was successfully added to your cart.

Tag

Epistle to the Romans

Note of the Day (Rom 1:1, etc)

By | Note of the Day | No Comments

Romans 1:1 & 11:13

In light of the possible reference to Junia as an apostle in Rom 16:7 (cf. Part 4 of the series “Women in the Church”), it is worth considering the use of the word a)po/stolo$ (apóstolos) elsewhere in the New Testament. I will be looking, in particular, at the other two occurrences in Romans as being representative of Paul’s understanding and use of the term. However, a brief overview here will also be useful.

The word itself is derived from the verb a)poste/llw, to set someone or something away from [a)po/] a person, i.e. to send away, to send forth. As such, it is a relatively common verb, largely synonymous with pe/mpw (“send”). Within the Gospels, the noun is used exclusively in reference to the twelve closest companions of Jesus (“the Twelve”), those whom he selected from his followers to have a special role and position (Mk 3:14; Matt 10:2; Lk 6:13). It is not certain if Jesus used this word specifically (note the variant in Mk 3:14), but its rarity in the Gospels suggests that it is a subsequent identification made by early Christians. Certainly it should be associated with Jesus’ practice of sending his disciples out as his representatives, to preach and perform healing miracles in his name (Mk 6:7-13 par; Lk 10:1-12, 17ff; 22:35-36). The theme is emphasized in several sayings of Jesus (in the “Q” tradition, cf. Matt 9:38; 10:16, 40 par; also Lk 10:16), and, especially, in the tradition of Jesus’ commissioning his disciples after the resurrection (Matt 28:19-20; [Mk 16:15ff]; John 20:21; Acts 1:8). The motif has special theological significance in the Gospel of John (cf. 17:3-25, etc).

The basic restriction of meaning to the circle of Twelve continues in the book of Acts (1:2, 26; 2:37, 42-43; 4:33ff, etc), but with several key points of emphasis that can be discerned:

  • They are personal companions of Jesus during his earthly ministry (1:2ff) who were also witnesses of the resurrection, i.e. those who saw and heard the resurrected Jesus (1:21-22)
  • They are specifically located and centered in Jerusalem and Judea (8:1, 14; 9:27; 11:1); this distinction becomes increasingly significant as the narrative moves to the mission in the Gentile world (outside of Judea). It also means that the apostles, like nearly all of the earliest believers, were Jewish Christians (cf. 15:2ff, 22-23; 16:4).
  • They had the specific role and duty of teaching and preaching—that is, proclaiming the Gospel message, and, perhaps more importantly, serving as the source for transmitting the sayings and teachings of Jesus.

Given these three main aspects of the apostolic identity, it is understandable why there might be some conflict regarding Paul’s own identification as an apostle, which he makes repeatedly in his letters, and often in the very opening, as we see in Romans:

“Paulus, slave of (the) Anointed Yeshua, called (to be) an apostle, having been set apart unto the good message [i.e. Gospel] of God…” (Rom 1:1)

The sense of conflict is most acute in Galatians, which centers on the controversy between Paul and other Jewish Christian leaders (including some prominent representatives from Jerusalem), as he describes vividly in Gal 2:1-14ff. This helps us to discern better his own understanding of what it means to be an apostle:

“Paulus, an apostle—not from men, and not through (any) man, but (rather) through Yeshua (the) Anointed and God (the) Father, the (one who) raised him from the dead…” (Gal 1:1)

Paul was commissioned as an apostle through the direct revelation (and personal appearance) of Jesus to him (Acts 9:1-19 par; Gal 1:11ff). His apostolic position was not based on his Jewish background or connection to the other apostles in Jerusalem (Gal 1:13-24). This particular point of emphasis for Paul, however, does make clear that most (if not all) the other apostles were early (Jewish) believers from Jerusalem and Judea, as indicated above. This would apply to Barnabas, who is referred to as an apostle (Acts 14:14, cf. also 1 Cor 9:6); even though he was not one of the Twelve, he was among the earliest believers, and may have been one of those who witnessed the risen Jesus.

In Romans 11:13 we see a special aspect of Paul’s apostleship—it is defined by his missionary work among the “nations” (that is, non-Jews or “Gentiles”):

“But to you I give account [i.e. speak], to the nations, in as much as I am an apostle of [i.e. to] the nations, (and) I give honor/esteem to my service…”

This statement is tied in with Paul’s distinctive teaching in Rom 9-11, that the missionary work among the Gentiles was, in part, intended (by God) to provoke Jews to jealousy (11:11, etc). This is also a large part of why Paul gives special honor to his ministry “…if (some)how I might create excitement alongside my flesh [i.e. with my fellow Jews] and would (thus be able to) save some of them”. What is most important to note here is that Paul very much identifies being an apostle with the particular work of ministry to which he has been called. In Romans 1:1, he uses the verb a)fori/zw, which means to mark out (or mark off, vb. o(ri/zw) from (a)po/) others, that is, to separate out, creating a division or boundary. The apostle is a minister called by God from among all other persons (all other believers) for a special purpose—the pioneering missionary work of proclaiming the Gospel and establishing churches in a region.

When we turn again to the reference in Romans 16:7, if Andronicus and Junia are, in fact, identified as apostles, it may simply mean that they, like Barnabas, are among the earliest believers (i.e. the first generation), and may have come from Judea or participated in the first rush of the Spirit’s activity. If they are among those mentioned in Acts 2:10b, then it is possible that they were also among the very first Christians (and missionaries) in Rome. One aspect of the apostolic role of preaching the Gospel and teaching the early Gospel/Christian traditions involved the founding and establishment of churches (congregations) in a region. Perhaps Paul is referring to this ministry role. In any event, his emphasis in Romans 16, as well as throughout his letters, when referring to his fellow missionaries (whether as apostles, or simply as “servants, co-workers”, etc), is on their sharing with him the same mission work and labor to which he has been called.

Women in the Church: Part 4 (Romans 16:1-2ff)

By | Exegetical/Study Series | No Comments

Romans 16:1-2ff

The next primary passage to be examined in this series is Romans 16:1-2ff, in particular, the references to the women mentioned by Paul in this chapter.

Historical and Literary Context

Romans was written by Paul sometime after 54 A.D., probably from Corinth—in the context of the missionary journeys described in the book of Acts, this presumably would have taken place during the third journey (cf. Acts 20:1-3). This situation of the letter is unique in that Paul had not yet visited Rome (though he was eager to do so, Rom 1:10-15; 15:22-29), and played no direct role in the establishment of Christianity there. He did know, it would seem, a number of believers in the Roman churches, as indicated by the greetings in chapter 16. By all accounts, churches or groups of believers had been present in Rome from nearly the beginning (cf. below on 16:7, and note Acts 2:10; 18:2), from both Jewish and Gentile (Greco-Roman) backgrounds. This is the catalyst for the framework of the letter—addressed to both Jewish and Gentile Christians—expressing a great hope for unity, especially in light of his pending journey to Jerusalem with the collection taken up (in Greece and Macedonia, etc) for the suffering believers there. A good many of the themes from Galatians are picked up and developed in Romans.

It has often been suggested that chapter 16 is part of a separate letter, and was not addressed to the churches in Rome, but rather to those in another location (such as Ephesus). Moreover, there is evidence that Romans circulated in a form which lacked either chapters 15-16 or 16:1-23 (cf. Fitzmyer, pp. 47-67). However, this is far from conclusive, and the weight of the (textual) evidence suggests that chap. 16 is part of the original letter (except for verse 24, which is almost certainly a subsequent addition). If so, then 16:1-23 serves as the conclusion to the letter (Epistolary Postscript), with vv. 25-27 as the concluding doxology. It may be divided as follows:

  • Recommendation of Phoebe to the Roman congregations (vv. 1-2)
  • Greetings to believers in Rome (vv. 3-16)
  • Final exhortation (and warning) (vv. 17-20)
  • Further greetings from Paul and his secretary/scribe (vv. 21-23)

Exegetical Notes

In the notes on this chapter, I will be focusing on the references to women—the female friends and colleagues of Paul to whom he sends greeting.

16:1-2Phoebe (Foi/bh, lit. “Bright/Shining [One]”). These verses serve as an official introduction (recommendation) of Phoebe to the Christians of Rome; in all likelihood, she would have been the one carrying the letter. This is the technical sense of the verb suni/sthmi (“set/stand with”) which begins the chapter: “I cause her to stand (together) with you”, an idiom meaning “I introduce her to you”, i.e. “I (re)commend her to you”. She is called “our sister [i.e. in Christ]”, as a term of affection and respect, beyond simply identifying her as a believer. Phoebe is also described here by two specific words (or titles):

1. dia/kono$ (diákonos), “servant”. This word in Greek has a wide range of specific meaning, from a waiter at tables (Xenophon, Mem. 1.5.2, cf. Acts 6:1-6) to a person who holds a public (religious) office (cf. Rom 13:4). In early Christianity, it corresponds roughly to the English word “minister”. Paul uses it to refer to himself (an apostle), along with fellow missionaries and church leaders such as Apollos, Epaphras, and Tychicus—cf. 1 Cor 3:5; 2 Cor 3:6; 6:4; 11:15, 23; Col 1:7, 23, 25; 4:7; also Eph 3:7; 6:21, and 1 Tim 4:6. It does not appear to be used in the sense of a specific office within an organized Church structure, as would have developed by the early 2nd-century (Ignatius Ephesians 2:1; Magnesians 6:1), and which may be indicated in 1 Tim 3:8, 11-12; Tit 1:9 (cf. also Phil 1:1). The technical use of the word for the developed office is typically transliterated in English as deacon. Phoebe is sometimes referred to as a deaconess, but this is anachronistic, and the gender-specific term (diakonissa) is not used in the New Testament (cf. Fitzmyer, p. 729).

2. prosta/ti$ (prostátis), from the verb proi+/sthmi (“stand before”). It literally means “one who stands before”, i.e. as a leader or one who gives help and assistance to others. It can be used in the technical sense of a patron (Lat. patronus) or protector, implying one who possesses a higher socio-economic status. Generally, it should be understood as someone in a leadership role (cf. the use of the related verb in 1 Thess 5:12; Rom 12:8), but here it could also mean that Phoebe provided financial assistance, etc, to Paul when he was in Corinth (Cenchreae being a key port/harbor for Corinth). Phoebe thus appears to have been a prominent woman (perhaps a well-to-do business woman), who also served a leading role as minister in the congregations of Cenchreae (and Corinth).

16:3-5a Prisca (Pri/ska, of Latin origin), cf. also 1 Cor 16:19; 2 Tim 4:19. In the book of Acts, she is called Priscilla (Pri/skilla, “Little Prisca“). She is always mentioned together with her husband Aquila ( )Aku/la$), and typically her name comes before his, which may indicate that she was the better-known figure in Christian circles. From Acts (18:2), we know that she and her husband were Jews (probably already Jewish Christians) who had been living in Rome prior to the expulsion ordered by Claudius c. 49 A.D., after which they lived and worked in Corinth and Ephesus (traveling there together with Paul, 18:18). Now it would seem that they have returned to Rome, where they lead/host a congregation in their house, as they did in Corinth (1 Cor 16:19). Prisca (with her husband) was prominent and gifted enough as a minister to instruct Apollos “more precisely in the Way [of God]” (Acts 18:26), which indicates that she was capable of exercising a teaching role in the Church. The couple was known and respected by many congregations (Rom 16:4b).

Paul refers to them as sunergoi/ (v. 3), meaning that Prisca was a sunergo/$ (sunergós), literally one who “works (together) with” him [i.e. with Paul]. This term (or title) is used by Paul numerous times in his letters, in reference to friends and fellow-missionaries (or Church leaders) who work closely with him in proclaiming the Gospel and establishing/strengthening the churches—cf. Rom 16:21; 1 Cor 3:9; 2 Cor 1:24; 8:23; Phil 2:25; 4:3; Col 4:11; 1 Thess 3:2; Philem 1, 24. The reference here and in Phil 4:3 (cf. below) indicates that Paul uses the word for fellow ministers—men and women—without distinction.

16:6 Maryam (Mari/a, i.e. Mary), of whom it is simply said that she “did much labor/work [e)kopi/asen] unto us [i.e. on our behalf]”.

16:7 Junia ( )Iouni/a). It is also possible to read )Iounia=n instead of )Iouni/an, which would make it the shortened form of a man’s name (Junian[us]) ; however, this is highly unlikely (cf. Fitzmyer, pp. 737-8, and UBS/Metzger, p. 475). It is sometimes thought that she was the wife of Andronicus, with whom she is mentioned together here. Paul indicates that Andronicus and Junia share the same ethnic/religious origin (suggenei=$) with him, meaning they are Jewish Christians, and that they have also suffered imprisonment just as he has. They “(have) a mark upon [e)pi/shmo$]” them, i.e. are remarkable/noteworthy “among the apostles”. This phrase could mean (a) they are highly regarded by the apostles, or (b) they are apostles, and prominent among them. Some commentators are reluctant to grant the latter, as it would mean than Junia is an “apostle”; this difficulty almost certainly explains the attempts to read Junia as a man’s name. Otherwise, it would be the only time in the New Testament that the word a)po/stolo$ was applied to a woman. However, this may the result of a basic misconception. The noun a)po/stolo$ (apóstolos), from a)poste/llw (“set/send forth”) in the early Church (perhaps influenced by Jesus’ own use of it) came to have a distinct semi-technical meaning—someone who has been commissioned (sent forth) by Jesus to proclaim the Gospel and make disciples/converts (in his name). If Andronicus and Junia are counted among the apostles, this may simply mean that they are of the first generation of believers—Jewish Christians in Jerusalem (such as Barnabas, etc)—who either saw the resurrected Jesus (Acts 1:22; 1 Cor 15:6), or were part of the earliest events (Acts 2ff). Paul states that “they have come to be in Christ before me”, i.e. “they had been Christians before I was”.

16:12-13—Four women are mentioned: Tryphaina and Tryphosa (Tru/faina & Trufw=sa, both lit. “Luxurious [One]” or the like), who may have been sisters, and Persis (Persi/$) who may have been a slave. Of all three, Paul says that they “did much labor/work [e)kopi/asen] in the Lord” (cf. v. 6 above). He also mentions the mother (of Rufus), a woman Paul considers to be like his own mother (“…his mother and mine”).

Interpretation

Of the persons whom Paul specifically mentions in verses 3-16 (including Phoebe in vv. 1-2), there are eight women compared with five men (Aquila, Andronicus, Urbanus, Apelles, Rufus). Moreover, the terms and language he uses to describe them shows little or no distinction whatever, i.e. whether they are male or female. This follows what we see elsewhere in Paul’s letters, e.g., in Philippians 4:2-3, where the women Euodia and Syntyche are considered to be close “co-workers” (sunergoi/) of Paul, alongside Clement, etc. In Romans 16, Paul uses terms such as “servant [i.e. minister]”, “co-worker”, perhaps even “apostle”, equally of men and women without distinction; only in the case of the term “apostle” [a)po/stolo$] (v. 7) is there some uncertainly that it is applied to a woman (Junia). Certainly women such as Phoebe and Prisca were ministers in their own right and prominent/leading figures in the churches, alongside Paul and Apollos, et al. While we do not necessarily have specific detail on what they did in their position of ministry on a regular/daily basis, there is nothing in the Scriptural account itself—that is, in the passages where they are mentioned—to warrant our limiting or restricting their role in any way.

References marked “Fitzmyer” above are to J. A. Fitzmyer, Romans, Anchor Bible [AB] vol. 33, 1995.
“UBS/Metzger” refers to the UBS/Metzger Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament (2nd edition) 1994-2002.

Note of the Day – October 15 (Rom 11:33)

By | Exegetical/Study Series, Note of the Day | No Comments

Today’s note will briefly examine Paul’s use of the word gnw=si$ (gnœ¡sis, “knowledge”) in Romans 11:33.

Romans 11:33

This verse begins the doxology (vv. 33-36) that concludes the famous section of Romans spanning chapters 9-11. I have discussed the theme and structure of this section in an earlier article, along with a special note on Rom 11:26 in context. This analysis may be summarized in the following outline:

The opening verses of each section, with their personal and moving tone, lead into a presentation of arguments. The main issue at hand is how the Israelite/Jewish people relate to the new Christian identity.

Romans 9

9:1-5—Paul’s personal address: Israel (“they are Israelites…”, vv. 4-5)
9:6-13—Argument: Not all Israel is the true Israel.
9:14-33—Exposition: Three arguments, each beginning with a rhetorical question:

  • Vv. 14-18—”What then shall we declare [ti/ ou@n e)rou=men]?…”
  • Vv. 19-29—”You will therefore declare to me [e)rei=$ moi ou@n]…?”
  • Vv. 30-33—”What then shall we declare [ti/ ou@n e)rou=men]?…”

Romans 10

10:1-4—Paul’s personal address: The Law and justice/righteousness (vv. 3-4)
10:5-13—Argument: Justice/righteousness is realized in Christ.
10:14-21—Exposition: The Proclamation of the Gospel, and Israel’s response to it, in three parts:

  • The proclamation of the Gospel (vv. 14-15)
  • Israel’s response to the Gospel—not all have faith (vv. 16-17)
  • Evidence of this in the Scriptures (vv. 18-21)

Romans 11

11:1-12—Paul’s address (and argument): The People of God (“His people”, vv. 1ff)
11:13-32—Exposition: A Two-fold address to Gentile believers:

  • Vv. 13-24—Illustration of the olive tree and its branches
  • Vv. 25-32—Discourse on the (eschatological) salvation of Israel

11:33-36—Doxology on the wisdom and knowledge of God

An important theme running through these chapters is the election of the people of God, which takes place according to God’s own sovereign but mysterious will. This is one aspect of knowledge (i.e. God’s knowledge of his People, etc) here in this section, and it is emphasized in chapters 9 and 11. The second aspect—the people’s knowledge of God and his truth, the promises made, etc.—is addressed primarily in chapter 10, and expounded again in the second half of chap. 11. Note the structure in this regard:

  • Chap. 9: God’s knowledge of his people (Israel)—their election
    • Chap. 10: The people’s knowledge of God, in two respects:
      (a) The failure of many Israelites to accept the revelation in Jesus and the Gospel message (cf. vv. 2-4)
      (b) The acceptance of the Gospel, on the other hand, by many non-Israelites (Gentiles) (vv. 18-21)
  • Chap. 11: God’s knowledge of his people (the true Israel, all Israel)—the election of Jews and Gentiles both

For many of the non-Jewish Christians in Paul’s audience—as for many today—the main difficulty lay in the idea that Israelites and Jews would eventually accept Christ, though they may refuse (or be unable) to do so at the present. Though some had ‘fallen away’, a large percentage, presumably, in Paul’s mind, would (soon) respond to the Gospel, as the end drew near. This point is made reasonably clear in verses 11-16, followed by his famous illustration of the olive tree, in which Jews and Gentiles both come to be “grafted in” to the holy tree of the People of God—the unity of Jewish and Gentile believers in Christ, being a principal theme of the entire letter, is given dramatic and climactic expression here. In verses 25-32 Paul powerfully states again two great points:

  • Israelites and Jews, collectively, will come to faith, and the current “hardening” of their hearts and minds will be removed
  • They will be united (in Christ) with the Gentile believers who have come to faith before them

This two-fold dynamic is expressed in the declaration: “and so all Israel will be saved” (v. 26). Paul refers to this as a secret (musth/rion), which he is making known to believers in his letter; and there can be no doubt that he also has this in mind when he opens the concluding doxology in v. 33:

“O the deep(ness) of the wealth and wisdom and knowledge of God!—how unsearchable (are) his judgments, and (how) untrackable (are) his ways!”

A citation of Isaiah 40:13 follows in vv. 34-35; it is a passage which Paul also quotes in 1 Cor 2:16 (cf. my earlier note), specifically as part of his argument contrasting human wisdom with the wisdom of God. As Paul uses the Scripture, it is meant to show how far the “mind of God” surpasses and transcends our limited human understanding. In 1 Corinthians, the quotation is followed by the positive statement which applies to believers, somewhat paradoxically: “and (yet) we (do) hold the mind of Christ“. This last point is not emphasized in Romans, except perhaps implicitly, based on Paul’s line of discussion in the prior chapters, as well as in the basic idea that the “secret(s)” of God, hidden away from the world, are now made known to believers through: (a) the proclamation of the Gospel, and (b) the presence and work of the Spirit.

For the purpose of this series of articles, Romans 11:33 is especially instructive, within the context of Rom 9-11, in that it ties together several significant themes which will be discussed in some detail as we proceed:

  • The connection between the knowledge of God and salvation
  • That the (secret) will and knowledge of God is revealed, at least in part, to believers, and
  • That the knowledge of God is closely connected with the idea of the predestined/predetermined election of believers (i.e the people of God)

Note of the Day – July 27

By | Note of the Day | No Comments

Today’s note continues the survey of occurrences of the word musth/rion (“secret”) in the New Testament, most of which are found in the Pauline letters. Yesterday, I discussed the references in 1 Corinthians; here I turn to a pair of verses in Romans.

Romans 11:25; 16:25

I begin with Romans 16:25, the beginning of a doxology (vv. 25-27) which is often thought, by many critical commentators, to be a secondary addition, and not part of the original letter. However, there can be little doubt that verse 25 reflects genuine Pauline thought, such as we find in 1 Corinthians 2 (cf. the previous note):

“And to the (one who is) empowered [i.e. able] to set you firm, according to my good message [i.e. Gospel] and the proclamation of Yeshua (the) Anointed, according to the uncovering of the secret kept silent for times (and) ages (past)…”

The phrasing in v. 25b is similar in thought (and expression) to 1 Cor 2:7. Here, however, two points are emphasized:

1. The secret (musth/rion, myst¢¡rion) is parallel to, and essentially synonymous with, the Gospel (eu)agge/lion, euangélion), which is further defined specifically as “the proclamation [kh/rugma, k¢¡rygma] of Jesus Christ”. This can be seen by an examination of the structure of this part of the sentence:

  • the one empowered/able to set you firm
    • according to [kata/] the good message [eu)agge/lion]…
    • according to [kata/] the uncovering of the secret [musth/rion]…

2. Two additional details are given regarding this secret: (a) it has been kept silent [sesighme/nou] for long ages past, and (b) it is now being uncovered (a)poka/luyi$, from the verb a)pokalu/ptw, “remove the cover from”). This “uncovering” of the secret is specifically parallel with the “proclamation” of the Gospel. Paul does not quite use this language in 1 Corinthians; rather he simply says that he and his fellow ministers are now speaking this secret, i.e. making it known, which generally amounts to the same thing. To the extent that this secret has been “uncovered” it has been done so by the Spirit (1 Cor 2:10).

Interestingly, Paul typically uses the noun a)poka/luyi$ and verb a)pokalu/ptw in relation to the appearance (revelation) of Jesus at the end-time (2 Thess 1:7 [and note 2:3, 6, 8]; 1 Cor 1:7 [and 3:13]; also Rom 1:18; 2:5; 8:18-19); though, more properly, it refers to any (personal) manifestation of Christ (cf. Gal 1:12, 16; 2 Cor 12:1), etc. It can also refer generally to anything communicated (a prophecy, etc) to believers through Christ or the Holy Spirit (1 Cor 14:6, 26, 30; Gal 2:2; Phil 3:15; also Eph 3:3). Perhaps most notable are those passages which indicate that faith, righteousness, salvation, etc., have been revealed (“uncovered”) in the person of Jesus Christ (Rom 1:17; Gal 3:23).

In Romans 11:25, the word musth/rion (“secret”) is used in a special context, but one which, significantly, takes us back to the saying of Jesus in Mark 4:11 par:

“I do not want you to be without knowledge, brothers, (regarding) this secret—that you should not be (going) [along] in your own mind(-set)—that the rock-hard (attitude) from part of Israel has come to be (so) until the (time) in which the filling/fullness of the nations should come in.”

From our vantage point, Paul’s syntax (read literally) could easily obscure the point he is making; the central declaration is as follows (paraphrasing):

“this secret is: that the hardness of part of Israel has occurred (only) until the full number of Gentiles should come in (to faith in Christ)”

This statement (and what follows down through verse 32) represents the climax of a long and complex line of discussion by Paul in chapters 9-11, where he attempts to explain an issue dear to his heart: why it is that many of his fellow Jews have failed (or have been unwilling) to accept Christ and the Gospel message. This is something Paul dealt with all throughout his missionary work. We find fierce opposition to Paul and his co-workers throughout the book of Acts (esp. in chapters 13-21), during which time he began to turn his attention toward preaching to Gentiles (non-Jews)—cf. Acts 13:46-47; 18:6; 28:28. Something of his own fiery reaction to this can be found in 1 Thess 2:14-16 (a passage which must be read and handled with great care). Jewish Christians continued to oppose certain aspects of Paul’s teaching, or offered rival doctrines and sources of authority to Paul’s own—cf. throughout Galatians, and especially in 2 Corinthians 10-13. What is especially notable is that we find, in Paul’s addressing of the issue (at the end of the book of Acts, 28:26-27), the same Scripture (Isaiah 6:9-10) cited by Jesus in Mark 4:12 par (cf. the discussion in my previous note). It is possible to trace a line of interpretation and development:

  • Mark 4:12 par—God has blinded/hardened the people (Israel) so they cannot understand the “secret of the Kingdom” disclosed in Jesus’ parables, etc
  • John 12:40—This blindness/hardness of the people (Israelites/Jews) has resulted in their failure (and/or unwillingness) to accept and trust in Jesus
  • Acts 28:26-27—The blindness/hardness of Jews has forced Paul to turn his missionary efforts to non-Jews (Gentiles), who are coming to faith in Christ
  • Romans 11:25—This blindness/hardness was brought about by God for the specific purpose of bringing (the full number of) Gentiles to salvation

The first three of these passages cite Isa 6:9-10 directly; it is only implied, one can assume, in Romans 9-11. This narrows the focus of at least one aspect of the “secret(s) of God” and the “secret(s) of the Kingdom”, but one which was of fundamental importance to early Christians (especially Paul). It is perhaps hard for believers today—particularly those in the Western nations—to appreciate how intense this issue was in the early Church. The first generation of Christians, including most (if not all) of the apostles, was predominantly Jewish. The problem at first involved how non-Jewish believers should be included within the Church, and, it seems clear, there was much heated debate on the matter, which we can now glimpse vividly (if only partly) by reading Acts 10-11, 15, 21, etc, and Paul’s argument running through Galatians. By the time Paul wrote his letter to the Romans (mid/late 50s), many more Gentiles had come to believe in Christ, with congregations springing up all of the Greco-Roman world. A major theme, and purpose, of Paul in Romans was to make a fundamental statement on the unity of Jewish and Gentile believers in Christ. This was given theological (and soteriological) formulation, in various ways, throughout chapters 1-8; in chapters 9-11, there is a stronger eschatological emphasis. Commentators continue to struggle on just how one should interpret (and apply) the logic and force of Paul’s argument(s) in Rom 9-11 (cf. my earlier article in the series The Law and the New Testament); it must be studied and treated carefully, lest we too miss out on this aspect of the “secret of the Kingdom”.

Note of the Day – December 31

By | Note of the Day | No Comments

Continuing with the Christmas season theme of “The Birth of the Son of God”, the last two daily notes looked at Jesus as the “Son of God” within the context of early Christian preaching (i.e., the sermon-speeches in the book of Acts)—in Acts 2:29-36 and 13:26-41. Today I will examine Romans 1:3-4, often considered by scholars to be part of an early creed or hymn adapted and included by Paul within his greeting.

Romans 1:3-4

The opening and greeting (Epistolary Prescript [praescriptio]) of Romans 1:1-7 is actually a single sentence in Greek, framed by verses 1 and 7—”Paul…. to the (one)s in Rome…”—and the core of which is built upon the concluding words of verse 1: “the good message [i.e. Gospel] of God”. The syntax of vv. 2-6 may be outlined as follows:

“the good message of God”—

  • which [o^] He gave as a message [i.e. announced/promised] before(hand) through his Foretellers in (the) holy Writings (v. 2)
  • about [peri\] His Son [tou= ui(ou= au)tou=] (v. 3)
    • the (one) coming to be [tou= genome/nou] out of the seed of David (v. 3)
      —according to the flesh
    • the (one) marked (out) [tou= o(risqe/nto$] (as) Son of God [ui(ou= qeou=] in power (v. 4)
      —according to (the) spirit of holiness out of the standing-up [i.e. resurrection] of the dead
    • Yeshua (the) Anointed [xristou=] our Lord [tou= kuri/ou] (vv. 4-5)
      • through whom [di’ ou!]
        • we have received… (v. 5)
          • in [e)n] all the nations
          • in/among [e)n] whom (v. 6)
        • you also are called
      • of Yeshua (the) Anointed

Verses 3-6 represent the Christological kerygmatic statement that “fills” the epistolary prescript, in two portions:

  • vv. 3-4 are about Christ proper (i.e. the person of Christ)
  • vv. 5-6 are about believers in Christ (the result of his work)

Verses 3-4—this verse pair is made up of two participial phrases:

  • “the one coming to be” [tou= genome/nou] (v. 3)
    • “out of the seed of David” [e)k spe/rmato$ Daui\d]
    • “according to (the) flesh” [kata\ sa/rka]
  • “the one marked (out)” [tou= o(risqe/nto$] (v. 4)
    • “(as) Son of God in power” [ui(ou= qeou= e)n duna/mei]
    • “according to (the) spirit of holiness” [kata\ pneu=ma a(giwsu/nh$]
      • “out of (the) standing-up [i.e. resurrection] of the dead” [e)c a)nasta/sew$ nekrw=n]

The poetic parallelism is clear, with the possible exception of the last phrase. Let us look at each verse in detail.

Romans 1:3

First, it should be noted that manuscripts 51 61* 441 and later Byzantine MSS, read gennwme/nou (gennœménou) instead of genome/nou (genoménou), also reflected in some versional witnesses (Syriac and Old Latin MSS). The reading gennwme/nou, from genna/w (“come to be [born]”) rather than cognate gi/nomai (“come to be”), would more specifically emphasize Jesus’ birth, as mentioned in my discussion of genna/w/gi/nomai in prior notes. That such a reading could be seen as indicating the reality of Jesus’ human birth, can be seen from the arguments by Tertullian (On the Flesh of Christ §22) and Irenaeus (Against Heresies III.22.1) against their “gnostic” opponents. However, genome/nou is certainly the original reading. Occasionally, traditional-conservative scholars have cited the use of gi/nomai (instead of genna/w) here as evidence for Paul’s belief in the virgin birth, but this reads far too much into the text.

In terms of the reality of Jesus’ birth, this is already indicated with the phrase kata\ sa/rka (“according to [the] flesh”)—an expression normally used by Paul in a different theological/anthropological sense (part of a dualistic contrast between “flesh” and “spirit”), cf. Rom 8:4-9, 12-13; Gal 3:2-3; 5:16-19; 1 Cor 5:5; Phil 3:3. Here, it is used in an ‘ordinary’, conventional sense—of Jesus’ human nature, growth and upbringing, his ethnic/social background, etc—comparable to that in Rom 4:1; 9:3, 5. For similar early use of “flesh” (sa/rc) in this respect, applied to Christ, see 1 Pet 3:18, and the ‘credal/hymnic fragment’ in 1 Tim 3:16.

The phrase “out of the seed of David” (e)k spe/rmato$ Daui\d) is somewhat more problematic. That Jesus was a (real) descendant of David is evidenced by the Matthean/Lukan genealogies (Matt 1:1-17 [v. 6]; Luke 3:23-38 [v. 31]), as well as Acts 2:30; Luke 1:32, 69; 2 Tim 2:8; Rev 5:5; 22:16, and may implied in Mark 12:35-37 par; John 7:42. Within the Infancy narratives, Joseph certainly is designated as a descendant of David (Luke 1:27; 2:4; Matt 1:20), and this is presumably how the genealogies are to be understood—i.e., Joseph as legal (but not biological) parent of Jesus. Here too, in Romans, “out of the seed of David, according to the flesh” could be viewed in this same legal/metaphorical sense, except that a comparison with Gal 4:4 suggests otherwise:

“coming to be [geno/menou] out of the seed of David [e)k spe/rmato$ Daui\d]” (Rom 1:3)
“coming to be [geno/menon] out of a woman [e)k gunaiko/$]” (Gal 4:4)

Did Paul (and/or the tradition he inherited) understand Mary as being of Davidic descent? It is hard to be certain, since he never actually mentions Mary anywhere in his letters, nor the birth of Jesus specifically apart from these two references. Of course, Mary as a descendant of David came to be a common-place belief in the early Church, attested already in the early 2nd century by Ignatius (Ephesians 18:2) and the so-called Proto-Gospel (Protevangelium) of James (§10). However, there is no indication of this in the New Testament itself; indeed, what little evidence we have (Luke 1:5) suggests descent from the tribe of Levi rather than from Judah. Traditional-conservative commentators have often sought to harmonize the (partially) discordant genealogies of Matt 1 and Lk 3 with the theory that they record the genealogies of Joseph and Mary, respectively; but this is flatly contradicted by the text itself—both genealogies are for Joseph (Matt 1:16; Lk 3:23), despite the apparent discrepancies.

The title “Son of David” is used of Jesus in numerous places in the Gospels—Mk 10:47-48 par; 12:35-37 par; Matt 9:27; 12:23; 15:22; 21:9, 15. This title is used in conjunction with “Lord” (ku/rio$) in Matt 15:22; 20:30-31, and has a clear Messianic connection in Mark 12:35-37 par; Matt 12:23; 21:9 [par Mk 11:10].

What about Paul’s own understanding of Jesus as God’s Son? There is a strong likelihood that Rom 1:3 indicates something akin to the orthodox view of Jesus’ divine pre-existence. While this is not absolutely certain, such a general belief is expressed elsewhere in his writings (cf. Phil 2:6-7; Col 1:15ff). In examining Paul’s use of ui(o/$ (“son”) in relation to Jesus, these references can be divided more or less into three categories:

  1. Of a general relationship with God the Father—1 Cor 1:9; 2 Cor 1:19; Rom 1:9; 8:29
  2. Indicating his post-resurrection position and status in heaven (cf. Acts 13:33ff)—1 Thess 1:10; 1 Cor 15:28; Gal 1:16?; also Col 1:13
  3. Indicating divine status/nature in (or prior to) his death—Gal 2:20; Rom 5:10; 8:32

Galatians 4:4 is a close parallel to Rom 1:3 (cf. also Rom 8:3) which I have discussed in considerable detail in an earlier series of Advent Season notes.

Romans 1:4

The verb o(ri/zw has the basic meaning “mark out, mark off”, as of a limit, boundary, etc., and is often used in the sense of “determine, designate, appoint” and so forth. An early kerygmatic (Christological) signficance here is indicated by its use in:

  • Acts 2:23—referring to the role of Jesus’ death in God’s (predetermined) plan
  • Acts 10:42; 17:31—Christ is designated or appointed as eschatological/heavenly Judge

There are two principal ways the verb can be understood in Rom 1:4—Jesus is “marked out / appointed” as Son of God, either:

  1. By divine foreknowledge, prior to his death; as previously discussed, early Christians could speak of Jesus as God’s “Son” in terms of: (a) divine pre-existence, (b) birth, or (c) at his baptism
  2. Through his death and resurrection—i.e., by means of, or as a result of

The first view is more amenable to orthodoxy, as suggested by the common Latin rendering praedestinatus (instead of destinatus), which would seem to assume Greek proorisqe/nto$ (from proori/zw, “mark out [i.e. determine/appoint] beforehand”). This reading is not found in any manuscript, but it is used or mentioned by several Church Fathers—Eusebius, Against Marcellus 1:2; Epiphanius Panarion 54.6 (cf. Fitzmyer, pp. 234-5). The use of o(ri/zw in Acts 2:23 might otherwise confirm this meaning as well.

However, the overall context of Rom 1:3-4, as well as a comparison with the early Gospel preaching in Acts 2 and 13, etc (see the previous notes), strongly suggests option #2—that it is through his death and resurrection that Jesus is designated/appointed as “Son of God”. This would seem to be indicated by the qualifying phrase “in power” (e)n duna/mei) as well. There are two ways that “power” (du/nami$) is used in the preaching of Acts and in Paul’s letters: (a) of miraculous deeds, and (b) specifically in reference to the Spirit. These of course are related. Even though Jesus’ miracles during his ministry are referred to as “power” (Acts 10:38), it is in the resurrection and exaltation of Christ that God’s power is most prominently made manifest. The connection between the Spirit and the power of God is certainly clear (see esp. Luke 1:35; 4:14; Acts 1:8; 8:19; 10:38; Rom 15:13, 19; 1 Cor 2:4, etc), and it is in his exalted position (at the right hand of God) that Jesus has this power (Acts 2:33; Mark 14:62 par), receiving the Spirit from the Father. In both Luke-Acts and the Gospel of John, we find the idea of the raised/exalted Christ sending the Spirit (from the Father) to his disciples. There may be a parallel to the specific phrase “in power” (e)n duna/mei) in the ‘credal fragment’ of 1 Tim 3:16, where Jesus is said to have ascended “in glory” (e)n do/ch|).

There is some difficulty surrounding the expression “spirit of holiness” (pneu=ma a(giwsu/nh$). In his letters, Paul nearly always uses pneu=ma in reference to the the Holy Spirit (the Spirit of God/Christ); that fact, plus the connection between “spirit” and “power” (cf. above) might lead one to assume that this is what is meant here as well. However, this is by no means certain. His very use of the particular expression “spirit of holiness” may be intended to draw a distinction with the more common “Holy Spirit”. As I mentioned above, pneu=ma is juxtaposed with sa/rc (“flesh”), but not in the typical Pauline sense; again this, in part, may be why Paul qualifies pneu=ma with a(giwsu/nh$ (“of holiness”). Is this meant to indicate the way in which Jesus is “appointed” Son of God—in terms of God’s holiness?

Interestingly, “holy” and “holiness” are only rarely used of Jesus specifically in the New Testament, being limited primarily to the earlier strands of Christian preaching—i.e. the appellation “Holy (One)”, using both a%gio$ and o%sio$, Acts 2:27; 3:14, and note Lk 1:35; cf. also Acts 4:27, 30; 13:34-35. In his letters, Paul almost never uses “holy/holiness” of Jesus (1 Cor 7:34 is close), though he certainly sees a close connection between Christ and the Holy Spirit, viewing the Spirit, to a large extent, as the abiding presence of Christ in and among believers. Holiness, of course, is often seen as a characteristic and attribute of God, but even this association is relatively rare in Paul’s writings. Somewhat surprisingly, the noun a(giwsu/nh (“holiness”) only appears 3 times in the New Testament, the other two occurrences also being from Paul’s letters:

  • 1 Thess 3:13—prayer/exhortation to establish the hearts of believers to be “blameless in holiness” before God at the (eschatological) appearance of Jesus
  • 2 Cor 7:1—believers are urged to cleanse themselves, “completing holiness in the fear of God”; here too we find a similar juxtaposition of “flesh” and “spirit”

Perhaps the best way to understand the expression in context is as the (personal) holiness of Jesus which is manifest by God in the resurrection—or, viewed another way, as the holiness of God being manifest in the person of Christ. This may be similar to the idea of the “righteousness of God” being manifest in his person (1 Cor 1:30; cf. Rom 1:17; 3:21ff, etc).

It is possible that the reference to the resurrection in Rom 1:4 should not be limited simply to Jesus’ own resurrection—there may be an association with the wider idea of resurrection, such as we see expressed by Paul in 1 Cor 15:20, 23, where Jesus, by his resurrection, is the “firstfruits” of the harvest, i.e., those who will be raised again to life at the end-time. Notably, Paul describes this in terms of sonship in Rom 8:23, 29 (cf. Gal 4:5). Even more significant for our Christmas season theme is the further image of birth within this same context—Jesus is the “firstborn” (prwto/toko$) out of the dead (Col 1:18; cf. Rev 1:5), and, as such, the “firstborn” of “many brothers” (Rom 8:28; cf. also Heb 1:6; 12:23). Once again we see a powerful statement of two-fold birth: Christ as the Son of God and believers as the “sons of God”.

References here marked “Fitzmyer” are to J. A. Fitzmyer, Romans (Anchor Bible [AB] volume 33, 1993).

Paul’s View of the Law: Romans (12:1-15:13, and Conclusion)

By | Exegetical/Study Series | No Comments

Romans 12:1-15:13

Rom 12:1-15:13 is properly the exhortation (exhortatio) or hortatory section of the letter, which also contains parenetic material, i.e. practical instruction on ethical and religious matters (cf. Gal 5:1-6:10, which has a number of similarities with this section in Romans). Most of Paul’s teaching related to the Old Testament Law (Torah) is found in chapters 1-11; therefore, what remains of note in 12:1-15:13 may be dealt with more briefly, in summary fashion. I divide Rom 12:1-15:13 according to the following outline:

  • Opening Exhortation (12:1-12)
    Active (v. 1): “Make your bodies stand alongside [i.e. before] (God)…”
    Passive (v. 2): “Be changed in shape… in making the mind new again…”
  • Unity—Illustration of the Body (of Christ) (12:3-8)
  • Love—The ‘Love command’ (12:9-13:10)
    —vv. 9-13: Show love to one another
    —vv. 14-21: Show love to your enemies
    Excursus (13:1-7): Respect and obey governing authority
    —13:8-10: Love as fulfillment of the Law
  • Appeal—to live in the light and not in the darkness (13:11-14)
  • Instruction—regarding the “weak” and the “strong” (14:1-15:6)
    Threefold exhortation regarding those “weak” in faith/trust:
    —vv. 1-12: “Receive (them) toward you…”
    —vv. 13-23: “Do not judge…”
    —15:1-6: “We ought to bear their weaknesses…”
    —including a doxology for unity in Christ (vv. 5-6)
  • Exhortation to unity for Jews and Gentiles in Christ (15:7-13)

Romans 12:1-2

Here in this brief introductory exhortation, Paul makes use of language and imagery drawn from the sacrificial (Temple) ritual, applying it—spiritually and symbolically—to the life and person of the believer. As such, the Law is ‘fulfilled’ in a spiritual (or ethical) sense. Note especially:

  • the body (sw=ma) as a living sacrifice (qusi/a)—the noun qusi/a (and the verb qu/w) refer specifically to the sacrificial offering and its slaughter (cf. Hebrew jbz)
  • the mind (nou=$) conformed to the will of God (cf. the “Law of God” in Rom 7:22, 25)

Both of these are summarized as latrei/a, a term used for ritual service, but which Paul characterizes here as logiko/$. This adjective is nearly impossible to translate in English—literally it means “of the word/account [lo/go$]”, but used primarily in the more abstract sense “of reason”, i.e., “reasonable, rational”, etc. The mind, in particular, is that aspect of human nature which is able to recognize the will of God (cf. Rom 7:13-25). In any case, for Christians, religious “ritual” is understood according to the “inner person”—i.e., the mind, as renewed by the Spirit, in conformity with the will of God—but extending to the external body, as one lives out the Christian life.

Romans 13:8-10

Rom 12:9-13:10 is on the theme of love, which believers are to demonstrate to one another (12:9-13), and also to one’s enemies (12:14-21). This is sometimes referred to as the “love command”, based on Jesus’ incorporation of Leviticus 19:18 as part of the two-fold “Great Commandment” (along with Deut 6:4-5). According to Jesus’ teaching, especially as presented in Mark 12:28-34, “no other command is greater than these”, being far superior to all sacrificial offerings. Already in early rabbinic tradition (contemporary with Jesus), Lev 19:18 was considered to be a kind of epitome or summary of the entire Law, and so it was in early Christianity. Note how Paul frames the matter in Rom 13:8-10:

  • “the one loving the other (person) has (ful)filled the Law” (v. 8b)
  • —the commands (esp. the fundamental ethical commands [Exod 20:13-17]) are “summed up under the head in this (one) word [Lev 19:18]” (v. 9)
  • “…love is the filling/fullness [plh/rwma] of the Law” (v. 10)

Paul says virtually the same thing in Galatians 5:14 (cf. also Gal 6:2; 1 Thes 4:9; Col 3:14; 1 Tim 1:5). For other passages in the New Testament related to the ‘love command’, see James 2:8-12; John 13:34-35; 15:9-17; 1 John 2:5, 7-11; 3:10-24; 4:7-12, 19-21; 5:1-3. Interestingly, while love for one’s enemies is clearly part of Jesus’ teaching (see esp. Matt 5:43-48 par), it is not normally associated with the exhortation to love in the passages listed above—there the emphasis is on showing love to one’s fellow believers.

Romans 14:1-15:6: On the “weak” and the “strong”

Paul’s instruction regarding the “weak” and the “strong” is actually an exhortation and advice for how the “strong” ought to behave toward the “weak”. By “strong” (oi( du/natoi, lit. “the [one]s with power”), Paul seems to mean believers who trust fully in the freedom they have in Christ, while the “weak” (o( a)sqenw=n, “the [one who is] lacking strength”), refers primarily to the believer who (still) feels obligated to follow certain religious/ritual practices. Paul classifies himself with the “strong” (cf. 15:1). It is likely that the “weak” include Jewish believers who feel under some obligation to observe dietary restrictions, Sabbaths and holy days, and so forth. However, Paul’s instruction here should by no means be limited to this context, for he uses very much the same line of instruction in 1 Cor 8-10, where Gentile believers are entirely in view (cf. also Gal 4:8-11). In any case, this passage certainly emphasizes the relative unimportance of ritual/ceremonial elements of the Law, such as:

  • dietary restrictions (14:2-4)—though he is not referring specifically to laws of kashrût here
  • observance of special (holy) days (14:5-6)

Paul would seem to consider such things as part of the old order of the world to which Christians have died, and are no longer bound to follow (Gal 4:1-11; Col 2:16-23; cf. also Gal 2:19; Rom 7:6, etc).

With regard to the Old Testament dietary and purity laws, Paul declares quite clearly that these have been removed—that is to say, nothing is “clean” or “unclean” in itself (cf. Mark 7:14-23 par; Acts 10:9-16; 11:5-10), though a person  might still feel compelled to regard it so. This is an important principle (cf. also in 1 Cor 8), which leaves any such regulation or restriction as a matter of personal conscience (to put it in modern terms), not to be imposed on another. The following principles also may be drawn out of the passage:

  • What should guide the believer is the Spirit, not regulations (from the Law), Rom 14:17
  • The one serving Christ is acceptable to God, Rom 14:18
  • Religious service is defined by faith/trust (not observance of the Law), Rom 14:23

Romans 15:7-13

In this appeal for unity of Jews and Gentiles in Christ we have a summary of a major theme that has run all throughout the letter. This is important because, in Romans (as in Galatians), Paul is forging a new religious understanding and identity—one that is Christian, and not Jewish (that is, not limited to Israel). Of course, Paul does not use the term “Christian” yet, but one may combine two of his favorite expressions—(a) the ones trusting, using the participle of the verb pisteu/w, and (b) “in Christ” (e)n Xristw=|)—to form the distinct concept of believers in Christ. In Christ, Jews and Gentiles are equal and united (Gal 3:26-28, etc)—there is no distinction whatsoever, and the Old Testament Law (Torah) plays no role at all. On the other hand, as Paul has discussed in chapters 9-11, Gentile believers are not to consider themselves in any way superior, having been grafted into a (spiritual) tradition stretching back to Abraham. In this regard, it is interesting the wording Paul uses in verse 8: “I count (the) Anointed to have become a servant of circumcision [dia/kono$ peritomh=$]…”, which probably should be understood in terms of Jesus’ birth and life (in the flesh) and his Israelite heritage (cf. Rom 1:3; 9:5; Gal 4:4)—elsewhere Paul uses the expression “of (the) circumcision” to refer to Israelites and Jews in the ethno-religious sense. Consider the structure of verses 8-9:

  • a servant of circumcision…
    over [u(per] the truth of God
    —unto [ei)$] the making firm [i.e. confirmation] of the promises of the Fathers
    —and (unto) the nations giving esteem/glory to God
    over [u(per] mercy

For an interesting parallel (in Gospel tradition) regarding Christ’s life and work in relation to both Israel and the nations, see Luke 2:29-32 (esp. v. 32, cf. Isa 42:6; 49:6; 52:10; 60:3).

Conclusion

In Romans, Paul presents what is by far his most thorough and complex treatment of the Law. In several respects, he has gone beyond the arguments utilized in Galatians, to offer a more ‘systematic’ and multi-layered presentation. I would summarize the main areas of expansion and exposition as follows:

  • God’s (impending) judgment against humankind will be based specifically in terms of deeds (“works”) committed, and according to the Law.
  • Jews and Gentiles both are “under the Law”—even Gentiles, who are unfamiliar with the Torah, experience the Law (of God) through the witness of creation (1:18ff) and the testimony of their own inner conscience (2:14-16; 7:13ff).
  • Jews and Gentiles are thus on equal terms before God, in that they—all human beings—are (enslaved) under sin.
  • The Law and Sin are interconnected—the Law brings knowledge and awareness of sin, while sin “uses” this knowledge to bring human beings into even greater bondage.
  • Sin is depicted (personalized) as a ruling, enslaving Power, and human beings are in bondage under him; however, this is according to God’s own purpose, so that He will be able to show mercy and favor (grace) to all people. God’s Favor itself is personalized (in Rom 5:15ff), and works in a manner antithetical to that of Sin.
  • God’s work in Christ—his sacrificial death (and resurrection)—destroyed the power of sin, and, with it, the binding force of the Law as well.
  • Believers experience freedom from the enslaving power of sin through trust in Christ, and, in particular, by identification with (and participation in) his death—through this death, believers effectively die both to sin and the Law. As such, the Law no longer has any binding force over believers (Rom 7:1-6)
  • It is in the mind and the “inner man” that human beings recognize the Law of God—a larger concept than the Torah, and synonymous with the Will of God. However, under the power of Sin (in the “flesh”), human beings are not able to fulfill this Law; only after being freed from sin’s power, and through the work of Spirit, can it be fulfilled.
  • Indeed, it is through the Spirit that believers live in conformity to God’s will (and no longer by observing commands and regulations of the Old Testament Law). This is demonstrated principally by the love that believers show, both to each other, and even toward one’s enemies; this love itself fulfills the Law.

The Salvation of “All Israel” in Romans 11

By | Exegetical/Study Series, Supplemental Study | No Comments

This article, which is supplemental to the study on Paul’s View of the Law (in Romans 9-11), will attempt to clarify Paul’s complex address in chapter 11, particularly with regard to the declaration in verse 26a: kai\ ou%tw$ pa=$  )Israh/l swqh/setai (“and thus all Israel will be saved”). To begin with, it is important to keep the overall context of Romans 9-11 in mind when studying chapter 11; the following observations are especially significant:

  • The first argument (in Rom 9:6-13) of the section as whole, begins with the statement: “for all the (one)s out of Israel—these are not Israel” (v. 6b), i.e. not all Israelites are (the true) Israel.
  • Paul expounds this with the examples of Abraham and Isaac, to emphasize that true sonship and inheritance (of the blessing, etc) comes not from natural birth and ethnicity, but from the promise and favor of God (and God chooses and calls out whomsoever he wishes).
  • This is further applied in relation to the proclamation of the Gospel (the main theme of chapter 10)—Gentiles have responded to the Gospel, trusting in Christ, while many Israelites, God’s elect people, have failed (or refused) to accept Christ.

There is thus a fundamental connection between 9:6b and 10:15a:

“for all the (one)s out of Israel—these are not Israel”
or, “for not all the (one)s out of Israel are Israel” (9:6b)
“but not all (of them) listened under [i.e. obeyed] the good message” (10:15a)

Both use the expression “not all” (ou) pa/nte$), though the syntax of 9:6b makes this more difficult to see in translation. In any case, the implication is clear—only those (Israelites) who accept the Gospel are the true Israel. Now, to continue on with an analysis of chapter 11:

Paul’s initial address in Rom 11:1-12 contains a central argument (from Scripture), bracketed by two rhetorical questions (introduced with the formula le/gw ou@n, “I relate therefore…”). The central argument (in verses 3-10) draws upon the narrative in 1 Kings 19:9-18, of God’s revelation to Elijah as he sought refuge in a cave on Mount Horeb. Paul refers specifically to verses 10, 14, where Elijah laments to YHWH that he is the only prophet (of YHWH) left who has not been killed, and that the rest of Israel has forsaken the covenant (Rom 11:2b-3); God responds in verse 18 to the effect that there are still seven thousand in Israel who have not “bowed the knee to Baal”. Note how Paul phrases this in Rom 11:4: “I have left down [i.e. left behind] for myself seven thousand…”—the addition of e)mautw=| (“for/to myself”), shifts the meaning slightly from the original context of being spared from death (by the sword) to being chosen by God. We should observe carefully the points that Paul expounds from this passage:

  • Verse 5—he applies the situation in 1 Kings 9:9-18 to his own (current) time: “so then, even now in (this) time, there has come to be a (remainder) left behind [lei=mma] according to (the) gathering out of [i.e. by] (the) favor (of God)”. In verse 4, the verb used is kataleip/w (“leave down, leave behind”); the noun lei=mma is related to lei/pw, indicating something which is left (behind), either in a positive or negative sense. The word lei=mma is typically translated as “remainder” or “remnant”; but here, as indicated above, this remnant is understood as a people gathered out (the noun e)klogh/, from e)kle/gomai, “gather out”), i.e. elected by God, just as Israel herself was chosen as his people.
  • Verse 6—this gathering out is the result of the favor (xa/ri$) of God, and not because of anything the people have done. Here Paul moves away from the Old Testament passage again, which seems to tie the people’s being spared with their particular religious behavior; instead, he emphasizes that the gathering out is no longer (ou)ke/ti, “not yet, not any more”) based on works (“out of works”, e)c e&rgwn). He has already applied this very idea to the example of Abraham in Galatians 3 and Romans 4.
  • Verse 7—only the remnant obtains what Israel seeks after (cf. Rom 9:30-33), the rest were hardened (lit. turned to stone). The metaphor of “hardening the heart” is common in the Old Testament, most famously in the example of Pharaoh in the Exodus narrative, which Paul references in Rom 9:14-18.
  • Verse 12—this verse is transitional, following Paul’s answer to the (second) rhetorical question (in verse 11), and leading into the address of vv. 13-24. He introduces the first of several qal wahomer exclamations, arguing from the lesser to the greater—i.e., if in this lesser/inferior case it is so, then how much more so when…! The contrast is between Israel’s h%tthma (“loss, defeat”), parallel with para/ptwma (“falling alongside [i.e. over the line]”), and their plh/rwma (“filling [up], fullness”). The exact meaning of plh/rwma here is important for the overall flow and force of Paul’s argument; I think it is best to understand it in the sense of a restoration (filling up) of what was lost.

Romans 11:13-24 is the first of two addresses Paul makes to Gentile believers specifically, with regard to Israel and its salvation (vv. 13-14).

  • Verse 14—”if… I will [i.e. that I might] save some of them”—note Paul’s use of ti/$ (“some of them”)
  • Verses 15-16—Paul applies three more qal wahomer-style arguments, similar to the one in verse 12:
    • Israel’s a)pobolh/ (“casting away from”) and their pro/slhmyi$ (“taking/receiving toward”); it is not entirely clearly whether these should be understood as subjective genitives (their rejection/acceptance of the Gospel) or objective genitives (their rejection/acceptance by God), since either is possible, and they actually represent two aspects of the same situation.
    • The (currently) small number of Israelite believers as the a)pa/rxh (“beginning of [lit. from]”, i.e. the first grain of the harvest) and the (future) full number as the fu/rama (“[mass of] mixed/kneaded [dough]”).
    • This may also refer to the current “remnant” of Israel as the r(i/za (“root”), and those who will follow as the kla/doi (“branches”); though the “root” perhaps should be understood more generally as the true people of God (faithful Israel) extending back to Abraham. The context of vv. 17-24 strongly suggests this latter, wider interpretation.
  • Verses 17ff—in the illustration of the olive tree and its branches, some branches are “broken out” (e)cekla/sqhsan) and others are (currently) being “poked in” (e)nekentri/sqh$); the sense generally is that the new branches from the “wild olive” tree (i.e. Gentiles) take the place of those that were broken off.
  • Verse 20—the branches were broken off specifically for “lack of trust” (a)pisti/a), i.e. a failure (or unwillingness) to trust in Christ. This has to be understood in terms of Rom 9:6; 10:15 (cf. above).
  • Verse 23—similarly the grafting back in of branches broken off depends entirely on “not remaining in [i.e. upon] a lack of trust”—that is, they must come to trust in Christ.

Romans 11:25-32, the second of the two addresses directed at Gentile believers deals more directly with the question of Israel’s ultimate salvation. Paul now adopts a more decidedly eschatological focus.

  • Verse 25—Israel’s hardness (i.e. their inability/unwillingness to accept the Gospel) lasts until “the fulness of the nations should come in”. The use here of plh/rwma (“filling [up], fullness”) for the nations (Gentiles) is parallel to that in verse 12 for Israel; Paul probably understands it in the sense of the full (or complete) number, measure, etc. It is only then, once the Gentiles have fully come to Christ, that “all Israel will be saved” (v. 26a).
  • Verse 26-27—the Scriptures Paul cites here are important for an understanding of v. 26a; the primary citation is from Isaiah 59:20-21a, along with Isa 27:9—the combination of elements is significant:
    • “the one rescuing” (o( r(uo/meno$)—Christ himself (1 Thess 1:10, etc), or God working through Christ.
    • “he will turn away from Jacob [i.e. Israel] a lack of (proper) fear [a)sebei/a] (of God)”—cf. Rom 1:18; here a)sebei/a (lack of fear/reverence) is synonymous with sin and wickedness in general, but also, specifically, with a lack of trust (a)pisti/a) in Christ. On the idea of Christ turning people from evil (using the verb a)postre/fw), see Acts 3:26.
    • “and this is the (agreement) set through [diaqh/kh] to them alongside [i.e. with] me”—diaqh/kh here in the sense of an agreement (covenant) between two parties (according to the Hebrew tyr!B=), referring to the “new covenant” in Christ and not the old covenant of Sinai and the Torah (cf. 2 Cor 3:7-18). For the principal Old Testament passage relating to the “new covenant”, see Jer 31:31-34.
    • “when I should take away from (them) their sins”—probably an allusion to Isa 27:9, here set in parallel with the citation from Isa 59:21a, i.e. “turning them away from” and “taking away from them”. For the specific association between removal of sin (and its power), through the death of Christ, and the “new covenant”, see Jesus’ words in Mark 14:24 (par Matt 26:28; Luke 22:20).
  • Verses 28-29—the juxtaposition (me\nde/ “on the one hand… on the other hand…”) Paul establishes in verse 28 must be analyzed and treated with great care:
    • me/n (on the one hand)—
      • kata\ to\ eu)agge/lion (“according to the good message”)
        • e)xqroi/ (“[they are] enemies“)
          • di’ u(ma=$ (“through you”, i.e. for your sake)
    • de/ (on the other hand)—
      • kata\ th\n e)klogh/n (“according to the gathering out”)
        • a)gaphtoi/ (“[they are] loved“)
          • dia\ tou\$ pate/ra$ (“through [i.e. because of ] the fathers”)
    • Paul uses this construction to highlight the sense in which they are (currently) hostile to the Gospel—it is for the sake of Gentiles, that they should come to Christ, as Paul describes earlier in vv. 11-24, 25 (cf. also 10:19-21). For more on this difficult teaching, see below.
  • Verse 31—the mercy which will be shown to Israel is the same that has been shown to Gentiles—that is, the sacrificial work of God in Christ and the proclamation of the Gospel, which has the power to make human beings right before God and to free them from the enslaving power of sin.

Finally, it is left to address specifically the statement in v. 26a: “and thus all Israel will be saved”. There are a number of ways this has been interpreted, which I represent by the following five options:

  1. All Israelites, past and present, will be saved by the mercy and favor of God, but apart from their coming to faith in Christ.
  2. All Israelites, past and present, will be saved collectively through the work of Christ, but in a mysterious way understood only by God, and not necessarily in the sense of “becoming Christians”.
  3. All Israelites alive at the return of Christ will come to faith in him, and will thus be saved.
  4. All of the true Israel will be saved, understood as all Israelites (and Jews) who trust in Christ.
  5. All of the true Israel will be saved, understood as all believers in Christ, Jews and Gentiles alike.

Based on the statement in Rom 9:6 and the olive tree illustration in 11:17-24, Paul certainly would have affirmed the fourth and fifth views above, in the sense that the true Israel is to be identified with believers in Christ (cf. also Rom 2:28-29). However, in Romans 11, and especially in verses 25-32, it would seem that he actually has something like view #3 in mind—namely that, at the end of the age, upon the return of Christ (or shortly before), there would be a widespread conversion of all Israelites and Jews currently living, that together (and/or all at once) they would come to faith in Christ. It is important to remember that, when Paul penned Romans, many, if not most, of the Israelites and Jews of his own generation, who had failed or refused to accept the Gospel, were still living, and he could envision the possibility that they could all still come to faith. As is abundantly clear from his letters, Paul, like most early Christians, expected Christ’s return and the end of the current age to occur very soon, presumably within the lifetime of most believers. In this context, Paul’s eschatological hope for Israel here makes good sense. Admittedly, it is rather more difficult to apply to the situation today, where nearly two thousand years have gone by, and many generations of Israelites and Jews have passed away—a situation, I am quite certain, that never would have occurred to Paul. Even so, it is still possible to affirm the belief (or at least the hope) that there will be a widespread conversion of Israel before the return of Christ; and, indeed, may Christians today hold just such a view.

Interestingly, in recent decades, there have been an increasing number of commentators and theologians who would adopt an interpretation along the lines of #1 and 2 above, at least in the sense that Israelites and Jews will be saved by God without having to “convert” or “become Christian”. This may be related to what is called the “Two Covenants” or “Dual Covenant” theory, which I will discuss briefly in an explanatory article.

Most distinctive is Paul’s teaching that Israel’s ‘hardening’ against the Gospel is directly related to the missionary outreach to Gentiles. This reflects historical reality, in that there were Jews who fiercely opposed the early Christian mission, according to Paul’s own testimony and the narrative in the book of Acts. Persecution often fuels the success of a religious movement, galvanizing support and helping to forge a strong and distinctive identity. This may also reflect, at some level, a degree of “cognitive dissonance”—Paul and other Christians were forced to explain the success of the mission among Gentiles throughout Asia Minor, Macedonia, Greece and Italy (Rome), while many Jews, who (as the elect people of God) should have been more receptive, did not accept the Gospel. This leads Paul to two different explanations which he brings together in these chapters:

  • Not all Israelites are the true Israel (9:6), and
  • They fell away (i.e. refused to believe) in order to make room for the Gentiles to come to faith
    —this last proposition is most vividly illustrated by the image of the olive tree and the branches (11:17-24)

    • Paul viewed Christianity as the outgrowth of (faithful) Israel stretching back to Abraham (i.e., the “remnant” is the root of the tree)
    • The branches which are faithful and remain in the tree (cf. John 15:1-11) are the early Jewish believers
    • The branches of the wild olive tree are the Gentiles—believers are grafted into the tree of ‘true Israel’
    • The branches which were broken off (i.e., unbelieving Israelites and Jews) may yet come to faith and be grafted back in

Once the full number (or measure) of Gentiles have come to faith, then the unbelieving Israelites and Jews will have the covering removed from their mind (2 Cor 3:14-15) and will come to trust in Christ as well. This, at least, is how Paul appears to have viewed the matter. Fitting it into a particular eschatological framework today is, of course, especially difficult, as indicated by the wide range of interpretive approaches that have been adopted over the years.

 

Note of the Day – November 15

By | Note of the Day | No Comments

Romans 10:4

In the previous daily note, I discussed the immediate context of verses 1-3 (cf. also the article on Rom 9-11); today it remains to examine verse 4 in detail.

“For (the) Anointed {Christ} (is the) te/lo$ of (the) Law unto justice/righteousness for every (one) th(at is) trusting.”

Let us look at each element of this verse:

te/lo$ (“end”)—this word, which I left untranslated above, is in the first (emphatic) position; it has the fundamental meaning “completion, finish”, more commonly translated simply as “end”. The problem with rendering it as “end” is that this can be understood at least two ways: (1) as a termination, or (temporally) as the limit of a term, and (2) as a goal or purpose. Before discussing how Paul intends it to be understood in context here, I will proceed with the remainder of the verse.

ga\r (“for”)—this is a coordinating particle, connecting with what has come before (vv. 1-3) and serving to explain it.

no/mou (“of the Law”)—Paul normally uses no/mo$ (“law”) in reference to the Old Testament Law (Torah), though occasionally, particularly in Romans, he uses it in the wider sense of the “Law of God”; here, however, he specifically means the Old Testament Law.

Xristo/$ (“[the] Anointed”)—the regular shorthand title for Jesus (Christ), serving virtually as a proper name already in early Christian usage. A verb has to be supplied in English—”Christ (is) the end of the Law”—to fill out the predication. For the sense in which Christ is “the end of the Law”, see below.

ei)$ dikaiosu/nhn (“unto justice/righteousness”)—the preposition here (ei)$, “into/unto”) indicates purpose or end result; in English, it is typically translated “for justice/righteousness”. The noun dikaiosu/nh, used frequently by Paul in Romans, along with the verb dikaio/w, the adjective di/kaio$ and the related noun dikai/wma, indicates fundamentally the “just-ness” and “right-ness” of God, which is expressed both in the Law, and, more importantly, manifest in the person and work of Christ. For more on the meaning and translation of the dik-/dikaio- word-group, see the article on Justification and throughout the series on Paul’s View of the Law (in Galatians and Romans).

panti/ (“for all/every [one]”)—Paul often gives special significance to pa=$ (“all, every”), as a key word for the universal scope of the Gospel message—it is for all people, Jews and Gentiles alike. The dative case here could be rendered “for all” or “to all”.

tw=| pisteu/onti (“the [one] trusting”)—the participle (of the verb pisteu/w, “trust”) is a regular way for Paul to refer to believers in Christ. In Romans and Galatians, Paul regularly contrasts trust (pi/sti$) in Christ with observance of the Torah (no/mo$, “the Law”, or “works [e&rga] of the Law”). While the full force and significance of this contrast is largely lost today, it is vital to an understanding of Paul’s thought, especially in Galatians and Romans. For more on this, see below.

Two essential interpretive questions remain to be addressed:

  1. What does Paul mean by te/lo$ (“end”) in this verse?
  2. What exactly does it mean to say that Christ is the “end of the Law”?

1. As indicated above, there are two main possibilities for te/lo$ here:

  • as a termination—emphasizing that the Law has ceased to be in force and is no longer binding
  • as a goal or purpose—emphasizing that the Law ultimately points and leads to Christ, whether or not one considers the Law in any way to be still in force

These, of course, are hardly incompatible, since, to use Paul’s regular metaphor of the race, upon reaching the goal, the race comes to an end. However, there are several factors which do need to be considered:

  • In 1 Cor 1:8; 10:12; 15:24, and (probably) also 1 Thess 2:16, Paul uses it in the sense of termination, of a cessation for the current Age; while in Rom 6:21-22; 2 Cor 11:15 and Phil 3:19, it similarly relates to a person’s fate at the end of the Age. In 2 Cor 1:13, the expression e%w$ te/lou$ (“until completion”) probably means “completely, fully”. Overall, he does not seem to use te/lo$ in the sense of an end goal or purpose.
  • In the only instances where he may refer to te/lo$ as a goal or purpose—2 Cor 3:13 and (possibly) 2 Thess 2:16—Paul uses the preposition ei)$ (ei)$ to\ te/lo$, “unto the end/completion [of]”). Here in Rom 10:4, ei)$ (indicating purpose or end result) is used with dikaiosu/nh (“justice/righteousness”). There is a similar context between 2 Cor 3:13 and Rom 10:4, as both passages deal with the Law in relation to Christ (cf. below).
  • The immediate context of Rom 9:30-33 suggests the metaphor of a race (“pursuing [after]”)—Gentiles take hold (of the prize) through faith in Christ, while many Israelites fail to reach the goal as they should. In this respect, te/lo$ would likely refer to the goal (justice/righteousness), though, as indicated above, it might also mean the termination of the race.

When we consider the other metaphors and illustrations Paul uses, especially those in Galatians 3-4 and Romans 6-7, we see that he repeatedly expresses the idea that, with Christ, the period governed by the Law comes to an end. Believers are no longer under the authority of the Torah, bound to observe it (Rom 6:14); in this regard, the “end” (te/lo$), in Paul’s way of thinking, is also understood in terms of death—in Christ, believers die (and are dead) to the Law (Gal 2:19; Rom 7:4-6, etc), so it no longer has any binding force over us. However, he also expresses elsewhere something of the idea that the Law points the way and leads to Christ (cf. below).

2. As already indicated, there are two related ways that Christ can be understood as “the end of the Law”:

  • With the coming of Christ—and, in particular, with his sacrificial death and resurrection—the period of the Old Testament Law (Torah) is terminated.
  • The justice/righteousness of God as expressed in the Law points toward the justice/righteousness that is manifest in the person and work of Christ; these are not in conflict, but the latter supersedes the former entirely, so that the old covenant is replaced by the new and the old covenant is no longer in force.

Throughout Galatians and Romans (esp. in Gal 3-4 and Rom 6-7), Paul has emphasized (and clearly taught) the first of these views; however, the second view is, in many ways, complementary to the first, and seems to be closer to Paul’s emphasis in Romans 10:1-4. This is to be seen in the language used earlier in 9:31:

“but Israel, pursing (the) Law of justice/righteousness, did not reach/arrive (first) unto (this) Law”

Here, the goal of the “race” is the “Law of justice/righteousness” (no/mo$ dikaiosu/nh$), best understood as “the Law of God” (cf. Rom 7:22, 25; 1 Cor 9:21), as expressed in the Torah. Israel did not reach this goal, or, at least did not reach it first—i.e., many Gentiles reached it, grabbing hold of the prize, ahead of them. Since Paul has also expressed clearly that Jesus Christ is the embodiment and manifestation of God’s justice/righteousness (Rom 3:21ff, etc), it is natural and appropriate to refer to Christ himself as the true goal of Israel’s pursuit. Paul’s sorrow stems from the fact that many of his fellow Israelites and Jews have failed to recognize or acknowledge this, as he movingly and powerfully describes here in Romans 9-11. A similar line of argument and discussion is found in 2 Corinthians 3:7-18; the illustrative, contrasting juxtaposition he employs is forceful and striking:

The Old Covenant

  • Ministered by Moses
  • Attended by a temporary glory (that comes to an end)
  • Governed by the written word (gra/mma), i.e. Scripture/Torah
  • Written on tablets of stone
  • Ultimately leads to death
  • For those who read/hear it, there is a covering over the mind and heart
  • It has ceased to be in effect, with the coming of Christ

The New Covenant

  • Ministered by missionaries and apostles of Christ
  • Attended by an eternal glory that will not go away
  • Governed by the Spirit (pneu=ma), i.e. the (Holy) Spirit of God
  • Written on the heart
  • Leads to (eternal) life
  • Through the Gospel and trust in Christ, the covering is removed
  • It is lasting and eternal

Note especially Paul’s repeated use of the verb katarge/w in vv. 7, 11, 13-14; this verb has the basic meaning “make (something) cease working”, i.e. render it ineffective, inactive—in a technical (legal) sense, it means “invalidate, nullify, make void,” etc. In 2 Cor 3:7-14, it is used four times, each in the present passive (“is [being] made inactive”):

  • In verse 7, it refers specifically to the glory over Moses’ face, cf. Exod 34:29-35
  • In verse 11, the reference seems to be the entire ministration of the Covenant
  • Verse 13 refers to the temporary status of the Covenant (and its glory)—its fate/end is to be made inactive
  • In verse 14, the emphasis is on the old Covenant being made inactive in Christ

We can see how this passage blends together both meanings of te/lo$ indicated above: (a) the Law is terminated and ceases to be in effect, and (b) it ceases to be in effect “in Christ” (e)n Xristw=|), i.e. God’s work in Christ as the ultimate purpose and goal of the Law. Interestingly, from what Paul says elsewhere in Romans and Galatians, the immediate purpose of the Law has to do with the manifestation of sin, in particular, the enslaving power of sin at work over human beings in the world and “in the flesh”; but the ultimate purpose is that God should show mercy and favor over human beings through the person and work of Christ, rescuing and freeing them from the power of sin and death. In the process, according to Paul’s remarkable teaching, we are also freed from the Law—in this sense, Christ truly is the finish, completion and end of the Law.

Paul’s View of the Law: Romans (9:1-11:32)

By | Exegetical/Study Series | No Comments

Romans 9-11

These famous chapters in Romans have been notoriously difficult to interpret, not least in terms of how exactly they fit into the overall structure of the letter. From the standpoint of rhetorical analysis, Rom 1:18-8:39 clearly represents the probatio, the presentation of arguments in support of the main proposition (Rom 1:16-17). I have already discussed in detail each of the four main sections which make up the probatio, according to the thematic division presented as four announcements:

  • Rom 1:18-3:20: Announcement of God’s (impending) judgment, according to the Law (of God) (article)
  • Rom 3:21-5:21: Announcement of God’s justice/righteousness (in Christ), apart from the Law (Torah) (article)
  • Rom 6:1-7:25: Announcement of Freedom from the Law and Sin (article)
  • Rom 8:1-39: Announcement of Life in the Spirit (article)

Through the arguments in these sections, Paul effectively expounds his central (two-fold) proposition:

“I do not feel shame upon [i.e. about] the good message [i.e. Gospel],
for it is the power of God unto salvation to every (one) th(at is) trusting—to the Yehudean {Jew} first and (also) to the Greek.
For the justice/righteousness of God is uncovered in it, out of trust (and) into trust, even as it has been written: ‘but the just/righteous (person) will live out of trust’.”

In chapters 9-11 he further expounds one portion specifically: “unto salvation to every one that trusts—to the Jew first and (also) to the Greek“. This section has been referred to as a refutatio—a refutation by Paul of (possible) arguments made especially by Gentiles in Rome with regard to the role and position of Jewish believers (cf. B. Witherington, Paul’s Letter to the Romans Eerdmans [2004], pp. 237-9). However, I do not see Paul’s approach here as being appreciably different from the one he takes in earlier in chapters 2-4; there is an interesting symmetry and balance of presentation:

  • Rom 2-4—addressed primarily to Jews, emphasizing that Gentiles are on an equal footing before God with regard to both judgment and salvation
  • Rom 9-11—addressed primarily to Gentiles, emphasizing the (future) salvation of Israelites/Jews and their inclusion into the body of Christ

In between (Rom 5-8) Paul presents a kind of “salvation history”, an exposition of the Gospel message for all human beings—Jews and Gentiles alike. Chapters 9-11 actually have the character of a personal appeal or confession—indeed, this characterizes each of the sections (matching the numbered chapters):

  • Chapter 9—Paul’s confession (Rom 9:1-5)
  • Chapter 10—Paul’s confession (Rom 10:1-4)
  • Chapter 11—Paul’s appeal (Rom 11:1-6ff)

The opening verses of each section, with their personal and moving tone, lead into a presentation of arguments. The main issue at hand is how the Israelite/Jewish people relate to the new Christian identity. As a missionary and representative (apostle) of Christ, Paul saw how many of his fellow Israelites and Jews had been unwilling to accept the Gospel, some even being openly hostile to his missionary work (as narrated repeatedly in the book of Acts, cf. also 1 Thess 2:14-16, etc). Even Jewish believers could be opposed to his presentation of the Gospel, especially his unique view of the Law and his missionary approach to the Gentiles, as seen in Acts 15:1ff and throughout Galatians. At some level, this must have been traumatic for Paul, and difficult to understand—how could so many of God’s elect people, Israel, fail to trust in Christ? While he never really addresses this directly in his other surviving letters, it is clear that he had thought about it a good deal. The result is the wonderful, if somewhat enigmatic, exposition here in Romans 9-11.

I present my analysis of these chapters in summary, outline form, discussing several key verses in more detail in separate notes.

Romans 9

Rom 9:1-5—Paul’s personal address: Israel (“they are Israelites…”, vv. 4-5)

In vv. 1-3, Paul offers a moving confession of the sadness and burden he feels for his fellow Jews, whom he refers to as “my brothers” and “my kin (lit. ones coming to be [born] with me)”, and who, most notably, are Israelites (ei)sin  )Israhli=tai). This leads in vv. 4-5 to an announcement of the benefits and honors accorded to Israel by God, culminating in the coming of Jesus Christ in the flesh (“according to the flesh”, kata\ sa/rka). The setting forth (establishment) of the Law (nomoqesi/a) is, of course, one of these honors.

Rom 9:6-13Argument: Not all Israel is the true Israel.

This is defined clearly by Paul in verse 6:

“But (it is) not so that the word/account of God has fallen out [i.e. failed]: for these—all the (one)s out of Israel—are not Israel.”

The specific syntax of this last statement is important. The negative particle ou) governs the statement as a whole: ou) ga\rou!toi  )Israh/l (“for these…are not Israel”); and these (ou!toi) refer to the preceding phrase pa/nte$ oi( e)c  )Israh/l (“all the ones out of Israel”). Secondarily, one may also read the negative particle with pa/nte$, “not all the ones out of Israel.. are Israel”. The preposition e)k here means “out of” in the sense of physical/biological descent from (i.e. “offspring of the flesh”, v. 8). In other words the true Israel is not simply the same as all Israelites taken in the ethnic/cultural sense. Paul builds on this by returning to the example of Abraham from chapter 4 (cf. also Gal 3-4), emphasizing that Isaac was his “seed” according to the promise of God, and not simply out of his flesh. Abraham’s true descendants likewise are the “offspring of the promise” (ta\ te/kna th=$ e)paggeli/a$), v. 8. In a similar manner, Paul emphasizes that Isaac’s son Israel was chosen (“called out”) by God beforehand, in contrast to his other son Esau—i.e., the blessing was not based simply on birth or genealogy (vv. 11-13).

Rom 9:14-33Exposition: Three arguments, each beginning with a rhetorical question:

  • Vv. 14-18—”What then shall we declare [ti/ ou@n e)rou=men]? There is not injustice [a)diki/a] alongside God (is there)? May it not come to be (so)!”
  • Vv. 19-29—”You will therefore declare to me [e)rei=$ moi ou@n]: For what [i.e. why] then does He yet find fault (with us)? For who has stood against His counsel [i.e. what He has resolved to do]?”
  • Vv. 30-33—”What then shall we declare [ti/ ou@n e)rou=men]? That the nations not pursuing justice have taken hold of justice…but Israel, pursuing (the) Law of justice…did not arrive (first)…?

The first two arguments (vv. 14-29) relate to the example of Isaac in vv. 6-13, of how God chose Israel beforehand (over Esau). These verses came to be central to subsequent theological debates regarding “predestination” and the sovereignty of God—i.e., how God may accept one person and reject another, quite apart from anything done to deserve such blessing. Unfortunately, this doctrinal emphasis tends to wrench the passage well out of its original context, as is quite clear from the the concluding argument in vv. 30-33, where Paul returns to the main statement of v. 6. Because of their importance to Paul’s view of the Law, verses 30-33 will be discussed in a separate note.

Romans 10

Rom 10:1-4—Paul’s personal address: The Law and justice/righteousness (vv. 3-4)

Paul offers a personal confession, similar to that in 9:1-3; here he expresses his desire (and prayer) that Israel might be saved—”(my) need (expressed) [i.e. prayer] toward God over them unto (their) salvation” (v. 1b). In verses 2-3 he offers his diagnosis regarding Israel’s current situation:

“For I witness regarding them that they hold a fervent desire of God, but not according to (true) knowledge upon (Him); for, lacking knowledge of the justice/righteousness of God, and seeking to stand (up) th(eir) own [justice/righteousness], they did not put themselves (in order) under the justice/righteousness of God.”

Then follows, by way of contrast, the famous statement in verse 4, functioning as a concise (and controversial) summary of the Gospel:

“For (the) Anointed {Christ} is (the) te/lo$ of the Law unto justice/righteousness for every (one) th(at) is trusting.”

This verse (along with vv. 2-3) will be discussed in a separate note.

Rom 10:5-13Argument: Justice/righteousness is realized in Christ.

This argument is essentially a commentary on Leviticus 18:5, which Paul also cites in a similar context in Gal 3:10-14. It is part of his regular contrast between the Law, which one observes by doing (“works of the Law”), and trust/faith (in Christ). The contrast is stark indeed—”justice/righteousness out of the Law” vs. “justice/righteousness out of faith/trust”. His supplemental usage here of Deut 30:11-14 is interesting, illustrating dramatically the righteousness based on doing, taken to extremes: “step up into the (high) heaven…step down into the deep (pit)”, adding the detail that the purpose is to “bring the Anointed down” and “bring the Anointed up”. The idea seems to be that this righteousness through deeds (i.e. observance of the Law) effectively takes the place of the true righteousness of God found in Christ, as expressed in v. 3. Another difference is that true righteousness is realized through the “utterance in the mouth… and in the heart” (v. 8, citing Deut 30:14); this utterance (r(h=ma) is then identified with the “word” or proclamation (kh/rugma) of the Gospel. Paul cites a kerygmatic formula in verse 9, expounding it in vv. 10-11, and applying it to all people—Jews and Gentiles equally—who trust in Christ, and confess this trust, i.e. “all who call upon him” (v. 12f, citing Joel 2:32 [cf. Acts 2:21]).

Rom 10:14-21Exposition: The Proclamation of the Gospel, and Israel’s response to it, in three parts:

  • The proclamation of the Gospel (vv. 14-15)
  • Israel’s response to the Gospel—not all have faith (vv. 16-17)
  • Evidence of this in the Scriptures (vv. 18-21, citing Psalm 19:4; Deut 32:21; Isa 65:1-2)

The statement in v. 16, “not all have obeyed [lit. listened/heard under] the good message”, relates back to the main argument in 9:6—not all Israelites are (the true) Israel. The implication is, that the true Israel is represented by those who accept the Gospel and trust in Jesus Christ. This is the message of chapters 9 and 10, in summary form. It is important to keep this in mind when studying chapter 11 (below).

Romans 11

Rom 11:1-12—Paul’s address (and argument): The People of God (“His people”, vv. 1ff)

The structure of this chapter is somewhat different from the previous two—here Paul’s personal address in relation to Israel is embedded within a larger discussion of Israel’s role as the people of God. Verses 1-12 actually form an argument from Scripture (vv. 3-10), framed by two similar rhetorical questions:

  • Vv. 1-2: “I relate then [le/gw ou@n]…”
    Question: “God has not pushed his people away from (him, has he)?”
    Answer: “May it not come to be (so) [mh\ ge/noito]!… God has not pushed away from (him) his people whom he knew before(hand).”
  • Vv. 11-12: “I relate then [le/gw ou@n]…”
    Question: “They have not started to fall (so) that they should fall (completely, have they)?”
    Answer: “May it not come to be (so) [mh\ ge/noito]! But by their falling alongside, the salvation for the Gentiles (has come), to bring them [i.e. Israel] along to a burning (desire) [i.e. to jealously].”

The central argument from Scripture (vv. 3-10) draws upon the narrative from 1 Kings 19:9-18, and the idea of a faithful remnant of Israel—”so then also in this time now there has come to be a (remainder) left over, according to the gathering out of [i.e. by] (the) favor (of God)” (v. 5).

Rom 11:13-32Exposition: A Two-fold address to Gentile believers:

  • Vv. 13-24—Illustration of the olive tree and its branches
  • Vv. 25-32—Discourse on the (eschatological) salvation of Israel

Rom 11:33-36—Doxology on the wisdom and knowledge of God

Because of the importance of this chapter, especially verses 13-32, in terms of Paul’s view of the Law, as well as the relationship between Jews and Gentiles in Christ, it will be discussed in more detail in a supplementary article.

 

Note of the Day – November 14

By | Note of the Day | No Comments

Romans 10:1-4

In today’s note, I will be looking at Romans 10:4, one of the key verses relating to Paul’s View of the Law. I have already discussed chapters 9-11 of Romans in a prior article, and here it is also necessary to set verse 4 in the immediate context of chapter 10. In verses 1-2, Paul delivers a personal address regarding his fellow Israelites and Jews, much as in 9:1-3ff (cf. also 11:1ff), expressing his heart’s desire and longing to God that “they might be saved”. Verse 2 is significant in this regard:

“For I witness concerning them that they hold a burning (desire) for God, but not according to (true) knowledge about (Him)…”

This lack of correct understanding Paul clarifies in the next verse:

“…for, lacking knowledge regarding the justice/righteousness of God, and (even) seeking to stand (up) th(eir) own justice/righteousness, they did not put themselves (in order) under the justice/righteousness of God”

There are three components to Israel’s failure, as Paul describes it:

  • they lacked knowledge regarding the justice/righteousness of God
  • they sought to establish their own justice/righteousness
  • they did not put themselves correctly under [i.e. did to submit to] His justice/righteousness

As the remainder of chapter 10 makes clear (vv. 8ff), Paul frames this entirely from the standpoint of the failure of many Israelites and Jews to accept the Gospel message and to trust in Jesus Christ. How does this relate to the three components outlined above? Based on the context of Romans, this can be explained as follows:

  • they are unaware of the justice/righteousness of God which has been manifest (in Christ) apart from the Old Testament Law (Rom 3:21ff); Paul refers to this lack of knowledge in terms of their mind being hardened (Rom 3:14-18; 11:7-10; 2 Cor 3:14, or of being covered/blinded (2 Cor 3:12-18)—even when they read the Scripture and observe the Torah, there is a veil over their hearts and they cannot see the truth (2 Cor 3:15-16)
  • they understood justice/righteousness (dikaiosu/nh)—i.e. being and doing right before God—in terms of their own actions (deeds) in observing and fulfilling the Law (Torah), not realizing that this is entirely contrary to the true way that people of made right in God’s eyes, namely by trusting in Christ and what God has done through him on behalf of humankind (cf. Rom 3:21-26; 5:6-11; 8:3-4; 9:30-33; Gal 2:16; 3:10-14, 21-22; Phil 3:9).
  • they did not submit in obedience to the justice/righteousness of God in that they did not accept the Gospel and trust in Christ (esp. Rom 10:8-21).

One might be inclined to view the phrase “seeking to establish their own justice/righteousness” in the sense of trying to earn acceptance before God through a person’s own efforts. However, this does not seem to be exactly what Paul means. Compare Philippians 3:9:

“…(that I might gain Christ) and be found in him, not holding my (own) justice/righteousness th(at is) out of the Law, but (rather) th(at which) (is) through trust of Christ—the justice/righteousness th(at is) out of God, upon th(is) trust.”

Paul clearly identifies “his (own) righteousness” with observance of the Law (Torah), using the expression “out of [i.e. from] the Law” (e)k no/mou); strikingly, “out of the Law” is contrasted precisely with “out of God”:

  • my (own) righteousness
    —out of the Law (e)k no/mou)
  • righteousness through Christ
    —out of God (e)k qeou=)

It is not so much that an observant Jew is trying to “earn” salvation, but simply that he/she is observing the Law without recognizing (or being unwilling to recognize) that fulfillment of the Law ultimately is found in Christ. With the manifestation of God’s justice/righteousness in Christ, the old covenant has passed, and a new covenant has come—one that is not based upon the Law, but upon the trust (e)pi\ th=| pi/stei) in Christ. This is the very point that Paul makes in Romans 10:4, which I will analyze in detail in the next daily note.