The section of Paul's book-length essay known as Chapter 9 of Romans has been subject to a great deal of misinterpretation arising from two errors. The first is reading into the text and the second is failing to interpret in context (i.e. the entire essay) while overlooking important statements of principle.
Reading into the text has the fancy name of eisegesis, defined by Merriam-Webster as interpreting a text by imposing on it one's own ideas. It is the opposite of exegesis, which denotes the practice of reading a text on its own terms and allowing it to challenge the reader. A typical case of eisegesis is that of people who see the Bible story as a series of different plans God had for saving people. The first was Eden, but the humans disobeyed. The second was up to the great flood, the one Noah built the ark for. The next was Israel, followed by the coming of Jesus and the establishment of the Christian church. These people look to a future plan in which Israel is restored and Jesus reigns for 1000 years. Then there will be a great battle after which the elect (there is a certain amount of predestination built in to this way of interpreting the Bible) are taken into the Eternal New Jerusalem. Each one of these plans (and mind you, we are at Plan F by this time) is called a dispensation of grace, a different way of saving people. It depicts God as failing in his first intents and shuffling the cards each time things just do not work out. My description of the dispensationalist interpretation is not meant to be critical of people who hold this view, but rather to point out that it imposes a system onto the biblical texts rather than let the Bible speak on its own.
Let us try out an exegetical approach instead: What does Chapter 9 have to say. What is the context? At the beginning of the essay Paul establishes that all of us have sinned and that God makes no distinction between Jews and Gentiles. In Chapter 15 he insists that God has commissioned him to take the good news of Jesus to the non-Jews, the Gentiles, the peoples (ethnoi in Greek). If God sent Paul to the non-Jewish people and if God holds all people with the same regard, and if Paul makes a big deal of the fact that Abraham was put right with God through trust (faith), then Paul cannot be saying in Chapter 9 that merely being a good Jew will turn out to be enough in the end.
What Paul does say in Chapter 9 is that he recognizes his Jewishness and that he feels sorrow for his own people. After all, the salvation history up to the time of Jesus was first and foremost a Jewish story. They were given the adoption (as children of God), the glory (a vision of God's presence), the covenants, the law, the (temple) worship, and the promises (v. 4). God's word and purpose did not fail, but rather the problem was that not all Israelites truly belong to Israel (v. 6). Paul sees the church as the New Israel. Jeremiah foresaw that God would make a new pact, one written on people's hearts rather than on stone and parchment (32:40). Jesus said his death (and resurrection) established a new pact (Luke 22:20).
In the remainder of Chapter 9 Paul insists on God's sovereign right to have mercy on who he will have mercy, to put all humans on an equal footing, to use Israel's disobedience to allow multiple millions of Gentiles to come to faith. The discussion of Chapter 9 really ends in 10:4: "Christ is the fulfillment of the law to make righteous all those who believe." It could not be clearer. He will go on to cover the matter of how Israel will fit in God's future purposes in Chapters 10 and 11. Keep in mind where Paul ends up in this part of the essay: "I do not wish you to be ignorant, my brothers and sisters, of this mystery, so that you will not think too highly of your own wisdom: the hardening of a portion of Israel has come about until the fullness of the Gentiles enters (the kingdom of God) and that is how all Israel shall be saved (11: 25). This is the new pact, all who put their full trust in Jesus, whether Gentile or Jew, will be made right with God.
Tuesday, November 27, 2018
Saturday, October 27, 2018
Romans 8
I ask your permission to indulge in a brief digression, the purpose of which will become apparent below. Perhaps my favorite novel is Pêcheur d'Islande (Iceland Fisherman) by Pierre Loti, set in the 1890's. The main character, who lives in Brittany, spends his summers on a fishing boat that circles Iceland. There are poetic descriptions of a large sun which circles the horizon constantly, looking like a large balloon. Meanwhile, his brother is fighting with the French army in Vietnam, where he is hit by a bullet. As he travels back toward France on a hospital boat, he dies at the precise moment the boat crosses the equator as the evening sun dips into the horizon and darkness comes swiftly in that latitude. This happens at the exact middle of the novel. I later discovered that the best written novels usually have a centrally important turning point in the exact middle, give or take one or two pages either direction.
Now Paul, in his book-length essay divided much later into 16 chapters, begins chapter eight, the very middle of his book, with the resounding affirmation that summarizes all he wrote before and announces what comes in the remainder of the essay: "There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus, for the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and death" (NRSV) What can be more clear than that? The remainder of the chapter explores what that means and how it works. Several sections in this chapter are among the most quoted in books and from the pulpits, not always paying sufficient attention to the context.
As you read the remainder of the chapter, keep in mind what Paul has argued in the preceding portions of the letter: God takes the initiative to offer his grace, leaving us free to trust in such confidence that we respond in obedience. or to refuse to accept the offer of grace in order to live as we like. Those who respond in trust have their faith accounted as right relationship with God, as was the case with Abraham. If you read his story, you will see that God forgave him much.
Up through verse 17 Paul contrasts the flesh with the Spirit. The flesh is Paul's metaphor for our desire to disobey God, leading to all sorts of evil results. The Spirit is Christ, God himself, living alongside us and transforming us. He gives us the right to call God Father. Paul uses the Hebrew word, Abba. Preachers often declare that it means "Daddy," but we must be careful. Abba is the only word Hebrew uses for "father." Overinterpretation can be dangerous. The point is that we are God's children, if the Spirit is in us, and if so heirs of God, that is, joint heirs with Christ. God adopts the believers as God's own.
In verses 18 through 30 we see that the presence of the Spirit and the rightness with God that is thereby worked in us gives us faith in the future, a future which makes anything we suffer in the present worthwhile. The Spirit prays on our behalf when we do not know how or what to pray. The Spirit, that is God in us, knows us, loves us, helps us withstand the bad things that happen to us, and in God's time turns them into something good for us, something that makes us mature and experience joy in spite of what happens.
At the very end of that section, Paul affirms that God knew all along who would respond in faith and therefore prepared a purpose for them, calling them to be conformed to the image of Jesus, that is to be made more and more how we were meant to be and to fit us for glory (that is, living in the presence of God). Taken in the full context of the essay, this cannot mean that God decided beforehand who would be saved and who would not. That is overinterpretation taking a verse or two out of context.
Verses 31 to the end of chapter eight tell us what that means: that nothing the world can throw at us can separate us from God. Because God has already triumphed, we will triumph, if we respond to God in a total trust that issues in obedience.
Now Paul, in his book-length essay divided much later into 16 chapters, begins chapter eight, the very middle of his book, with the resounding affirmation that summarizes all he wrote before and announces what comes in the remainder of the essay: "There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus, for the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and death" (NRSV) What can be more clear than that? The remainder of the chapter explores what that means and how it works. Several sections in this chapter are among the most quoted in books and from the pulpits, not always paying sufficient attention to the context.
As you read the remainder of the chapter, keep in mind what Paul has argued in the preceding portions of the letter: God takes the initiative to offer his grace, leaving us free to trust in such confidence that we respond in obedience. or to refuse to accept the offer of grace in order to live as we like. Those who respond in trust have their faith accounted as right relationship with God, as was the case with Abraham. If you read his story, you will see that God forgave him much.
Up through verse 17 Paul contrasts the flesh with the Spirit. The flesh is Paul's metaphor for our desire to disobey God, leading to all sorts of evil results. The Spirit is Christ, God himself, living alongside us and transforming us. He gives us the right to call God Father. Paul uses the Hebrew word, Abba. Preachers often declare that it means "Daddy," but we must be careful. Abba is the only word Hebrew uses for "father." Overinterpretation can be dangerous. The point is that we are God's children, if the Spirit is in us, and if so heirs of God, that is, joint heirs with Christ. God adopts the believers as God's own.
In verses 18 through 30 we see that the presence of the Spirit and the rightness with God that is thereby worked in us gives us faith in the future, a future which makes anything we suffer in the present worthwhile. The Spirit prays on our behalf when we do not know how or what to pray. The Spirit, that is God in us, knows us, loves us, helps us withstand the bad things that happen to us, and in God's time turns them into something good for us, something that makes us mature and experience joy in spite of what happens.
At the very end of that section, Paul affirms that God knew all along who would respond in faith and therefore prepared a purpose for them, calling them to be conformed to the image of Jesus, that is to be made more and more how we were meant to be and to fit us for glory (that is, living in the presence of God). Taken in the full context of the essay, this cannot mean that God decided beforehand who would be saved and who would not. That is overinterpretation taking a verse or two out of context.
Verses 31 to the end of chapter eight tell us what that means: that nothing the world can throw at us can separate us from God. Because God has already triumphed, we will triumph, if we respond to God in a total trust that issues in obedience.
Sunday, October 7, 2018
Romans 7
In the section of the essay we know as chapter 7, Paul makes two final efforts to drive home what he has been saying: That everyone in the world is in the same condition before God. Obeying the Torah and the extensions of the law developed in the era following the exile of the Jews in Babylon cannot make God owe you anything. Conversely, being acquitted by the grace of God does not entitle non-Jews to live as they please.
In the first six verses Paul makes an analogy with marriage. An analogy is not an argument and seems strange in post-modern times but the intent of the writer is clear. It goes like this: A married woman was bound by the law to her husband. As a result she was not free to marry another. If her husband died, however, she was no longer bound by the law and could marry freely. In the first century C.E. the men were allowed to divorce their wives at will, but the wives could not divorce their husbands. Jesus pointed to a higher moral standard: keep to your marriage vows. Paul's point is that the death of Jesus freed all Jews from the condemnation outlined in the law (as the death of a husband frees his widow from the law) and the resurrection of Jesus allows to live a new life of freedom and of following Jesus (as though bound to a new husband).
The remainder of the chapter has puzzled interpreters for ages, with people staking out a position and verbally fighting those who assail it. But if we are right in reading Romans as a book-length essay, it becomes clear that at this point Paul is describing the common condition of all people: we cannot under our own power create the will to do what is right (if we can even know what the right thing is) and make it stick. In other words, we cannot justify ourselves, we cannot make ourselves right with God, we cannot make God owe us, and we cannot appease God. The mind may want to please God, but our human nature (what Paul means by "flesh") keeps asserting itself.
The first part of verse 25 gives thanks to God "through Jesus Christ our Lord." In a previous post I mentioned that the name God gave to Moses was "I will be who I will be" and that it is closely connected to "I will be with you." The word "Lord" is the Greek word Kyrios which is always used in the Greek translation of the Hebrew scriptures for "Yaweh". Jesus' last words to his disciples were "I will be with you to the end of the age." It is the God who is with us who acquits and brings us into the holy Presence.
In the first six verses Paul makes an analogy with marriage. An analogy is not an argument and seems strange in post-modern times but the intent of the writer is clear. It goes like this: A married woman was bound by the law to her husband. As a result she was not free to marry another. If her husband died, however, she was no longer bound by the law and could marry freely. In the first century C.E. the men were allowed to divorce their wives at will, but the wives could not divorce their husbands. Jesus pointed to a higher moral standard: keep to your marriage vows. Paul's point is that the death of Jesus freed all Jews from the condemnation outlined in the law (as the death of a husband frees his widow from the law) and the resurrection of Jesus allows to live a new life of freedom and of following Jesus (as though bound to a new husband).
The remainder of the chapter has puzzled interpreters for ages, with people staking out a position and verbally fighting those who assail it. But if we are right in reading Romans as a book-length essay, it becomes clear that at this point Paul is describing the common condition of all people: we cannot under our own power create the will to do what is right (if we can even know what the right thing is) and make it stick. In other words, we cannot justify ourselves, we cannot make ourselves right with God, we cannot make God owe us, and we cannot appease God. The mind may want to please God, but our human nature (what Paul means by "flesh") keeps asserting itself.
The first part of verse 25 gives thanks to God "through Jesus Christ our Lord." In a previous post I mentioned that the name God gave to Moses was "I will be who I will be" and that it is closely connected to "I will be with you." The word "Lord" is the Greek word Kyrios which is always used in the Greek translation of the Hebrew scriptures for "Yaweh". Jesus' last words to his disciples were "I will be with you to the end of the age." It is the God who is with us who acquits and brings us into the holy Presence.
Wednesday, September 26, 2018
Romans 6
At this point it may be good to take a deep breath and remember: we must interpret what Paul has to say in his book-length essay we know as Romans in accordance with Jesus' teaching. Baptists, of which I am one, have too long tended to interpret Jesus' teaching by Paul's letters. I suppose the reasoning goes that Paul is more western in his thinking and his thoughts are difficult to follow. It must be, then, that his contribution to the New Testament is more complete and meaningful or deep. However that is a false bit of reasoning. If Jesus is God come to earth, then he must be the criterion for interpreting all other scripture.
Accordingly, you may want to spend a few days in the study of one of the Gospels: Mark if you want something fast-moving, Luke if you appreciate scholarly thoroughness and all the parables and stories only he recorded, or John for his intuitive and loving grasp of who Jesus is.
Returning to Paul, what he has to say in what we call chapter 6 can be summarized in verse 11: "So you must also consider yourselves dead to sin and alive to God in Christ Jesus" (NRSV). The entire chapter says the same thing over and over: under the law we slaves to sin, but the eternal redemptive purpose of God means that under his grace we are slaves of a new master. Being a slave to sin brings condemnation, but being a slave of God brings acquittal and life.
Jesus said it clearer: "If anyone wishes to be my disciple, deny yourself, take up your cross daily and follow me." Once we give ourselves to God we must live a life of obedience. It is all well and good to stress that God's salvation is once for all, but we have too long failed to take seriously Jesus' call to discipleship. Paul says "Should we sin because we are not under law but under grace? By no means!" (v. 15 NRSV). We are all the same before God. Disobedience brings death but God came in person to buy us back, metaphorically speaking, but a metaphor causing Jesus' execution and resurrection. The law cannot save anyone. God saves us by his grace and we respond in trust that leads us to do what God commands, to live "in newness of life," to love God and live an ethical life of faithfulness by loving our fellow creatures.
To say it another way: Paul says no, you cannot live as you please because you are under grace, and no, continuing to live under the Torah and Talmud will not do either. The Spirit of Christ, the Holy Spirit in us means to transform us and make us fit for the Eternal Kingdom. Because Christ is risen, he leads the way.
Accordingly, you may want to spend a few days in the study of one of the Gospels: Mark if you want something fast-moving, Luke if you appreciate scholarly thoroughness and all the parables and stories only he recorded, or John for his intuitive and loving grasp of who Jesus is.
Returning to Paul, what he has to say in what we call chapter 6 can be summarized in verse 11: "So you must also consider yourselves dead to sin and alive to God in Christ Jesus" (NRSV). The entire chapter says the same thing over and over: under the law we slaves to sin, but the eternal redemptive purpose of God means that under his grace we are slaves of a new master. Being a slave to sin brings condemnation, but being a slave of God brings acquittal and life.
Jesus said it clearer: "If anyone wishes to be my disciple, deny yourself, take up your cross daily and follow me." Once we give ourselves to God we must live a life of obedience. It is all well and good to stress that God's salvation is once for all, but we have too long failed to take seriously Jesus' call to discipleship. Paul says "Should we sin because we are not under law but under grace? By no means!" (v. 15 NRSV). We are all the same before God. Disobedience brings death but God came in person to buy us back, metaphorically speaking, but a metaphor causing Jesus' execution and resurrection. The law cannot save anyone. God saves us by his grace and we respond in trust that leads us to do what God commands, to live "in newness of life," to love God and live an ethical life of faithfulness by loving our fellow creatures.
To say it another way: Paul says no, you cannot live as you please because you are under grace, and no, continuing to live under the Torah and Talmud will not do either. The Spirit of Christ, the Holy Spirit in us means to transform us and make us fit for the Eternal Kingdom. Because Christ is risen, he leads the way.
Monday, September 17, 2018
Romans 5
Since writing the last post, I received some feedback questioning what I meant by saying that, according to Paul, the Jewish law (Torah) brings condemnation. In 4:15 Paul says the law brings wrath. He doesn't go into explanation at this point, but, judging from what he has been saying, it can be taken to mean that the law cannot save us from our sinful nature. If it is the case, as Paul argues, that if there is no law, there is no guilt, then it follows that the Torah gives some guidance as to what to do, and some prohibitions, which we would not have known are wrong without the Torah having told us. The "wrath" Paul refers to is not "the wrath of God" but just "wrath." To us that doesn't sound very satisfactory, but consider the following: we bring condemnation on ourselves. This is not something God wants, but it is inherent in the freedom God gives us to obey or not. God's purpose is redemption, not condemnation.
Paul starts his essay by establishing that God has no favorites and that from the beginning, humans have been acquitted and made right with God by his grace, which we accept through trust that leads to repentance. So some of the Greek Christians say "Great! Now we can live as we like, since God gives us grace, right?" Paul says "No, that's not it." The Jewish Christians said "To know what God wants of us we all have to know and follow the Torah law." Paul says "No, that's not it either." However, Paul's problem is to explain to the Jews what to do with the law.
So Paul embarks on an alternative that applies to all, Greek and Jewish Christians, in chapter 5. God acquits us when we respond in faith and puts us at peace through God the Son, Jesus Christ. We are therefore entitled to boast of our hope of the eternal Kingdom and even in any suffering we encounter because it sets off a process of growth from endurance all the way to a hope based on God's promise, which is therefore secure. That's the first five verses.
Jesus gave his life for all of us while we were still sinners and because of his resurrection, saves us from death (verses 6 to 12). Under the Torah and the sacrificial temple worship, people had to purify themselves and provide the applicable sacrifice before they could come to God. It follows that the Jewish system had it backward: God provides the sacrifice and the life. We come as we are to him in trust, and he is faithful to acquit us. We then respond with faithfulness to God, following Jesus in complete obedience.
In the remainder of the chapter, Paul apparently deals with a question he has been asked or is anticipating may be asked: How can just one man do the full sacrifice for all people for all time? The Jews needed to sacrifice over and over. At the time the essay was written, the temple sacrificial worship was still in operation. The answer is not the kind that would probably convince us post-modern people, but it would make sense to those to whom the essay was read: sin came into the world through one human being. Now God provides the one human being (Jesus) who can undo what Adam did. Now you may be thinking: wasn't it Eve who took the forbidden fruit first? But you see, what Paul's readers and listeners would know is that Adam in Hebrew means "mankind." God's provision more than suffices for all who trust God with their lives.
Paul's teaching is not that we are obliged to believe that Adam (Mankind) and Eve (Life) were individual humans in the creation story. His point is that Jesus and Jesus alone gives life in the eternal kingdom to all who trust fully in him. We need no other.
Paul starts his essay by establishing that God has no favorites and that from the beginning, humans have been acquitted and made right with God by his grace, which we accept through trust that leads to repentance. So some of the Greek Christians say "Great! Now we can live as we like, since God gives us grace, right?" Paul says "No, that's not it." The Jewish Christians said "To know what God wants of us we all have to know and follow the Torah law." Paul says "No, that's not it either." However, Paul's problem is to explain to the Jews what to do with the law.
So Paul embarks on an alternative that applies to all, Greek and Jewish Christians, in chapter 5. God acquits us when we respond in faith and puts us at peace through God the Son, Jesus Christ. We are therefore entitled to boast of our hope of the eternal Kingdom and even in any suffering we encounter because it sets off a process of growth from endurance all the way to a hope based on God's promise, which is therefore secure. That's the first five verses.
Jesus gave his life for all of us while we were still sinners and because of his resurrection, saves us from death (verses 6 to 12). Under the Torah and the sacrificial temple worship, people had to purify themselves and provide the applicable sacrifice before they could come to God. It follows that the Jewish system had it backward: God provides the sacrifice and the life. We come as we are to him in trust, and he is faithful to acquit us. We then respond with faithfulness to God, following Jesus in complete obedience.
In the remainder of the chapter, Paul apparently deals with a question he has been asked or is anticipating may be asked: How can just one man do the full sacrifice for all people for all time? The Jews needed to sacrifice over and over. At the time the essay was written, the temple sacrificial worship was still in operation. The answer is not the kind that would probably convince us post-modern people, but it would make sense to those to whom the essay was read: sin came into the world through one human being. Now God provides the one human being (Jesus) who can undo what Adam did. Now you may be thinking: wasn't it Eve who took the forbidden fruit first? But you see, what Paul's readers and listeners would know is that Adam in Hebrew means "mankind." God's provision more than suffices for all who trust God with their lives.
Paul's teaching is not that we are obliged to believe that Adam (Mankind) and Eve (Life) were individual humans in the creation story. His point is that Jesus and Jesus alone gives life in the eternal kingdom to all who trust fully in him. We need no other.
Monday, September 3, 2018
Romans 4
In Romans 4 Paul argues that people are made right with God solely through faith. Much has been misunderstood owing to the large gulf between the meaning of pistis in Koiné Greek and "faith" in English. We are the victims of centuries of practice of using the word "faith" to mean intellectual assent to propositions about God developed by the Church, whether Roman Catholic, Reformed, Lutheran, Presbyterian, Methodist, or Baptist, and so on. Faith so defined misses Paul's point.
Pistis means "trust." In New Testament terms, as we will see, it means "trust that leads to following Jesus in loving obedience" or "trusting Jesus to be always who he said he was when on earth and behaving accordingly." Yet another way to define pistis is "faithfulness." It is used of God to describe his faithfulness in dealing with us.
In what we know as chapter 4, Paul quotes Genesis 15:6, which says that Abraham believed in God, that is, that God would keep the promise to make Abraham's descendants a great nation. This trust in the faithfulness of God justified Abraham (accounted to him as righteousness). Justification is a legal term meaning to acquit an accused person. In Paul it means that a person is put into right relationship with God, whose purpose has always been redemption, and whose message is personal and ethical. That is what righteousness means.
After quoting from the Torah, Paul goes on to say that works did not justify Abraham, otherwise we would have something to boast about. Keep that idea in mind, as later on in the book Paul talks about what it is proper to boast about as a believer. When we work at a job and are paid, we are given what is owed to us. It is not a gift. Similarly, we cannot make God owe us, but rather justification, or being accounted as right with God, is a free gift.
Even the psalmist says "Blessed are those whose iniquities (acts of disobedience to God) are forgiven and whose sins are blotted out; blessed is the one against whom the Lord (יהוה) will not reckon sin." (Psalm 32:1-2).
Then Paul points out that Abraham was accepted as righteous by God before he or anyone of his family was circumcised and long before the Torah was given. At this point in the reading of the book in Rome, the Greek Christians were probably nodding with satisfaction, while the Jewish Christians were squirming. God set Abraham as the father of many nations before there was law (Torah) or even circumcision. Abraham continued to believe after he was very old and Sarah was, to all human knowledge even today, beyond child-bearing possibility. That is what faith (trusting) is. All the hearers of the letter knew that, in her old age, Sarah bore a son to Abraham and named him Yitschak ("he laughs").
If becoming right with God were a matter of obeying the Torah, then faith would be meaningless, and the promise to Abraham would be empty. If you can by obedience to rules make yourself righteous and attain your hope, then there is no place for faith or promise. So what is God about, then, and what was the purpose of the Torah? Paul's position is that what the Torah does is to bring wrath (condemnation) and to make faith and promise empty, while God is working out his promise to Abraham in those who believe in the one who raised Jesus our Lord from the dead, he who died because of our rebellious living and was raised from the dead to make us right with God.
That is strong enough, however, something of major importance is lost in translation into English. When Jesus is given the title Lord, that is the word in Greek kurios, which all of Paul's hearers knew was the word used by Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible (the Septuagint) every time the covenant name of God (יהוה) appeared. This is the Trinitarian teaching that Jesus was none other than the One God come to earth as a first-century human.
If that is the case, then the nature of God is not that of an ancient Middle Eastern vengeful and angry God who needs to be appeased, but rather the loving God, attested to throughout the Hebrew Scriptures, whose purpose is redemption, whose nature is love, and who promises, as he did to Moses, to be with us to the end of the age.
Pistis means "trust." In New Testament terms, as we will see, it means "trust that leads to following Jesus in loving obedience" or "trusting Jesus to be always who he said he was when on earth and behaving accordingly." Yet another way to define pistis is "faithfulness." It is used of God to describe his faithfulness in dealing with us.
In what we know as chapter 4, Paul quotes Genesis 15:6, which says that Abraham believed in God, that is, that God would keep the promise to make Abraham's descendants a great nation. This trust in the faithfulness of God justified Abraham (accounted to him as righteousness). Justification is a legal term meaning to acquit an accused person. In Paul it means that a person is put into right relationship with God, whose purpose has always been redemption, and whose message is personal and ethical. That is what righteousness means.
After quoting from the Torah, Paul goes on to say that works did not justify Abraham, otherwise we would have something to boast about. Keep that idea in mind, as later on in the book Paul talks about what it is proper to boast about as a believer. When we work at a job and are paid, we are given what is owed to us. It is not a gift. Similarly, we cannot make God owe us, but rather justification, or being accounted as right with God, is a free gift.
Even the psalmist says "Blessed are those whose iniquities (acts of disobedience to God) are forgiven and whose sins are blotted out; blessed is the one against whom the Lord (יהוה) will not reckon sin." (Psalm 32:1-2).
Then Paul points out that Abraham was accepted as righteous by God before he or anyone of his family was circumcised and long before the Torah was given. At this point in the reading of the book in Rome, the Greek Christians were probably nodding with satisfaction, while the Jewish Christians were squirming. God set Abraham as the father of many nations before there was law (Torah) or even circumcision. Abraham continued to believe after he was very old and Sarah was, to all human knowledge even today, beyond child-bearing possibility. That is what faith (trusting) is. All the hearers of the letter knew that, in her old age, Sarah bore a son to Abraham and named him Yitschak ("he laughs").
If becoming right with God were a matter of obeying the Torah, then faith would be meaningless, and the promise to Abraham would be empty. If you can by obedience to rules make yourself righteous and attain your hope, then there is no place for faith or promise. So what is God about, then, and what was the purpose of the Torah? Paul's position is that what the Torah does is to bring wrath (condemnation) and to make faith and promise empty, while God is working out his promise to Abraham in those who believe in the one who raised Jesus our Lord from the dead, he who died because of our rebellious living and was raised from the dead to make us right with God.
That is strong enough, however, something of major importance is lost in translation into English. When Jesus is given the title Lord, that is the word in Greek kurios, which all of Paul's hearers knew was the word used by Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible (the Septuagint) every time the covenant name of God (יהוה) appeared. This is the Trinitarian teaching that Jesus was none other than the One God come to earth as a first-century human.
If that is the case, then the nature of God is not that of an ancient Middle Eastern vengeful and angry God who needs to be appeased, but rather the loving God, attested to throughout the Hebrew Scriptures, whose purpose is redemption, whose nature is love, and who promises, as he did to Moses, to be with us to the end of the age.
Tuesday, August 28, 2018
Romans 3
The section of the letter to the Romans we know as chapter 3 is somewhat difficult to interpret. I will state again that I am not writing a verse-by-verse commentary but rather an exploration of the themes that run throughout this letter which is also a book-length essay.
The main thrust of this passage is verse 9: "What then? Are we any better off? No, not at all; for we have already charged that all, both Jews and Greeks, are under the power of sin." (NRSV) Paul is preparing to expound further on the theme of equality before God and that all need his forgiveness and redemption. First, though, in verses 1 through 8, he makes an argument that is baffling to us. I am asking your leave to try out a hypothesis: that Paul is walking through the arguments and accusations that the Christians in the Roman church had been throwing at each other and that had been reported to him.
This is just a hypothesis and should not be taken as any sort of definitive interpretation. Based on what Paul says in 1 through 8, I imagine that the Gentile or Greek Christians had questioned the advantage that the Jews claimed they had in knowing about or accessing the favor of God and the value of circumcision. Many Jews had been unfaithful to God through history so consequently that nullifies their advantage. No, replied the Jews, the sinfulness of our forefathers served to confirm that God is just. Well, then why should anyone be condemned as a sinner if God's glory is shown by it? replied the Gentiles.
If this is the topic of argument, then what Paul says in verses 1 to 8 makes eminent sense. The Jews have the advantage of receiving the "oracles" of God (his message) first, before anyone else. Although some were unfaithful, God is always faithful. This should obviate the entire argument between Jewish and Greek Christians. No one has any excuse for their rebellion against or unfaithfulness to God.
Then Paul states in verse 9 that although the Greek Christians cannot claim to be better Christians than the Jewish ones, neither are the Jewish believers better off. Then he quotes from two psalms (14 and 53) and Ecclesiastes 7:20 to the effect that no one is righteous (right with God, saved by their good works or ethical behavior, etc.). We are all rebellious.
Then Paul argues that the purpose of the law (Torah) was to silence the mouths of those living under it and to hold the entire world accountable to God. Through the Torah we can know what is sinful and learn that we ourselves are sinful (rebellious against God). The NRSV translates "... no human being will be justified in" the sight of God "by deeds prescribed in the law." However, Paul actually wrote "no flesh will be justified." The word "flesh" (sarx) is used by Paul in various of his letters always to mean human nature, that is, rebellious and proud, self-satisfied behavior.
In verse 21 Paul says that "apart from the law, the righteousness of God has been disclosed and is attested by the law and the prophets." (NRSV) This saying is clear just on the surface. It helps, however, to note that the Hebrew scriptures are called by the three sections of text: torah, navi'im ve ctuvim (Pentateuch or first five books of the Bible, prophets, and writings--Daniel, Esther, Ruth, Chronicles, etc.). Jesus drew his message from all three sections of the Hebrew bible. Paul says that both the first five books and the prophets, which sometimes are read as standing in tension with each other, attest to the fact that all of us are made right with God (only) through faith in Jesus Christ. God makes no distinction of persons on any basis. It is in the context of all this discussion that Paul says the quote often heard in church: "all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God." The next verse is part of the same sentence and thought unit: (but they are) justified (brought into right relationship with God) freely, as a gift, of God's grace (willingness to forgive if we will accept it) through the work of Jesus Christ. Paul interprets Jesus' work as being a redemption (making free by buying back). Then for those who still see God as needing to be appeased (not a position I take, but common enough now and back then) Paul says that Jesus, through his obedience that led to being executed on a cross provided whatever sacrifice of atonement may be needed, forgiving past sins and, through faithfulness to him, making people right with God.
In the last paragraph of the chapter (remember that the original text was written without paragraphs, chapters, verses, or even division between words) Paul concludes that, as a result of what he has presented, it becomes clear that no one has any grounds to boast (that they are better off with God as compared to anyone else by virtue of ethnicity or obeying laws). We are made right with God through faith apart from any works of the law; moreover circumcision is immaterial. God is the God of all peoples both Jews and all Gentiles (the rest of the world) and the only way to become right with God is faith in Jesus. The section ends with Paul echoing the teaching of Jesus: the Torah is not being overthrown, rather its true purpose is being revealed and brought to fruition.
One last matter. The Greek word for faith (pistis) also encloses the concept of faithfulness. Faith is not an assent to propositions. It is trusting Jesus to be, now and forever, who he said he was, which is recorded in the Gospels. This trust should lead to faithfulness in living. Easy to understand, hard to do.
The main thrust of this passage is verse 9: "What then? Are we any better off? No, not at all; for we have already charged that all, both Jews and Greeks, are under the power of sin." (NRSV) Paul is preparing to expound further on the theme of equality before God and that all need his forgiveness and redemption. First, though, in verses 1 through 8, he makes an argument that is baffling to us. I am asking your leave to try out a hypothesis: that Paul is walking through the arguments and accusations that the Christians in the Roman church had been throwing at each other and that had been reported to him.
This is just a hypothesis and should not be taken as any sort of definitive interpretation. Based on what Paul says in 1 through 8, I imagine that the Gentile or Greek Christians had questioned the advantage that the Jews claimed they had in knowing about or accessing the favor of God and the value of circumcision. Many Jews had been unfaithful to God through history so consequently that nullifies their advantage. No, replied the Jews, the sinfulness of our forefathers served to confirm that God is just. Well, then why should anyone be condemned as a sinner if God's glory is shown by it? replied the Gentiles.
If this is the topic of argument, then what Paul says in verses 1 to 8 makes eminent sense. The Jews have the advantage of receiving the "oracles" of God (his message) first, before anyone else. Although some were unfaithful, God is always faithful. This should obviate the entire argument between Jewish and Greek Christians. No one has any excuse for their rebellion against or unfaithfulness to God.
Then Paul states in verse 9 that although the Greek Christians cannot claim to be better Christians than the Jewish ones, neither are the Jewish believers better off. Then he quotes from two psalms (14 and 53) and Ecclesiastes 7:20 to the effect that no one is righteous (right with God, saved by their good works or ethical behavior, etc.). We are all rebellious.
Then Paul argues that the purpose of the law (Torah) was to silence the mouths of those living under it and to hold the entire world accountable to God. Through the Torah we can know what is sinful and learn that we ourselves are sinful (rebellious against God). The NRSV translates "... no human being will be justified in" the sight of God "by deeds prescribed in the law." However, Paul actually wrote "no flesh will be justified." The word "flesh" (sarx) is used by Paul in various of his letters always to mean human nature, that is, rebellious and proud, self-satisfied behavior.
In verse 21 Paul says that "apart from the law, the righteousness of God has been disclosed and is attested by the law and the prophets." (NRSV) This saying is clear just on the surface. It helps, however, to note that the Hebrew scriptures are called by the three sections of text: torah, navi'im ve ctuvim (Pentateuch or first five books of the Bible, prophets, and writings--Daniel, Esther, Ruth, Chronicles, etc.). Jesus drew his message from all three sections of the Hebrew bible. Paul says that both the first five books and the prophets, which sometimes are read as standing in tension with each other, attest to the fact that all of us are made right with God (only) through faith in Jesus Christ. God makes no distinction of persons on any basis. It is in the context of all this discussion that Paul says the quote often heard in church: "all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God." The next verse is part of the same sentence and thought unit: (but they are) justified (brought into right relationship with God) freely, as a gift, of God's grace (willingness to forgive if we will accept it) through the work of Jesus Christ. Paul interprets Jesus' work as being a redemption (making free by buying back). Then for those who still see God as needing to be appeased (not a position I take, but common enough now and back then) Paul says that Jesus, through his obedience that led to being executed on a cross provided whatever sacrifice of atonement may be needed, forgiving past sins and, through faithfulness to him, making people right with God.
In the last paragraph of the chapter (remember that the original text was written without paragraphs, chapters, verses, or even division between words) Paul concludes that, as a result of what he has presented, it becomes clear that no one has any grounds to boast (that they are better off with God as compared to anyone else by virtue of ethnicity or obeying laws). We are made right with God through faith apart from any works of the law; moreover circumcision is immaterial. God is the God of all peoples both Jews and all Gentiles (the rest of the world) and the only way to become right with God is faith in Jesus. The section ends with Paul echoing the teaching of Jesus: the Torah is not being overthrown, rather its true purpose is being revealed and brought to fruition.
One last matter. The Greek word for faith (pistis) also encloses the concept of faithfulness. Faith is not an assent to propositions. It is trusting Jesus to be, now and forever, who he said he was, which is recorded in the Gospels. This trust should lead to faithfulness in living. Easy to understand, hard to do.
Thursday, August 23, 2018
Romans 2
After establishing the main themes of his book-length essay, in chapter 2 Paul begins to dig into the implications of how God deals with people. Of course God will dispense judgment, but it falls on everyone equally. God has no favorites and so we are all in the same boat. The good news is that, throughout the Bible, both in the Hebrew scriptures and in the New Testament, the purpose of God is redemption.
The opening of this section can well be translated: So you have no excuse, all you people who judge; by judging others you condemn yourselves because you practice what you condemn. The exclamation often rendered "... o man" is o ánthrope. Anthropos is the word for human being, not a male person. That word is aner. One clear implication is that we men are not any better off nor less culpable because we are male. Paul repeats the word in verse 3. How seldom we stop to think about it in this light!
Verse 4 sums up what Paul is getting at: "Or do you despise the riches of his kindness and forbearance and patience? Do you not realize that God's kindness is meant to lead you to repentance?" (NRSV). Repentance is a key New Testament word. Both John the Baptist and Jesus opened their preaching by saying "Repent, for the Kingdom of God is at hand." Accordingly, it is important to understand clearly what repentance means. Our cultural concept (being sorry for what one has done) is inadequate. In Hebrew, the word for repentance (shuv) means to realize that you are on the wrong road and to turn aside or back to join the right road, the one that leads to God. It calls for changing your lifestyle. The Greek word (metanoia) implies to change your way of thinking, your intentions, your goals and aspirations. Taken together, this means that to repent, in the Biblical sense, is to change your way of life and your world view. This is huge. It's what Jesus meant when he said that if we want to be his disciples, we are to deny ourselves, take up our cross daily, and follow him. I take it to mean, obey Jesus, wherever he leads and whatever it costs. I don't know about you, but as far as I'm concerned, our usual religiousness just doesn't cut it.
Paul means that we all, in our disbelief, hardness of heart, and assurance of our own rightness of purpose, condemn ourselves. He says several times that the principle applies to the Jew first and then to the Gentile (literally "the Greek"). God shows favor first to the Jew and then to the Greek and condemns disobedience, first that of the Jew and then that of the Greek. In dealing with time-bound humanity, God started dealing with us at a certain point in time with a specific individual (Abraham). So the Jew is first in chronological order because God, in entering into our world, had to start somewhere. But since God has been dealing with the Jew for so much longer in human terms, the Jew has more responsibility and is more liable for disobeying God. The Gentile, if doing what is right because of what nature (God's creation) reveals and follows, then God honors that. However, the fact is that we are all disobedient and rebellious (sinners) and all equally in need of redemption.
Paul's discussion here is important to what he expounds in the following sections. We are all in need of Jesus, because "God, through Jesus Christ, will judge the secret thoughts of all (v. 16, NRSV). In the remainder of what we know as chapter 2, Paul reworks the preceding theme. The Jewish law and circumcision are really secondary. The last two verses read: "A person is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is true circumcision something external and physical. Rather, a person is a Jew who is one inwardly, and real circumcision is a matter of the heart -- it is spiritual and not literal. Such a person receives praise not from others but from God." There is a lot there. These verses should be read and reread carefully and their implication completely thought through.
I don't claim to deal with every verse, because this is not a detailed Bible commentary. I hope to highlight the main teaching of Paul and to explore the themes he sets out, interpreting them by what Jesus did and thought. Next up: Chapter 3 of Romans.
The opening of this section can well be translated: So you have no excuse, all you people who judge; by judging others you condemn yourselves because you practice what you condemn. The exclamation often rendered "... o man" is o ánthrope. Anthropos is the word for human being, not a male person. That word is aner. One clear implication is that we men are not any better off nor less culpable because we are male. Paul repeats the word in verse 3. How seldom we stop to think about it in this light!
Verse 4 sums up what Paul is getting at: "Or do you despise the riches of his kindness and forbearance and patience? Do you not realize that God's kindness is meant to lead you to repentance?" (NRSV). Repentance is a key New Testament word. Both John the Baptist and Jesus opened their preaching by saying "Repent, for the Kingdom of God is at hand." Accordingly, it is important to understand clearly what repentance means. Our cultural concept (being sorry for what one has done) is inadequate. In Hebrew, the word for repentance (shuv) means to realize that you are on the wrong road and to turn aside or back to join the right road, the one that leads to God. It calls for changing your lifestyle. The Greek word (metanoia) implies to change your way of thinking, your intentions, your goals and aspirations. Taken together, this means that to repent, in the Biblical sense, is to change your way of life and your world view. This is huge. It's what Jesus meant when he said that if we want to be his disciples, we are to deny ourselves, take up our cross daily, and follow him. I take it to mean, obey Jesus, wherever he leads and whatever it costs. I don't know about you, but as far as I'm concerned, our usual religiousness just doesn't cut it.
Paul means that we all, in our disbelief, hardness of heart, and assurance of our own rightness of purpose, condemn ourselves. He says several times that the principle applies to the Jew first and then to the Gentile (literally "the Greek"). God shows favor first to the Jew and then to the Greek and condemns disobedience, first that of the Jew and then that of the Greek. In dealing with time-bound humanity, God started dealing with us at a certain point in time with a specific individual (Abraham). So the Jew is first in chronological order because God, in entering into our world, had to start somewhere. But since God has been dealing with the Jew for so much longer in human terms, the Jew has more responsibility and is more liable for disobeying God. The Gentile, if doing what is right because of what nature (God's creation) reveals and follows, then God honors that. However, the fact is that we are all disobedient and rebellious (sinners) and all equally in need of redemption.
Paul's discussion here is important to what he expounds in the following sections. We are all in need of Jesus, because "God, through Jesus Christ, will judge the secret thoughts of all (v. 16, NRSV). In the remainder of what we know as chapter 2, Paul reworks the preceding theme. The Jewish law and circumcision are really secondary. The last two verses read: "A person is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is true circumcision something external and physical. Rather, a person is a Jew who is one inwardly, and real circumcision is a matter of the heart -- it is spiritual and not literal. Such a person receives praise not from others but from God." There is a lot there. These verses should be read and reread carefully and their implication completely thought through.
I don't claim to deal with every verse, because this is not a detailed Bible commentary. I hope to highlight the main teaching of Paul and to explore the themes he sets out, interpreting them by what Jesus did and thought. Next up: Chapter 3 of Romans.
Friday, August 10, 2018
Romans 1, part 2
Good interpretation always takes context into account. The church in Rome consisted of Gentile (that is, non-Jewish) believers in Christ and recently returned Jewish believers. The emperor had expelled all Jews from Rome some years earlier, and then the empire allowed them to return. The church, which for a good while was much more culturally homogeneous now was dealing again with thorny cultural differences among the members.
Some of the Jewish believers held that people had to become Jews first (the men circumcised as part of this conversion) before they could become Christian. So Paul writes a letter which is also a book-length essay to the church to argue that all human beings have the same status before God.
In verses 18 to the end of the chapter Paul seems to allude to the entire history of humans, from the time of creation. In the first chapters of Genesis, God creates Adam (Humankind) and Eve (Chava, which sounds almost like Chaia, that is Life). God sets them in the Garden of Eden (Delight) and gives them both freedom and the full run of the world except for eating the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil (that is, deciding for themselves what is right and wrong instead of trusting God to make that determination). The humans listen to the temptation spoken by a talking snake and disobey God.
From the beginning humans have gone their own way and preferred their own counsel to that of God, who, because he gave them freedom, instead of destroying everyone (Genesis 6 through 11), set out to redeem us from the evil consequences of our disobedience. Paul says that everyone is without excuse, because God can be known from the natural world. Unfortunately, he doesn't explain just how that works, but he point he is making is that this estrangement from God applies to everyone. We think we are wise, but in so doing we become fools (verse 22). People make their own gods out of wood or stone, and nowdays in some photographs and some movies, in the images of humans or animals, who are all mortal. preferring them to the one God who lives forever.
In the rest of the chapter, Paul makes a list of awful behaviors that have resulted from worshiping the creature(s) rather than the creator. Most commentators make a great deal of verses 24-27, which deal with sexual behavior, and gloss over the remainder (28-32). This is picking an choosing rather than reading in context.
When Paul condemns undisciplined sexual practices, he is summarizing (very briefly) what many ancient Greek and Roman ethicists and social critics had already said before him. This was nothing new to any of the listeners of this book in the church. Most would readily agree, though I can imagine the Jewish Christians at this point would feel quite satisfied with Paul's criticizing how the people of the ancient Mediterranean world lived, which was different from Jewish practice. However, were not the people of ancient Israel criticized often by the prophets for worshiping idols?
The discussion of sexual practices is preceded by mention of idolatry and followed by condemnation of "evil, covetousness, malice...envy, murder, strife, deceit, craftiness, they are gossips, slanderers, God-haters, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, rebellious towards parents, foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless" (New Revised Standard Version). Why do we not condemn envy and gossiping on the same level as sexual misconduct? The text certainly intends to condemn all of these practices equally. No human can claim to be blameless. This truth is fundamental to the rest of the book/letter.
As for sexual practices, Jesus set a bar higher than human wisdom can fathom. See Matthew 19: 1-12.
At this point we would do well to remember that it is God's prerogative, not ours, to judge and condemn. I would submit that Paul gives us this list for self examination. By the same token, it is clear throughout the entire Bible that God's purpose from the beginning is redemption. Oh, yes, and the teaching is that God is love.
Some of the Jewish believers held that people had to become Jews first (the men circumcised as part of this conversion) before they could become Christian. So Paul writes a letter which is also a book-length essay to the church to argue that all human beings have the same status before God.
In verses 18 to the end of the chapter Paul seems to allude to the entire history of humans, from the time of creation. In the first chapters of Genesis, God creates Adam (Humankind) and Eve (Chava, which sounds almost like Chaia, that is Life). God sets them in the Garden of Eden (Delight) and gives them both freedom and the full run of the world except for eating the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil (that is, deciding for themselves what is right and wrong instead of trusting God to make that determination). The humans listen to the temptation spoken by a talking snake and disobey God.
From the beginning humans have gone their own way and preferred their own counsel to that of God, who, because he gave them freedom, instead of destroying everyone (Genesis 6 through 11), set out to redeem us from the evil consequences of our disobedience. Paul says that everyone is without excuse, because God can be known from the natural world. Unfortunately, he doesn't explain just how that works, but he point he is making is that this estrangement from God applies to everyone. We think we are wise, but in so doing we become fools (verse 22). People make their own gods out of wood or stone, and nowdays in some photographs and some movies, in the images of humans or animals, who are all mortal. preferring them to the one God who lives forever.
In the rest of the chapter, Paul makes a list of awful behaviors that have resulted from worshiping the creature(s) rather than the creator. Most commentators make a great deal of verses 24-27, which deal with sexual behavior, and gloss over the remainder (28-32). This is picking an choosing rather than reading in context.
When Paul condemns undisciplined sexual practices, he is summarizing (very briefly) what many ancient Greek and Roman ethicists and social critics had already said before him. This was nothing new to any of the listeners of this book in the church. Most would readily agree, though I can imagine the Jewish Christians at this point would feel quite satisfied with Paul's criticizing how the people of the ancient Mediterranean world lived, which was different from Jewish practice. However, were not the people of ancient Israel criticized often by the prophets for worshiping idols?
The discussion of sexual practices is preceded by mention of idolatry and followed by condemnation of "evil, covetousness, malice...envy, murder, strife, deceit, craftiness, they are gossips, slanderers, God-haters, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, rebellious towards parents, foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless" (New Revised Standard Version). Why do we not condemn envy and gossiping on the same level as sexual misconduct? The text certainly intends to condemn all of these practices equally. No human can claim to be blameless. This truth is fundamental to the rest of the book/letter.
As for sexual practices, Jesus set a bar higher than human wisdom can fathom. See Matthew 19: 1-12.
At this point we would do well to remember that it is God's prerogative, not ours, to judge and condemn. I would submit that Paul gives us this list for self examination. By the same token, it is clear throughout the entire Bible that God's purpose from the beginning is redemption. Oh, yes, and the teaching is that God is love.
Saturday, August 4, 2018
Romans Chapter 1
First a word about chapter and verse divisions. When the books of the Bible were written, there were no chapter or verse divisions. As a matter of fact, there were no paragraph divisions and, as writing materials were very expensive, in order to save space and money there was no division between words, whether in Hebrew, Aramaic, or Greek. Where words divide is usually obvious. I know of only two or three places in all the Bible where there is a question as to where the words divide and the choice is not significant to the overall sense of the passage where it is found.
When in the Hebrew Scriptures, there are books numbered 1 and 2, such as First Samuel and Second Samuel, it was because the complete text did not fit onto one scroll and had to be continued onto a second scroll. Books were in scroll format in ancient times until, around the first century of our era, when someone got the idea of cutting the columns apart and then tying the resulting pages together. Thus the codex was born. It is the format we consider a book.
The Biblical texts were divided into chapters and verses in the Middle Ages to make finding passages easier. The idea was so practical, that it survived to our days. It is important to keep in mind that they are merely references introduced later for convenience. The texts should never be read as if each verse has a separate life and meaning. Rather texts should be read as a whole and interpreted accordingly.
Finally, we should always keep in mind that even in the first century, when the New Testament was written, few people owned books. They were just too expensive and rare until printing was invented, nearly fifteen hundred years later. Most people never had the text of Romans in their hands to read alone. Rather, as a letter to a specific group of people, it was read out loud in meetings. No wonder, then that Paul repeats himself and deals with his handful of topics from numerous angles. He paints enough different word pictures to make sense to just about every hearer and hopefully "get through" to all.
In chapter one of Romans, after the greeting and beginning in verse 8, Paul expresses his desire to visit Rome. He has heard of their faith and in his prayers always thanks God for that and intercedes for them. He makes clear that his intention of visiting them is firm, so that he can strengthen them in some way as well as doing the same among all nations (ethnic groups-there were no nations as we think of them back then). Then he makes an intriguing statement: he owes both Greek-speaking people and speakers of other languages (barbaroi), wise and not wise. Strictly speaking for myself, I interpret that, as a minimum, Paul is saying that God has commissioned him to tell the gospel of Jesus to all nations, inasmuch as it is possible for Paul to do so. He is saying he still has a lot of work to do to make that happen. There certainly may be further meanings to this saying which escape me.
In verses 16 and 17 Paul mentions the pairing of Jews and Greeks for the first time. He says that he is proud to proclaim the gospel (the high points of the life of Jesus, especially his death on the cross and return to life on the third day), calling it the power of God for salvation of the Jews first and then of the Greeks. Salvation means the redeeming power and intent of God to forgive our sins and bring us into fellowship with him and to obedience because we trust Jesus to be always who he said he was. Faith should be read as absolute trust because we know the character of God through Jesus. That is why Paul says that God's ethical goodness and power (that is, righteousness) is revealed from first to last and at all times through faith: God's faithfulness to us calling us to be faithful. Therefore, Paul concludes (and this is his theme): the righteous persons are those who trust. Those who trust will find life.
In my next post I will say a word as to why "to the Jews first and then to the Greeks" and I plan to deal with the remainder of Chapter 1.
When in the Hebrew Scriptures, there are books numbered 1 and 2, such as First Samuel and Second Samuel, it was because the complete text did not fit onto one scroll and had to be continued onto a second scroll. Books were in scroll format in ancient times until, around the first century of our era, when someone got the idea of cutting the columns apart and then tying the resulting pages together. Thus the codex was born. It is the format we consider a book.
The Biblical texts were divided into chapters and verses in the Middle Ages to make finding passages easier. The idea was so practical, that it survived to our days. It is important to keep in mind that they are merely references introduced later for convenience. The texts should never be read as if each verse has a separate life and meaning. Rather texts should be read as a whole and interpreted accordingly.
Finally, we should always keep in mind that even in the first century, when the New Testament was written, few people owned books. They were just too expensive and rare until printing was invented, nearly fifteen hundred years later. Most people never had the text of Romans in their hands to read alone. Rather, as a letter to a specific group of people, it was read out loud in meetings. No wonder, then that Paul repeats himself and deals with his handful of topics from numerous angles. He paints enough different word pictures to make sense to just about every hearer and hopefully "get through" to all.
In chapter one of Romans, after the greeting and beginning in verse 8, Paul expresses his desire to visit Rome. He has heard of their faith and in his prayers always thanks God for that and intercedes for them. He makes clear that his intention of visiting them is firm, so that he can strengthen them in some way as well as doing the same among all nations (ethnic groups-there were no nations as we think of them back then). Then he makes an intriguing statement: he owes both Greek-speaking people and speakers of other languages (barbaroi), wise and not wise. Strictly speaking for myself, I interpret that, as a minimum, Paul is saying that God has commissioned him to tell the gospel of Jesus to all nations, inasmuch as it is possible for Paul to do so. He is saying he still has a lot of work to do to make that happen. There certainly may be further meanings to this saying which escape me.
In verses 16 and 17 Paul mentions the pairing of Jews and Greeks for the first time. He says that he is proud to proclaim the gospel (the high points of the life of Jesus, especially his death on the cross and return to life on the third day), calling it the power of God for salvation of the Jews first and then of the Greeks. Salvation means the redeeming power and intent of God to forgive our sins and bring us into fellowship with him and to obedience because we trust Jesus to be always who he said he was. Faith should be read as absolute trust because we know the character of God through Jesus. That is why Paul says that God's ethical goodness and power (that is, righteousness) is revealed from first to last and at all times through faith: God's faithfulness to us calling us to be faithful. Therefore, Paul concludes (and this is his theme): the righteous persons are those who trust. Those who trust will find life.
In my next post I will say a word as to why "to the Jews first and then to the Greeks" and I plan to deal with the remainder of Chapter 1.
Tuesday, July 31, 2018
Introduction to Romans
Every week for a month or two I will be writing a post on the New Testament book of Romans. After that I will continue with other books from the Scriptures.
Introduction to Romans
The book titled To the Romans (Prous Romaious in Greek) is a letter and a book-length essay.
Romans is clearly a letter because it begins with the elements of classical Greek and Roman letters though, as we shall see, greatly expanded. A typical letter two thousand years ago would begin as follows:
Romulus Quintus (the writer)
to Augustus Tertius (the recipient)
Xairen (grace: the normal greeting in Greek, the language of the eastern Roman Empire)
Romans begins "Paul, a slave of Jesus Christ," followed by a sentence of praise to God the Father and the Son who gave him, Paul, the job of apostle, that is, one sent to the peoples of the world to proclaim the good news of the story of Jesus. The opening ends with grace, as customary, but not just grace in general or grace as a formula, but the grace of God. Grace becomes the theme of the letter, as Paul insists that we are put right with God, not by our beliefs, nor by our rites or ethics, but by God's grace which anyone may receive through faith, meaning to trust Jesus to be always who he said he was when he was on earth, and therefore follow him in obedience because we love him.
Romans also ends with a leave-taking that is normal for ancient letters. It includes greetings from people the recipients would know and a benediction. Letters usually are relatively short (see the letters of John or Paul's letter to Philemon. Romans is the first letter in the New Testament because they are mostly arranged from the longest to the shortest by author.
Romans is, for all practical purposes, a book-length work, specifically a book-length essay because it essentially deals with one or two ideas: (1) no one is righteous enough to make God owe him or her God's favor and (2) it is trusting God that makes us right with him, which is the definition of faith. The person who lives by faith of this kind will find life.
The French produce many book-length essays. Jacques Derrida's On Grammatology, a largely misunderstood book in America academia, is a good example. He spends the first half of his work urging the reader to give up ontological logocentrism (big words that mean simply considering books as scriptures coming from an unquestionable authority, and he was not talking about Bible, but rather about people's attitude towards literature in general). Once he had made the point in as different ways and with as many examples as possible, he proceeded to investigate which book by Rousseau, Emile or another one, was written first, because the order of writing determined what the author meant to say. This examination makes up the remainder of the book. American literary academics, not being used to book-length essays, misunderstood what Derrida had to say and gave us deconstructionism. To go further into this matter exceeds the scope of this blog. Suffice it to say that you can look up deconstructionism if you really want to and that we can be glad the movement has run its course.
One more example: Marshall McLuhan was also given to writing book-length essays. He was an Anglo-Canadian, but Canada has more tolerance of the French way of thinking than does the US. In The Mechanical Bride his one point is that all advertising is totalitarian and destructive of traditional cultures. And he was basing his observations on print advertising before television became big. In The Gutenberg Galaxy his one major point is that print made people of the modern period think linearly and come up with outlines, programs, and technology. He remarked that Romans thought of themselves as ancient Greeks, Medieval people thought of themselves as ancient Romans, Modern people thought of themselves as Medieval, and the we post-moderns think of ourselves as Modern. Finally, in Understanding Media he defines radio as a hot (high definition) medium and television as a a cold (low definition) medium and he says that the medium is the message. This saying means simply that the effect the medium (whether print, radio, or television) has on the user is greater than any content that it conveys. If we read book-length essays as such, we don't expect every single paragraph to say something different and we do not become frustrated with the text.
Armed with the understanding of what a book-length essay is, we can now go back to Romans. Paul has one major idea to make in his book-length letter: Jews and non-Jews are on the same footing before God, who approves of those who live by trust in Jesus. Neither belonging to an ethnicity nor holding certain tenets nor obeying a list of rules deriving from the Torah will suffice. He makes these points repeatedly, coming at them from various angles and using many different stories, arguments, and quotes from scripture.
Next week I will deal with the first chapter of the essay we call Romans.
Introduction to Romans
The book titled To the Romans (Prous Romaious in Greek) is a letter and a book-length essay.
Romans is clearly a letter because it begins with the elements of classical Greek and Roman letters though, as we shall see, greatly expanded. A typical letter two thousand years ago would begin as follows:
Romulus Quintus (the writer)
to Augustus Tertius (the recipient)
Xairen (grace: the normal greeting in Greek, the language of the eastern Roman Empire)
Romans begins "Paul, a slave of Jesus Christ," followed by a sentence of praise to God the Father and the Son who gave him, Paul, the job of apostle, that is, one sent to the peoples of the world to proclaim the good news of the story of Jesus. The opening ends with grace, as customary, but not just grace in general or grace as a formula, but the grace of God. Grace becomes the theme of the letter, as Paul insists that we are put right with God, not by our beliefs, nor by our rites or ethics, but by God's grace which anyone may receive through faith, meaning to trust Jesus to be always who he said he was when he was on earth, and therefore follow him in obedience because we love him.
Romans also ends with a leave-taking that is normal for ancient letters. It includes greetings from people the recipients would know and a benediction. Letters usually are relatively short (see the letters of John or Paul's letter to Philemon. Romans is the first letter in the New Testament because they are mostly arranged from the longest to the shortest by author.
Romans is, for all practical purposes, a book-length work, specifically a book-length essay because it essentially deals with one or two ideas: (1) no one is righteous enough to make God owe him or her God's favor and (2) it is trusting God that makes us right with him, which is the definition of faith. The person who lives by faith of this kind will find life.
The French produce many book-length essays. Jacques Derrida's On Grammatology, a largely misunderstood book in America academia, is a good example. He spends the first half of his work urging the reader to give up ontological logocentrism (big words that mean simply considering books as scriptures coming from an unquestionable authority, and he was not talking about Bible, but rather about people's attitude towards literature in general). Once he had made the point in as different ways and with as many examples as possible, he proceeded to investigate which book by Rousseau, Emile or another one, was written first, because the order of writing determined what the author meant to say. This examination makes up the remainder of the book. American literary academics, not being used to book-length essays, misunderstood what Derrida had to say and gave us deconstructionism. To go further into this matter exceeds the scope of this blog. Suffice it to say that you can look up deconstructionism if you really want to and that we can be glad the movement has run its course.
One more example: Marshall McLuhan was also given to writing book-length essays. He was an Anglo-Canadian, but Canada has more tolerance of the French way of thinking than does the US. In The Mechanical Bride his one point is that all advertising is totalitarian and destructive of traditional cultures. And he was basing his observations on print advertising before television became big. In The Gutenberg Galaxy his one major point is that print made people of the modern period think linearly and come up with outlines, programs, and technology. He remarked that Romans thought of themselves as ancient Greeks, Medieval people thought of themselves as ancient Romans, Modern people thought of themselves as Medieval, and the we post-moderns think of ourselves as Modern. Finally, in Understanding Media he defines radio as a hot (high definition) medium and television as a a cold (low definition) medium and he says that the medium is the message. This saying means simply that the effect the medium (whether print, radio, or television) has on the user is greater than any content that it conveys. If we read book-length essays as such, we don't expect every single paragraph to say something different and we do not become frustrated with the text.
Armed with the understanding of what a book-length essay is, we can now go back to Romans. Paul has one major idea to make in his book-length letter: Jews and non-Jews are on the same footing before God, who approves of those who live by trust in Jesus. Neither belonging to an ethnicity nor holding certain tenets nor obeying a list of rules deriving from the Torah will suffice. He makes these points repeatedly, coming at them from various angles and using many different stories, arguments, and quotes from scripture.
Next week I will deal with the first chapter of the essay we call Romans.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)