While scholars typically lay out interpretive options and then argue one is the best, Daniel Patte, in this first volume of a three-volume commentary on Romans, presents three interpretations of Romans and argues that all are equally legitimate and equally plausible. In the foreword (pp. xv–xxv) and introduction (pp. 1–10) Patte describes how recent cultural phenomena of “fake news” and “alternative facts” as well as the diversity of interpretations of the biblical text make the subject of divergent explanations exceptionally relevant and how studying the reception of Romans along with biblical scholars, church historians, theologians from 1997–2011 as part of the SBL Seminar “Romans through History and Cultures” led him to see three major ways to interpret Romans that are equally legitimate and plausible.

Because such a view goes against the grain of critical biblical scholarship, Patte defends his approach in the two chapters of part 1 (“Critical and Interpretation...

You do not currently have access to this content.