It is with a degree of reluctance I commence a series of expositions on Romans. There are parts of it which puzzle me greatly. It has been used to formulate doctrines with which I disagree. It is difficult not to interpret certain passages in line with one's doctrinal predelictions. Lastly, I'm getting old and cannot work as easily on these expositions as when I commenced them 10 years ago.

The reason I am undertaking the task at all is in the hope of understanding Paul's letter better. If in the process others are helped to understand it as well then God be praised.

I am using the following commentaries:

(1) Romans by F.F.Bruce

(2) The letter to the Romans by William Barclay.

(3) The epistle to the Romans by Douglas J Moo

(4) The Pulpit Commentary on Romans.

(5) Romans, God's revelation of God's righteousness in the Focus on the Bible series by Paul Barnett.

(6) The New American Commentary on Romans by Robert H.Mounce.

The mistakes I make will not be through any lack of commentaries. The danger is that conflicting interpretations will leave me confused.