Römer 16:15

Lutherbibel

Grüßet Philologus und die Julia, Nereus und seine Schwester und Olympas und alle Heiligen bei ihnen.

Parallel Translations

Schlachter Bibel (1951)
Grüßet Philologus und Julia, Nereus und seine Schwester, auch Olympas und alle Heiligen bei ihnen.

Bible Verse Review
  from Treasury of Scripure Knowledge

and all: Romans 16:2, Romans 1:7, Isaiah 60:21, Ephesians 1:1, 1 Peter 1:2

Reciprocal: 1 Corinthians 16:19 - the church

Gill's Notes on the Bible

Salute Philologus, and Julia,.... The first of these is a Greek name, and the name of a man, and signifies a lover of learning. This name Atteius assumed to himself, which Eratosthenes had done before him, because of his great learning y; this man is reckoned among the seventy disciples, and is said to be bishop of Sinope: :-. Julia is a woman's name, and Roman, probably the wife of the former; one of Stephens's copies read, "Junia":

Nereus, and his sister, and Olympas, and all the saints which are with them; who all dwelt together also in one family; and were saints, by separation, imputation, and the effectual calling; were called to be saints, and lived as such, and had a place in the apostle's affections on that account: Nerio, or Neriene, according to Gellius z, was a name with the Sabines, signifying "strength", from whence came Nero; and Olympas is the same with Olympius, said to be of the seventy disciples, and a Roman martyr; :-. It deserves some notice, that among all the persons here mentioned by name, known by the apostle to be at Rome, that he takes no notice of Peter; which surely he would have done, had he been, as the Papists say, bishop of Rome, and resided there.

y Suetonius de illustr. Gram. c. 10. z Noct. Attic, l. 13. c. 22.

Clarke's Notes on the Bible

Verse Romans 16:15. Salute Philologus, c.] Of these several persons, though much has been conjectured, nothing certain is known. Even the names of some are so ambiguous that we know not whether they were men or women. They were persons well known to St. Paul, and undoubtedly were such as had gone from different places where the apostle had preached to sojourn or settle at Rome. One thing we may remark, that there is no mention of St. Peter, who, according to the Roman and papistical catalogue of bishops, must have been at Rome at this time if he were not now at Rome, the foundation stone of Rome's ascendancy, of Peter's supremacy, and of the uninterrupted succession, is taken away, and the whole fabric falls to the ground. But if Peter were at Rome at this time, Paul would have sent his salutations to him in the first place; and if Peter were there, he must have been there, according to the papistical doctrine, as bishop and vicar of Jesus Christ; but if he were there, is it likely that he should have been passed by, while Andronicus and Junia are mentioned as of note among the apostles, Romans 16:7, and that St. Paul should call on the people to remedy the disorders that had crept in among themselves; should not these directions have been given to Peter, the head of the Church? And if there were a Church, in the papistical sense of the word, founded there, of which Peter was the head, is it likely that that Church should be in the house of Priscilla and Aquila, Romans 16:5. But it is a loss of time to refute such ridiculous and groundless pretensions. It is very likely that Peter, so far from being universal bishop at Rome, never saw the city in his life.