as the Good News is concerned” in the sense of because they reject the Good News (New English Bible “in the spreading of the gospel”). In this context “enemies” must be taken in the sense of God’s enemies (see Moffatt, An American Translation*, New English Bible, Jerusalem Bible). “Because of you” is understood to mean “for your sake” (so most translations); and the Good News Translation reflects the demands of English discourse structure in requiring the pronoun “you” to be identified as you, the Gentiles.

There is a potential difficulty in the rendering of the Jews are God’s enemies for the sake of you. This might imply that the Jews purposely became God’s enemies for the sake of the Gentiles, which is obviously not the case. Therefore, one must translate is some languages: “the Jews are God’s enemies, but this turns out to be of help to you, the Gentiles.” However, there is no such contrast in the second sentence of verse 28, since at that place there is no adversative relation between the Jews being God’s friends and this being for the sake of the patriarchs.

In the second clause “choice” refers to God’s choice (see also An American Translation* and New English Bible). The word rendered friends is not the usual Greek word for “friends”; it means something like “persons who are loved.” The Revised Standard Version, Moffatt, and New American Bible used the archaic “beloved,” while An American Translation* translates “they are dear to him,” and Jerusalem Bible “they are still loved by God”; New English Bible has “friends.”

For the sake of the patriarchs has a reference either to the promises that God made to the patriarchs or to the covenants he made with them.

The initial phrase, because of God’s choice, may be transformed into a verbal expression, “because God chose them.”

The final phrase, for the sake of the patriarchs, may need to be somewhat more specific in some languages—for example, “because of the promises God made to the patriarchs” or “because God promised the patriarchs that their descendants would always be his friends.”

Quoted with permission from Newman, Barclay M. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on Paul’s Letter to the Romans. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1973. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

For this reason refers back to the grounds of obedience given in the previous verse. God’s wrath (see also Revised Standard Version, An American Translation*, Moffatt) is literally “the wrath,” but in light of verse 4 (and in light of the way in which Paul uses the word “wrath” elsewhere in this letter) it is better to take this as a specific reference to God’s wrath. However, the New English Bible appears to try to avoid this conclusion and to make the word refer to the retribution imposed by the authorities. In a sense both of these translations are legitimate. Christians are encouraged to obey the civil authorities so that they will not be punished by them, but Paul definitely looks upon the punishment handed out by the civil authorities as God’s wrath on people who do evil. This seems to be the primary focus in the present passage.

In the first part of this verse the authorities is supplied by the Good News Translation as the understood object of the verb obey (An American Translation* “obey them”); most translations do not supply an object to the verb. For Paul the Christian is obligated to obey the civil authorities, not only out of the fear of punishment but for the sake of his conscience towards God. But also as a matter of conscience is rendered in some languages as “but because your heart also tells you to” or “because in your heart you know it is what you should do.”

Quoted with permission from Newman, Barclay M. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on Paul’s Letter to the Romans. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1973. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

It is interesting to note that Paul includes himself among those who are strong in the faith. The words in the faith are not a part of the Greek text as such, but they are included by the Good News Translation to make explicit the meaning of the word strong.

To carry (translated support in 11.18) is used of Jesus carrying his cross in John 19.17 and of believers carrying their cross in Luke 14.27. This verb also occurs in Galatians 6.2. In light of these passages, it is most likely that the verb means more than simply “to tolerate” or “to put up with.” It perhaps indicates that those who are strong in faith should be willing to experience self-denial for the sake of believers whose faith is weak.

To carry their burdens seems so natural a metaphor that sometimes translators are not aware that this cannot always be transferred literally into another language. In some instances the metaphor must be changed to a nonmetaphor—for example, “to help the weak to deal with their problems” or “to cause the weak to continue in faith.”

We should not please ourselves may be translated as “we should not do just what we ourselves want to do” or “we should not do just what is going to make us happy.”

Quoted with permission from Newman, Barclay M. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on Paul’s Letter to the Romans. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1973. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Recommend (Moffatt and An American Translation* “introduce”) is rendered by most translations as “commend.” Letters of “recommendation” were well known in the ancient world and Paul himself alludes to them in 2 Corinthians 3.1.

In some languages there is no technical term such as recommend. It may, therefore, be necessary to use a phrase: “I want to say to you that our sister Phoebe is a fine person,” “… Phoebe, who also believes as we do, is a fine person,” or “… is to be trusted.”

The word sister (like the word “brother”) is used in the sense of “fellow believer.”

Phoebe is mentioned only here in the New Testament.

Who serves (New English Bible “who holds office”; An American Translation* “who is a helper”) translates a noun (Revised Standard Version “a deaconess”). It is doubtful that this had become a technical term for an office in the church at the time that Paul wrote, and it is better to use a general term rather than the specific term “deaconess.”

Cenchreae was the seaport of Corinth on the eastern side of the isthmus (see Acts 18.18).

Quoted with permission from Newman, Barclay M. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on Paul’s Letter to the Romans. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1973. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

The noun rendered doing wrong appears also in 1.18 (evil ways), 1.29 (wickedness), and 2.8 (what is wrong). Here it stands in formal contrast to God’s doing right (literally “righteousness of God”). Although the phrase God’s doing right is essentially the same phrase that Paul uses in 1.17, it is clear that Paul uses the phrase in a different sense in the present context. Whereas in the former passage it is used in the general Pauline sense of God’s placing men in a right relationship with himself, here it refers to an attribute of God, specifically the fact that God is right and does what is right. The phrase God’s doing right is translated in a variety of ways (Moffatt “the justice of God”; Jerusalem Bible “his integrity”; New English Bible “God’s justice”; Phillips “the goodness of God”; and An American Translation* “the uprightness of God”).

This first question in verse 5 is particularly difficult to translate, primarily since it involves two kinds of events, our doing wrong and God’s doing right, in which the one distinctly affects the other. Moreover, the expression serves to show up more clearly is often difficult, since there is no indication to whom God’s doing right is shown up more clearly. It may, therefore, be necessary to recast this question in a somewhat different form—for example, “But what, if when we do wrong, people can see more clearly that God does right?” or “But what if, by our doing wrong, God’s doing right is shown to people so that they can see it more clearly?” For languages in which this type of question presents difficulties, it is possible to change to a nonquestion form, by introducing some type of context such as “men may argue” or “some men may say”—for example, “But some men argue that when we do wrong people can see more clearly how God does right.”

The question what can we say? is equivalent in some languages to “how can we answer this argument?,” “what can we say in response?,” or “is there an answer to this argument?” For languages in which such rhetorical question are not possible, one can always say “but there is an answer to this argument.”

The word rendered does wrong comes from the same stem as the word doing wrong in the earlier part of the verse.

When he punishes us is literally “bringing wrath on us,” but in the present context the reference is to punishment (see New English Bible “to bring retribution upon us”; An American Translation* “to inflict punishment”; and Phillips “to punish us”).

The question That God does wrong when he punishes us? may require some introductory phrase—for example, “Can we argue that…” or “Can we say….” Again, for languages which cannot employ such a rhetorical question, one may say: “Men may even argue that God does wrong when he punishes us.”

By his statement I speak here as men do (see 6.19; 1 Corinthians 9.8; Galatians 3.15), Paul means that he is presenting arguments based on human wisdom. This statement is best understood as parenthetical (see New English Bible, Jerusalem Bible, Phillips, and An American Translation*).

It may be necessary in rendering the verb do to make it somewhat more specific—for example, “I speak here as men ordinarily speak.” Some type of modifier such as “ordinarily” may be required in order to indicate that this is not necessarily what men do on all occasions but what is their habitual practice.

For languages in which the rhetorical questions of verse 5 are changed into nonquestions introduced by some expression relating to the way in which people argue such issues, it is not necessary to introduce this parenthetical statement I speak here as men do, since in reality the contents of this parenthetical sentence have been, as it were, redistributed as introductory features to the earlier sentences of the verse.

Quoted with permission from Newman, Barclay M. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on Paul’s Letter to the Romans. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1973. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

The Good News Translation (see also Revised Standard Version and Jerusalem Bible) restructures this verse rather considerably for its English readers; the New English Bible (“for it was not through law that Abraham, or his posterity, was given the promise…”) follows very much the Greek word order. God promised Abraham and his descendants is literally “the promise to Abraham or to his seed.” The noun phrase in Greek (“the promise to Abraham”) must be restructured into a verb phrase for English readers; and so many modern translations render this by a passive verb construction (New English Bible “was given”; Jerusalem Bible “was made”), while the Revised Standard Version speaks of the promise coming to Abraham. The promise, of course, did not come on its own, it was given; and since God is the one who gave it, the Good News Translation makes this information explicit: God promised.

In Hebrew to speak of one’s “seed” is to speak of one’s descendants, and most translations render “his seed” by his descendants.

In some languages his descendants are simply “his children” or “his grand-children.” In other instances one may employ “those who followed after him” or “those who came down from him.”

That the world would belong to him is literally “that he would be heir of the world.” In biblical language the noun “heir” frequently means simply “one who receives or gains possession of something,” without the necessity of a death involved, as the English word often implies. So then, the expression “heir of the world” merely means the world would belong to him. The reference is probably to Genesis 22.17-18 (see also 18.18), and it is interesting to note that the Hebrew text of Genesis 22.17 has “will possess” while the Septuagint reads “will inherit.”

In view of the fact that the promise was made to both Abraham and his descendants, it may be necessary to employ the pronoun “them” at the end of this first sentence—for example, “that the world would belong to them” or “that they should inherit the world.”

In Greek verse 13 is one sentence, and the words this promise was made, not because Abraham obeyed the Law appear first in the Greek sentence structure (literally “for not through law”). The force of this construction in Greek is to emphasize the words “for not through law.” However, since the subject of the sentence in Greek is “the promise,” it is more natural in English to introduce this information first, and then qualify it later. That is why so many modern translations, including the Good News Translation, restructure the order of the Greek sentence. This promise was made may be shifted into an active form by saying “God made this promise” or “God promised Abraham.”

Throughout Romans Paul uses the word “law” in a variety of ways, and it is not always easy to discern which particular meaning he has in mind in a given passage. In the present context the Good News Translation understands “law” as a specific reference to the Jewish Law (so also Moffatt, An American Translation*, Phillips, and so it seems, the Revised Standard Version), while the New English Bible (“it was not through law”) and the Jerusalem Bible (“was … on account of any law”) take it in a more general sense. To be sure, it is in keeping with Paul’s thought that no man can be put right with God through any sort of legalistic religious system, but in the present context he seems to be dealing specifically with the Jewish Law in this regard.

Obeyed the Law may be rendered as “did what the Law said he should do,” “followed the words of the Law,” or, negatively, “did not transgress against what the Law said.”

But because he believed and was accepted as righteous by God (literally “but through righteousness of faith”) renders essentially the same phrase discussed in verse 11 above.

It may be necessary to relate but because he believed and was accepted as righteous by God as “but because he believed and as a result was accepted as righteous by God,” “… and therefore was accepted as righteous by God,” or “… and hence God accepted him as righteous.”

Quoted with permission from Newman, Barclay M. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on Paul’s Letter to the Romans. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1973. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Paul’s answer to the question he has raised is in the form of a very strong negative: Certainly not (see also 3.4, 6 where the same reply is given).

Died (an aorist tense in Greek) points to a definite time in the past, and on the basis of the following verse Paul evidently has the moment of baptism in mind. As a general rule, the Greek simple future does not describe action in progress, and so Paul adds a particle to the verb tense here in order to describe the continuation of the action: how then can we go on living in it? (see An American Translation* and New English Bible “how can we live in it any longer?”)

We have died to sin may be rendered as “we have died as far as sinning is concerned,” “if it is a matter of sinning, then we are dead,” or “we have seemingly died; sin cannot move us.” It may be necessary to introduce some such expression as “seemingly” in order to indicate clearly that the “dying” is to be understood metaphorically. In some languages, however, died to sin must be rendered as “dead from sin,” that is to say, “dead, and in this way separated from the power of sin.”

The final question, how then can we go on living in it?, may be rendered as either a question, “how can we go on sinning in our lives?,” or as a statement, “we must not go on living and continuing to sin.”

Quoted with permission from Newman, Barclay M. and Nida, Eugene A. A Handbook on Paul’s Letter to the Romans. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1973. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .