CHAPTER FIFTEEN - Weebly

C H A P T E R F I F T E E N

THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANSTHE GOD OF JEW AND GENTILE

P hilip Mel anchthon, one of the great theological minds of the Reformation, de-scribed Romans as “an outline and com-pendium of all Christian doctrine,” and its in-terpretation has often been driven by theological interests and debates. Indeed, until quite recently Romans had been read primarily as an essay in propositional theology, and in-terpreters often lost sight of the concrete and specific circumstances and interests that called this letter into existence. Attempting to ab-stract the timeless theology of Romans, Chris-tians have repeatedly broken off fellowship with other Christians over the interpretation of minute aspects of this letter, for example, the question of predestination versus free will, the degree of human depravity, the nature of

“saving” faith, and so forth. A tragic irony emerges when we consider that in Romans, Paul provides his fullest treatment of the way God has brought people of diverse heritage and practice together into the one body of the church, and he also gives several chapters of practical advice for preserving unity in the midst of this diversity.

Since the reading of Romans has been framed more by theological inquiry and debate than by listening to the text, the reader may have to work harder to hear Romans itself over the cacophony. Many of us have been brought up in a certain tradition of what Romans has to mean; thus we are caught in the endless cycle of reading into Romans what we have been

taught to find there, which confirms in the end that Romans means exactly what we thought all along. But the mystery of God is always more difficult to domesticate than our tradi-tions tend to admit. After Paul has said all he has to say about the mystery of God’s right-eousness, even he can still only exclaim, “How unsearchable are God’s decisions and how un-fathomable God’s ways! ‘For who has known the Lord’s mind? Or who has been God’s coun-selor?’” (Rom 11:33-34). It is perhaps more ap-propriate to do as Paul advises and simply

“stand in awe” (Rom 11:20) rather than presume to systematize and codify this mystery. For Paul, standing in humble awe of God will allow Jew and Gentile to worship together in the one body (Rom 15:7-13), whereas the propositional approach to Romans has contributed to the fracturing of this body.

THE SETTING AND PURPOSES OF ROMANSRomans has long been regarded as a timeless treatise, not an application of the gospel aimed to achieve particular goals (whether to affect the situation in local congregations or to attain its author’s particular ends). It was viewed almost as the distilled essence of Paul’s thought, as recently as Günther Bornkamm, who called it Paul’s “last will and testament.”1 Presumed to

1Günther Bornkamm, “The Letter to the Romans as Paul’s Last Will and Testament,” Australian Biblical Review 11 (1963–1964): 2-14 (repr. in The Romans Debate, ed. Karl P. Donfried, rev. ed. [Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1991], 16-28).

deSilva, David A.. 2018. An Introduction to the New Testament : Contexts, Methods and Ministry Formation. Westmont: InterVarsity Press. Accessed November 29, 2020. ProQuest Ebook Central.Created from dtl on 2020-11-29 15:51:10.

Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

8. In

terV

arsi

ty P

ress

. All

right

s re

serv

ed.

the ePistLe to the romans 527

be “Pauline” in its purest form, Romans became the key to reading all of his other letters. Several breakthroughs have significantly advanced our understanding of Romans. The first of these came when students of the letter began to see that Romans is not without at least some con-tingent purpose and occasion; it seeks to achieve certain goals like every other of Paul’s letters. A second important breakthrough came when scholars began to recapture the cor-porate dimension of Romans, which had long been overlooked in the history of reading Romans as a treatise on how the individual

“gets saved.”2 A third breakthrough came as Romans (along with Galatians) ceased to be privileged above all the other letters in the dis-cussion of Pauline theology, with the result that the theological contributions of the Corinthian and Macedonian letters are now honored equally in recent attempts to ascertain “the the-ology of Paul.”

The Christian communities in Rome. Rome had a large Jewish population (estimated at forty to fifty thousand),3 in part because the city itself naturally drew people from the prov-inces, in part because Pompey the Great had

2A groundbreaking essay in this regard was Krister Stendahl’s “The Apostle Paul and the Introspective Conscience of the West” (HTR 56 [1963]: 199-215), which demonstrated how Western individualism and preoccupation with “internal” matters, such as the feelings of guilt and acceptance, have skewed the reading of Romans. Stendahl’s conclusion that Romans was written to explain how two ethnic bodies come together in the new people of God—how Gentiles come in without disinheriting the Jews—has opened up new vistas into every aspect of Paul’s theology and the exegesis of Ro-mans and Galatians in particular. His insistence that Ro-mans is not at all about how an individual gets saved, how-ever, has been justly critiqued as another instance of a pendulum swinging back too far in the opposing direction. (See Douglas J. Moo, Encountering the Book of Romans [Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2002], 28; Peter Stuhlm-acher, Revisiting Paul’s Doctrine of Justification [Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2001], 44-52). A reading that holds together Paul’s interest in people both as individuals and as ethnic groups will achieve the best balance.

3Harry J. Leon, The Jews of Ancient Rome, rev. ed. (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1995), 135-36.

Figure 15.1. Two views of the excavations of the Roman Forum, the center of the political and religious life of Rome and her empire. The three columns in the back center of the upper picture are the remains of a temple to Castor and Pollux; the paved ruins studded with the bases of columns are the remains of the Basilica Julia, a major judicial center. In the lower picture, we see eight large columns of the façade of the temple of Saturn and the three remaining columns from the façade of the temple of the Divine Vespasian and Titus. The photos are taken from the archive building, behind and above which sat the temple of Jupiter Capitolinus. (Photos by author)


Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

8. In

terV

arsi

ty P

ress

. All

right

s re

serv

ed.

528 AN INTRODUCTION TO THE NEW TESTAMENT

brought many thousands of Jews to Rome as slaves after his military intervention in Jeru-salem in 63 BCE. Many of these were liberated thereafter, with the result that most Jews in Rome would have occupied the status of slaves or freed persons. They were not nearly so large nor so unified as the Jewish community in Al-exandria, but they nevertheless provided an ample seedbed for the Christian congregations.

The origins of Roman Christianity remain largely unknown. Jews converted elsewhere to Christianity, perhaps returning from a pil-grimage to Jerusalem (like those present for Pentecost in Acts 2:10), perhaps moving to the

“Big Olive” for business opportunities (like Aquila and Priscilla of Pontus), brought the gospel to Rome, and began making disciples among Jews and Gentile adherents of the syna-gogues.4 Christianity in Rome thus probably had a strong Jewish character and a deep root-edness both in the Old Testament (LXX) tradi-tions and the practice of Jewish customs. It took shape, as elsewhere, in the form of house churches (see Rom 16:5, 14-15), though in the hyperovercrowded city of Rome (whose popu-lation density in some districts exceeded that of modern Calcutta) we might also need to en-vision small congregations meeting in the cramped tenements of Rome’s nonelite renters.5

Since they were so largely intertwined, one event in the life of the Jewish community of Rome no doubt had a great impact on the Christian community there. In 49 CE Claudius expelled at least some segment of the Jewish population from Rome on account of a distur-bance in that community over a person whom Suetonius, a Roman historian of the early second century, calls “Chrestus” (Life of Claudius 25). While it remains possible that someone actually

4Brendan Byrne, Romans, Sacra Pagina 6 (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1996), 10. Paul speaks of Junia and An-dronicus as “apostles” (Rom 16:7), perhaps knowing of their role in evangelizing in Rome.

5Special attention to this setting is given in Robert Jewett, Ro-mans, Hermeneia (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2007), 53-55, 62-69.

named Chrestus (a common-enough slave name) was fomenting riot, it seems more his-torically plausible that Suetonius has misinter-preted Christos, the unfamiliar Greek word for Messiah, as Chrestus. Given the response of Jews elsewhere in the eastern empire to the procla-mation of Jesus as the Messiah of Israel, we should expect many Jews in Rome also to have reacted strongly and openly against mission-aries of the new movement. The disruption of the peace led to strong measures on the em-peror’s part to quell the shameful breach of civic unity in the empire’s capital.6 If the trouble within the Jewish community was brewing as a reaction to the initial proclamation of the gospel, this would point to the beginnings of the Roman Christian community in 47 or 48 CE. If they were responding, however, to later trends in this movement—perhaps the erosion of support for the synagogue among proselytes and God-fearers, perhaps the rise of less law-observant strains of Christianity—then the beginnings of the Roman church could be pushed back much further. The emperor’s judgment, moreover, pro-vides additional evidence for Christianity being regarded as a wholly intra-Jewish phenomenon by Roman authorities at this point.

The church was strong enough to survive the expulsion of leading Jewish Christians from Rome (this is when Aquila and Priscilla, for example, left Rome and relocated in Corinth; Acts 18:2), and it continued to grow in their ab-sence. After Claudius’s death the edict of exile was rescinded, and returning Jewish Christians came home to a predominantly Gentile church. There may have been some tension between the returnees and the Christians they left behind (as well as the newer Gentile converts made in their absence).7 For five or more years the church had continued to grow and evolve

6See further E. Mary Smallwood, The Jews Under Roman Rule (Leiden: Brill, 1981), 211-16; James D. G. Dunn, Romans 1–8, WBC 38A (Waco, TX: Word, 1988), liii; Joseph Fitzmyer, Ro-mans, AB 33 (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1993), 31-32, 77; Jewett, Romans, 60-61.

7Byrne, Romans, 12; Jewett, Romans, 59, 61.


Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

8. In

terV

arsi

ty P

ress

. All

right

s re

serv

ed.


without their direct influence and leadership, possibly in directions that some Jewish Chris-tians would oppose (e.g., regarding the level of commitment to Judaistic customs among newer Gentile converts). Both sides now had to adjust: Jewish Christians to a church that was no longer under their direction, Gentile Chris-tians to a group of estranged sisters and brothers whose practices some found difficult to integrate and whose objections were difficult to understand or honor. Paul’s word in Romans would indeed have served as a “word on target” to such tensions within the community.

The Roman congregations continued to grow. Nero’s actions against the Christians in 64 CE (see Tacitus, Ann. 15.44) testify to the

size and visibility of this movement in Rome, to the tendency now to view it as something distinct from Judaism, and to the growing ani-mosity felt against this movement by the popu-lation of Rome in general.8 Paul wrote Romans, therefore, at something of a point of transition for this community, and much of its argumen-tation can be understood as an attempt to pre-serve the Roman church’s unity and internal solidarity through this transition.

Paul’s personal goals for Romans. That Romans was not written to be a “last will and

8For more detailed discussion of the early history of Roman Christianity, see Fitzmyer, Romans, 25-39; Jewett, Romans, 53-74.

Figure 15.2. The interior of the Roman Colosseum, completed under Titus (emperor 79–81 CE). A floor was originally constructed over the maze of passageways now visible in the center, where gladiators, animals, and other entertainments were prepared prior to their entrance into the arena. The arena could even be flooded for the reenactment of naval battles. (Photo by author)


Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

8. In

terV

arsi

ty P

ress

. All

right

s re

serv

ed.


testament,” a closing argument distilling the essence of Paul’s theology, is seen in that Paul does not regard Romans as his swan song but rather as a hinge between one phase of his mission and the next.9 Writing from Corinth or its westbound port, Cenchreae, sometime be-tween 55 and 58 CE,10 Paul sees himself standing at a juncture in his missionary en-deavors. Having successfully proclaimed the gospel from Jerusalem to Illyricum (the province northwest of Macedonia and Greece, reaching as far as northeast Italy), Paul senses that his work in the east is now complete (Rom 15:19) and now looks ahead to new fields for sowing the gospel, namely, westward from Italy through Gaul to Spain (Rom 15:20-24). Perhaps Paul entertained the hope that he might con-tinue thence through North Africa, Cyrenaica, and Egypt, closing the circle of the oikoumenē, the civilized world, returning to Jerusalem perhaps just in time for the parousia and the deliverance of Israel at the Last Day, having thoroughly fulfilled his commission as “apostle to the nations.”

Paul therefore wishes to gain the Roman Christians’ support for the next phase of this mission (to “reap some harvest” among them and to be “sent on” by them, Rom 1:13; 15:24).11

9Byrne, Romans, 9.10Paul can be confidently located in Corinth/Cenchreae if

Rom 16 is taken as integral to the letter. Gaius and Erastus, both known from Corinth, are able to send their greetings with Paul to Rome (Rom 16:23), and, moreover, it is Phoebe of Cenchreae who will be delivering the letter to the Christians in Rome and perhaps making herself avail-able for clarifications and answering other questions about this “Paul,” hence also the word of commendation for her, asking that she be accorded an appropriate reception (Rom 16:1). There is a marked preference for a date between 56 and 58 CE. See Dunn, Romans 1–8, xliii; C. E. B. Cranfield, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, ICC (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1975), 1:12-16; Byrne, Romans, 8; Fitzmyer, Romans, 85-88; Arland Hultgren, Paul’s Letter to the Romans: A Commentary (Grand Rapids; Eerdmans, 2011), 569-71; Jewett, Romans, 22-23.

11A. J. M. Wedderburn, The Reasons for Romans (Philadel-phia: Fortress, 1991), 43, 92-139; Dunn, Romans 1–8, lv; Byrne, Romans, 10. The Greek verb propempō used in Rom 15:24 is often used in the sense of “facilitate (someone

The well-established Christian community at Rome would make an ideal base of support for beginning a new mission. Paul is therefore at pains to establish a relationship with this church that he has not founded. We can see how Paul begins to construct a “prior rela-tionship” with the Roman Christians in Romans 1:8-10, 13. Both in his prayers and his intentions, the Roman Christians have already been very much a part of Paul’s life, a very real presence to him. Thus he subtly begins to lay a foundation for their future partnership with each other. Paul intends to bring “some spir-itual gift” to strengthen them, but he also looks forward to being encouraged by their faith-fulness as well (Rom 1:11-12). This provides a politic hint of the reciprocity relationship Paul wishes to initiate with the Roman congrega-tions.12 They cannot contribute now to the col-lection, as did the other Gentile churches that Paul founded, but they can still contribute to the spread of the gospel.

In order to enter into partnership with Paul, they need to know precisely what he stands for. This prompts him to present himself and his message to this congregation, not only to

“remind” them of the gospel (now given its dis-tinctive Pauline accent) that they accepted but also to “set the record straight” about his own commitment to a transformed life, his law-free

else’s) travel,” as in 1 Cor 16:6, 11; 2 Cor 1:16; Titus 3:13; 3 Jn 6 (so Hultgren, Romans, 6). Jewett (Romans, 74-79, 87-91) provides a brilliant analysis of the conditions of the prov-ince of Spain at this time, the challenges these conditions posed to Paul’s mission, and what specific help Paul would have needed from Roman Christians in order to facilitate his work there.

12Romans 1:12 is not a “diplomatic rephrasing of his relation to them,” correcting Rom 1:11 (Fitzmyer, Romans, 75). Far from being a step backward, it is a step forward—calling for a response of faithfulness within the relationship that Paul is initiating. Part of the problem is the persistence of mistranslation of this verse. It is not “to be mutually en-couraged by each other’s faith, both yours and mine,” but “to be mutually encouraged by our faith in [or trust in, or faithfulness toward] one another.” Faith (pistis) here would have more of its usual meaning of trust or reliability in a business partnership.


Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

8. In

terV

arsi

ty P

ress

. All

right

s re

serv

ed.


gospel having been subject to misrepresen-tation elsewhere (see Rom 3:8, the clearest evi-dence that Paul knows about prejudice against his message and mission).13 Here is one indi-cation that Romans is not a simple, detached presentation of Paul’s gospel but one designed to overcome potential doubts about the char-acter of Paul and his gospel so that the Roman Christians will accept him as a missionary apostle worthy of their full support. Since the doubts focus on issues such as how the Christian is supposed to live a moral life without becoming Torah observant, this takes Paul more into the topics that arose in the situ-ations in Antioch and Galatia, hence the abun-dance of connections between Galatians and Romans. (Unfortunately, this has also tended to lead to the privileging of these issues as central Pauline concerns, to the detriment of the contributions of Paul’s other letters to a fuller understanding of his “gospel.”)

A second purpose concerns Paul’s more im-mediate travel plans, as he prepares to depart for Jerusalem with the relief funds he has col-lected from his converts in Achaia and Mace-donia (Rom 15:25-29).14 This is an act of charity and kindness, but it also serves as a symbol for the reciprocity and partnership be-tween the Pauline churches and the Jerusalem church: “for it pleased them [Paul’s Gentile churches], and they are their debtors. For if the Gentiles received a share in their [the Jeru-salem Christians’] spiritual things, they [the Gentile Christians] owe it to them to be of service to them in physical things” (Rom 15:25-27). Immediately following this, however, Paul expresses concern for how the collection will be received by the Jerusalem community

13Byrne, Romans, 9, 18-19; Hultgren, Romans, 18-20.14These verses inform us that during his third visit to Corinth

(see 2 Cor 13:1) Paul successfully resolved the remaining tensions between himself and his congregation, and that Paul’s directions in 2 Cor 8–9 had in fact been carried out, since the Christians in Achaia have indeed contributed to the collection for the poor in Judea.

(Rom 15:30-32).15 This collection effort repre-sents, for Paul, the mutual acceptance of and the solidarity between the Diaspora-Gentile churches and the Judean churches. The funds he takes to Jerusalem are the firstfruits of the eschatological pouring in of the wealth of the nations to Jerusalem. The grateful acknowl-edgment and acceptance of this gift from Paul on the part of the Jerusalem and Judean churches would signify an affirmation of peace and unity between the churches he has founded and the churches that emerged as a result of the Jewish mission. In light of the conflicts in Antioch and Galatia, and in light of the growing hostility against Paul in non-Christian Jewish and Jewish-Christian circles (see Acts 21:20-22), Paul was understandably concerned that the unity of the church would be sealed through the acceptance of this of-fering (and fearful of the implications of the rejection of the collection by the leaders of the Jerusalem church). He therefore asks the Roman Christians, who have not had the op-portunity to contribute to this collection, to begin to act as Paul’s partners even before he visits them by supporting him in prayer (Rom 15:30-32), which Paul believes to be truly ef-fective and not just a casual and clichéd re-quest made in religious circles.

Paul’s pastoral goals for Romans. Some scholars have argued that Romans is not con-nected with circumstances or problems in-ternal to Roman churches.16 However, others

15Wedderburn, Reasons for Romans, 37-41; Dunn, Romans 1–8, lvi. See also Dieter Georgi, Remembering the Poor: The History of Paul’s Collection for Jerusalem (Nashville: Abing-don, 1992), 33-42, 117-20; Keith F. Nickle, The Collection: A Study in Paul’s Strategy (Naperville, IL: Alec R. Allenson, 1966), 111-29; Bengt Holmberg, Paul and Power: The Struc-ture of Authority in the Primitive Church as Reflected in the Pauline Epistles (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1980), 35-43.

16See, for example, C. H. Dodd, who calls it “a waste of time” to try to deduce internal conditions from this letter (The Epistle of Paul to the Romans [New York: Harper & Broth-ers, 1932], xxviii, xxxi); Robert J. Karris, “Romans 14:1–15:13 and the Occasion of Romans,” CBQ 25 (1973): 155-78


Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

8. In

terV

arsi

ty P

ress

. All

right

s re

serv

ed.


have argued (I think more persuasively) that Romans is written to address situation-specific circumstances and achieve specific goals within those circumstances. We have already seen how this is the case with regard to Paul’s aspirations and anxieties; it seems likely to have been true also with regard to circum-stances facing the Roman church.17 How would Paul get such information about a church he has not yet visited? The list of greetings in Romans 16, if it was indeed original to Romans, reveals that Paul was not unknown to the church in Rome. Through his own travels he had met quite a few members of the Roman congregation, either while they were living abroad (for example, Priscilla and Aquila, alongside whom Paul worked in Corinth) or before they came to settle at Rome. Paul was also not the only person to travel or write letters in the ancient world, and his personal acquaintances in Rome might easily have pro-vided him with firsthand information con-cerning the condition of the Roman congrega-tions prior to his writing Romans.18

The aspect of the Roman Christians’ situ-ation most clearly in view is found in Romans 14:1–15:13, where Paul seeks to nurture harmony and mutual respect among the “strong” and the

(also 65-84 in Donfried, Romans Debate). More recently, Arland Hultgren (Romans, 16-18, 503) has suggested that Paul’s advice in Rom 14–15 represents not the apostle’s in-tervention in actual divisions within the Roman church but rather his supplying the “counsel” that the Roman Christians would already know, approve, and follow as a means of further winning their support.

17Thus, rightly, Karl P. Donfried, “False Presuppositions in the Study of Romans,” in Romans Debate, 103.

18Dunn, Romans 1–8, 1:xlv. Paul’s advice about paying taxes in Rom 13:6-7, for example, is often read as an indication of such detailed information about current issues in Rome. About the time Romans was written, people in Rome were actively protesting the extortionate collection of “indirect” taxes by the publicani, such that the matter was brought before the emperor and senate, who eventually intervened to correct this abuse. Paul is thus counseling Christians to provide a model of orderliness and submissiveness to au-thorities in a situation of restlessness and turmoil. (See Tacitus, Ann. 13.50-51; Dunn, Romans 1–8, xliii-xliv, liv; Fitzmyer, Romans, 35-36, 78-79.)

“weak.”19 While it is true that Paul had used these terms to address a specific situation in Corinth, it does not follow that Paul adds this admonition here simply because it might be useful, even though he has no knowledge of a specific tension among Roman Christians, for the discussion concerns not only eating meat versus abstaining from all meats (as potential objects of pagan sacrifice) but also the obser-vation of special days versus the nonobservance of a sacred calendar. The tension reflects the known facts about Roman Christianity, namely, (1) its strong beginnings within the orbit of the synagogue, and (2) with the expulsion of the Jews (and possibly the influx of less Judaistic forms of the Way), the relaxation of Jewish ob-servances among some sector of the population. This is not to say that the “strong” are entirely and uniformly Gentile Christians as opposed to

“weak” Jewish Christians, since Priscilla and Aquila would surely share Paul’s mind with regard to meat and calendrical observances, whereas some Gentile Christian converts who had first been converts to Judaism, or been con-verted through a more Judaistic Christianity, could easily maintain scruples about foods sacrificed to idols and the need to observe the sabbath and other holy days.20

The “strong” might scorn the “weak” for their enslavement to their scruples (or perhaps

“superstition”), while the “weak” could accuse the “strong” of neglecting piety and not living in line with true religion. Paul’s exposition of

19See further Wedderburn, Reasons for Romans, 44-65; Fitzmyer, Romans, 33. Francis Watson (Paul, Judaism, and the Gentiles [Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986], 94-98) goes a bit further, suggesting that Paul’s ac-tual intent was to win over the weak to the position of the strong (not to the point of abandoning any distinctive practice but to the point of agreeing in theory that obser-vance of the Torah is now a matter of conscience rather than divine mandate) and thus consolidate Roman Chris-tianity as “Pauline” Christianity. This has significant merit, as such a theoretical shift seems prerequisite to the “weak” accepting the “strong,” which may be just as much an issue as the converse.

20Wedderburn, Reasons for Romans, 64-65; Jewett, Romans, 71.


Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

8. In

terV

arsi

ty P

ress

. All

right

s re

serv

ed.


the gospel in Romans 1–11 impinges directly on such a situation, as Romans 15:7-13, the scrip-tural celebration of the bringing together of Jew and Gentile in the one church, shows. Paul’s carefully balanced efforts both to negate the ethnic privileges of Jews and to exclude a boastful or superior attitude among Gentile converts come to bear here on nurturing an at-titude of tolerance across the lines of “strong” and “weak,” putting Christ’s welcome of all persons ahead of personal judgments. Re-solving these tensions is also ancillary to Paul’s personal ambitions, for a unified and harmo-nious church—especially one that has been helped along to harmony by Paul’s timely inter-vention—will make for a stronger and more committed base of support for his future mis-sionary endeavors.

GENRE AND STRUCTURERomans falls naturally into the major category of “letter.” It has the standard form for an epis-tolary opening (“Sender to Recipient[s], greetings”), but it is substantially expanded, as Paul was accustomed to do (Rom 1:1-7). The final chapters also include the normal topics covered in a letter closing—indication of travel plans, concluding greetings, and postscript. Within this letter frame the body of Romans incorporates several subgenres21 within a framework commonly called a “diatribe.” This form is common in popular philosophical teaching in urban centers and is found espe-

21For example, testimony lists (chains of Scripture quota-tions; see Rom 3:10-18; 9:25-29; 15:9-12), hymns, and a miniletter of recommendation (Rom 16:1-2). See further Fitzmyer, Romans, 91-92.

Figure 15.3. Worship of the family lares and genii, the protective spirits of the family line, was a typical feature of Roman domestic religion. Here we see a frescoed lararium with painted depictions of these ancestral spirits from an ancient tavern in Pompeii. (Photo by author)


Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

8. In

terV

arsi

ty P

ress

. All

right

s re

serv

ed.


cially in the Discourses or Dissertations of Epictetus.22 The speaker would present his or her case in a vivid style, engaging the hearers through direct address, paradoxes, rhetorical questions, asking questions and then providing answers, and dialogues with imaginary third parties (straw adversaries or “straight men” whose objections are answered or counterposi-tions dismantled). This form was especially ef-fective because it allowed the speaker to both address likely objections and prevent the hearers from drawing false conclusions. An audience is only won over if the secret objec-tions they harbor in their minds are defused. For this reason an effective speaker will show an awareness of likely objections to what is being said or questions prompted by what is being proposed and answer them up front.

Romans contains a lengthy, coherent, unified argument concerning the relationship of Jew and Gentile to God and each other in the one body of Christ. Within this argument some seams or stages are easily discernible; in other places it is difficult to know where to draw the lines between discrete pieces of the argument. An overall sketch of the letter might resemble the following:

1. Epistolary prescript (Rom 1:1-7), an-nouncing the theme of the letter: Paul preaches to bring about the “obedience of faith” among the Gentile nations (Rom 1:6)

2. Thanksgiving (Rom 1:8-15), developing Paul’s past and future partnership with the Roman Christians

3. Thesis, or proposition (Rom 1:16-17): The gospel brings God’s saving power to life in all who trust, whether Jew or Greek, re-vealing God’s righteousness “from faith/faithfulness to faith/faithfulness”

22See Stanley K. Stowers, The Diatribe and Paul’s Letter to the Romans, SBLDS 57 (Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1981); Thomas Schmeller, Paulus und die “Diatribe”: Eine verglei-chende Stilinterpretation (Münster: Aschendorff, 1987); Fitzmyer, Romans, 91; Jewett, Romans, 25-27.

4. The solidarity of Jew and Gentile under sin (Rom 1:18–3:20)

5. The solidarity of Jew and Gentile under God’s favor in Christ (Rom 3:21–4:25)

6. Conclusion and transition (Rom 5:1-21)a. Romans 5:1-11 celebrates God’s ini-

tiative in bringing human beings back into a state of favor, closing off the theme of wrath introduced in Romans 1:18 with the assurance of future salvation from that wrath in Romans 5:9 on account of the recon-ciliation effected in Christ.

b. Romans 5:12-21 reinforces the ne-gation of the Jew-Gentile distinction before God by viewing all of hu-manity as either “in Adam” under sin or “in Christ” under righteousness.

7. Clarifications of possible questions (Rom 6:1–8:39)a. What are the ethical implications of

this new life in Christ “under grace” and without “law” (Rom 6:1–7:6)? This section takes up the slanderous misrepresentations of Paul cited in Romans 3:5-8 that his gospel en-courages sin.

b. What is the role of the law in regard to sin (Rom 7:7-25)? This section ad-dresses questions raised by his treatment of the law in Romans 3:20; 4:15; 5:13, 20; 6:14; 7:6.

c. How does Paul’s gospel uphold the law rather than overthrow it (Rom 8:1-39)? Romans 8 looks forward now through the life in the Spirit of Christ to the redemption of all creation and the glorification of the believers in Christ, thus reversing the condition of wrath (and the promise of eschato-logical wrath) with which the ar-gument began in Romans 1:18.


Cop

yrig

ht ©

201

8. In

terV

arsi

ty P

ress

. All

right

s re

serv

ed.

CHAPTER FIFTEEN - Weebly

Documents

Transcript of CHAPTER FIFTEEN - Weebly