A Sea Of Red

my sister visited a church recently and the pastor said from the pulpit that romans 16 was not part of romans but had been removed from thr end of ephesains by the translators and inserted at the end of romans. has anyone ever heard of this teaching.

I hadn't heard it before but I found this link:

http://www.bibletexts.com/versecom/rom16.htm

I'd heard it, but have a few problems with it. If Erastus was the city treasurer of Ephasus, WHY was he greeting the city from where Paul was? It makes more sense for the city treasurer to know people in Rome, and send his greetings to them.

Paul didn't have to personally know everyone he was sending greetings to. He simply had to have had a report of what was happening there, which from the context of the letter I'd say he did.

In the grand scheme of things, does it really matter where it is? Does it matter that Ezra and Nehemiah were originally one book?

A.G. wrote:In the grand scheme of things, does it really matter where it is? Does it matter that Ezra and Nehemiah were originally one book?

Not really. It's just another thing for the scholars to argue about.

the bible text web web site is a christain science site. www.bibletext.com/other

Good call.... I didn't look for a site holding any particular belief... just one that tried to make sense of that theory. I apologize if I threw anyone off.

Being one of those "scholars" who argue over such things, I thought I would offer a book suggestion on the Romans' topic -

The textual history of the letter to the Romans : a study in textual and literary criticism
Gamble, Harry Y., 1941-
Publication info: Grand Rapids : Eerdmans, 1977.
ISBN: 0802816703
Description: 151 p. ; 25 cm.
Note: A revision of the author's thesis, Yale, 1970.

"This volume is a thorough and detailed study of the transmission of this letter in the early church, with a consideration of the shorter forms that circulated at various times and areas during the first centuries of the Church." - Bruce Metzger "Gamble examines the structure and composition of the New Testament letter in a way that not only contributes to the understanding of Romans, but is also of great value for Pauline studies in general. He shows himself master of the details of this intricate problem and of work on the Pauline letters as a whole." - G. D. Kilpatrick

It just seemed the scholarly thing to do!