Romans 16:7

Kinsmen - Neighbors; relatives.

Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen - As the word συγγενεις signifies relatives, whether male or female, and as Junia may probably be the name of a woman, the wife of Andronicus, it would be better to say relatives than kinsmen. But probably St. Paul means no more than that they were Jews; for, in Romans 9:3, he calls all the Jews his kinsmen according to the flesh.

My fellow prisoners - As Paul was in prison often, it is likely that these persons shared this honor with him on some occasion, which is not distinctly marked.

Of note among the apostles - Whether this intimates that they were noted apostles or only highly reputed by the apostles, is not absolutely clear; but the latter appears to me the most probable. They were not only well known to St. Paul, but also to the rest of the apostles.

In Christ before me - That is, they were converted to Christianity before Paul was; probably at the day of pentecost, or by the ministry of Christ himself, or by that of the seventy disciples.

My kinsmen - In Romans 9:3, the apostle calls "all" the Jews "his kinsmen," and it has been doubted whether he means anything more here than that they were "fellow Jews." But as many others who were Jews are mentioned here without this appellation, and as he especially designates these persons, and Herodian Romans 16:11, it seems probable that they were remote relatives of the apostle.

My fellow-prisoners - Paul was often in prison; and it is probable that on some of those occasions they had been confined with him; compare 2 Corinthians 11:23, "In prisons more frequent."

Who are of note - The word translated "of note" ἐπίσημοι episēmoi, denotes properly those who are "marked," designated, or distinguished in any way, used either in a good or bad sense; compare Matthew 27:16. Here it is used in a good sense.

Among the apostles - This does not mean that they "were" apostles, as has been sometimes supposed. For,

(1) There is no account of their having been appointed as such.

(2) the expression is not one which would have been used if they "had" been. It would have been "who were distinguished apostles;" compare Romans 1:1; 1 Corinthians 1:1; 2 Corinthians 1:1; Philippians 1:1.

(3) it by no means implies that they were apostles All that the expression fairly implies is, that they were known to the other apostles; that they were regarded by them as worthy of their affection and confidence; that they had been known by them, as Paul immediately adds, before "he" was himself converted. They had been converted "before" he was, and were distinguished in Jerusalem among the early Christians, and honored with the friendship of the other apostles.

(4) the design of the office of "apostles" was to bear "witness" to the life, death, resurrection, doctrines, and miracles of Christ; compare Matthew 10; Acts 1:21, Acts 1:26; Acts 22:15. As there is no evidence that they had been "witnesses" of these things; or appointed to it, it is improbable that they were set apart to the apostolic office.

(5) the word "apostles" is used sometimes to designate "messengers" of churches; or those who were "sent" from one church to another on some important business, and "if" this expression meant that they "were" apostles, it could only be in some such sense as having obtained deserved credit and eminence in that business; see Philippians 2:25; 2 Corinthians 8:23.

Who were in Christ ... - Who were "converted" before I was. The meaning is clear. The expression, "in Christ," means to be united to him, to be interested in his religion, to be Christians.

16:7 Who are of note among the apostles - They seem to have been some of the most early converts. Fellowprisoners - For the gospel's sake.