If you want to get into an argument, post something on the apostle Paul\u2014especially the book of Romans.<\/p>\n
Well, I don\u2019t [really] want to get into an argument, but here it goes anyway.<\/p>\n
As I read Romans, I don\u2019t walk away thinking, \u201cMy, what a carefully\u00a0planned out letter.\u201d I think more, \u201cPaul\u00a0is winging it.\u201d<\/p>\n
I know that might not seem very\u00a0reverent, especially since\u00a0Romans is often thought of as the primo example of Paul at his difficult yet nevertheless logically consistent best, where he once and for all lays out the basics of the gospel for all to hear and for all time.<\/p>\n
Not that Romans is a jumbled mess\u2014may it never be <\/em>(see what I did there?)\u2014but to me\u00a0Romans reads more like Paul is in creative-problem-solving mode for Roman Christians facing a pressing problem (how Jews and Gentiles make up one people of God<\/a> Here\u2019s what I mean. Look at how Paul uses the Old Testament, which he does throughout the letter. It doesn\u2019t take long before you\u00a0get the impression that Paul is riffing, For example:<\/p>\n 1. Abraham\u00a0was declared righteous by faith (Genesis 15) before the command to circumcision (Genesis 17) and long before the Law of Moses. Hence, according to\u00a0Paul, Abraham models that it\u2019s always been about faith and\u00a0not\u00a0<\/em>law keeping<\/strong> as the mark of being the true people of God (Romans\u00a04).\u00a0This is somewhat of a forced, selective, reading of the Abraham story (especially as he is hailed as a law keeper\u00a0before Moses<\/em> in Genesis 26:4-5).<\/p>\n 2. Paul claims that, all along,<\/em>\u00a0Gentiles have been called by God right alongside of Jews<\/strong> and supports that claim by a\u00a0string\u00a0of\u00a0Old Testament citations (Romans 9:25-29). But those passages (from Hosea and Isaiah) are not referring to\u00a0Gentile<\/em> inclusion but the restoration\u00a0of repentant Israel.<\/em><\/p>\n 3. To support his claim that Christ is the \u201cend\u201d (better \u201cculmination\u201d or \u201ccompletion\u201d) of the law, Paul pits two passages from Torah against each other<\/strong>. Leviticus 18:5, which speaks of obedience to Torah, is a \u201crighteousness that comes from the law.\u201d But the \u201crighteousness that comes by faith\u201d is about Christ, which Paul sees in Deuteronomy 30:11-14 (Romans 10:4-13). The problem is that the passage in Deuteronomy is about as strong a language as one can find about the dire consequences for\u00a0not keeping the Law of Moses. <\/em>Paul bypasses the clear meaning of that text\u2014Torah obedience\u2014in favor of a creative Christ-centered reading that marginalizes\u00a0Torah obedience.<\/p>\n 4. In Romans 11:26-27, Paul cites Isaiah 59:20-21 but changes one crucial word<\/strong> to allow him to make his theological point. In context, Isaiah speaks of God (the Deliverer) coming to Zion<\/em> (Israel) to deliver them from Babylonian captivity. Paul, however, uses this passage to speak of a different kind of deliverance that will come not\u00a0to<\/strong> Zion<\/em> but\u00a0out of<\/strong> Zion\u2014<\/em>meaning (I think) that the deliverance of both Jews and Gentiles originates with a Jewish\u00a0<\/em>Jesus.<\/p>\n We could go on.<\/p>\n Paul appeals to\u00a0the Old Testament in order to support what is hardly an obvious notion to Jews at the time: that Jesus, a crucified and risen son of a working-class family, is the long-hoped for Jewish messiah\u00a0and<\/em> that Gentiles\u00a0as Gentiles\u00a0<\/em>are full and equal partners along with Jews<\/strong> in this messianic age\u2014meaning the only requirement is faith\/trust in Jesus and not \u201czeal\u201d for Torah (Romans 10:2-4).<\/p>\n Preaching that message is one thing. Saying, as Paul does relentlessly in Romans, that that message is already encoded into the Old Testament (provided one reads against the grain and\/or beneath the surface) is something else altogether. Hence, Paul\u2019s necessarily\u00a0<\/em>creative handling of Israel\u2019s scriptures and traditions.<\/p>\n Making this sort of argument raised an even deeper problem: If encoded in the Old Testament is the gospel of Jesus\u2014where Torah is decentered and the door is flung open to the Gentiles without their needing to uphold things like circumcision and dietary laws (both of which are commanded in the Old Testament)\u2014then what\u2019s so special about being a Jew?<\/strong><\/p>\n Paul\u2019s passionate argument for Jesus is too good<\/em>:\u00a0<\/em>it puts Jesus in the place of Torah<\/strong> as central\u00a0to God\u2019s plan, thus calling into question the central place Torah plays in Israel\u2019s scriptures and traditions. He has painted himself into a corner that he knows he has to get out of, especially if he hopes to keep his Jewish audience on board. Two\u00a0examples:<\/p>\n First, in chapters\u00a01-2<\/strong>, Paul passionately levels the playing field between Jews and Gentiles, that neither has the upper hand. In fact\u00a0\u201creal circumcision is a matter of the heart\u2014it is spiritual and not literal\u201d (Romans 2:29). With this kind of rhetoric, Paul is right to voice an anticipated question (3:1): \u201cThen what advantage has the Jew? Or what is the value of circumcision? Much, in every way.\u201d His answer (3:2) seems inadequate\u00a0for truly answering the objection<\/strong>: \u201cFor in the first place, the Jews were entrusted with the oracles of God [Torah].\u201d<\/p>\n OK, they have the Bible. Anything else? There is no \u201cin the second and\u00a0third place.\u201d And then he flips back in verse 9 to say that Jews really aren\u2019t better off at all, since \u201cboth Jews and Greeks are under the power of sin.\u201d It\u2019s not really clear where Paul stands on the true advantage of Jews have now that Jesus is raised from the dead.<\/p>\n Second, in chapter 6<\/strong> Paul talks about the power of sin to which the unbeliever\u00a0is enslaved, and from which one is freed by the gospel. In\u00a07:1-7, however, Paul uses the same rhetoric to describe not sin but\u00a0the Law of Moses\u2014<\/em>to which one is enslaved and from which we are \u201cdischarged\u201d and given \u201cnew life of the Spirit\u201d rather than being \u201cslaves . . under the written code\u201d (7:6). So it seems that sin and Law are two sides of the same coin for Paul<\/strong>, which is\u00a0a shocking argument from a Jewish point of view.<\/p>\n And so Paul anticipates this objection and asks yet another rhetorical question (7:7), \u201cWhat then should we say? That the law is sin?\u201d Paul answers, \u201cBy no means!\u201d but commentators (at least the ones I\u2019ve read) see in the following verses (8-13) a rather unsatisfying attempt by Paul to extricate himself from he seems to have just done, namely equating law and sin, and thus potentially throwing the Old Testament under the\u00a0bus. (It doesn\u2019t help Paul\u2019s case that earlier, in 5:20, he sums up the law\u2019s value as\u00a0revealing the depth of sin rather than being a solution.)<\/p>\n Paul has a few other such moments in the letter where he seems to be backpedaling. By the force of his excitement to preach the gospel, perhaps Paul ran ahead of himself.<\/p>\n Think about it. The more airtight Paul makes his argument (by citing the Old Testament) that it has been God\u2019s plan all along<\/em> to show\u00a0no partiality<\/em> (2:11;\u00a03:21-31) to Jews, the more Jewish followers of Jesus might want to ask, \u201cSo, was all that back then about keeping the covenant just a big smokescreen? And what about all those Jews over the centuries who lived their lives according to Torah, some of whom were martyred\u2014does that mean\u00a0nothing<\/em>?\u201d<\/p>\n And so Paul finds himself having to defend God against that charge. His hand is forced by the resurrection of Jesus and he has to work it through\u2014sometimes more clear and compelling, sometimes less so.<\/p>\n What\u2019s my point?<\/p>\n I have no problem reading the book of Romans and watching Paul work through\u2014from the ground up, not the top down\u2014a thorny problem caused by a crucified and risen messiah and the implications that has for both Jews and Gentiles.<\/p>\n I find a connection to Paul by seeing him\u00a0work through the implications of the gospel, which\u00a0is both born out of the\u00a0scriptures and traditions of Judaism and that also moves in an utterly unexpected direction.<\/p>\n I like watching Paul deal with paradox and mystery and get tied up a bit trying to explain it. That\u00a0tells us something about the nature of scripture that models that process<\/a> ******<\/p>\n I teach Romans now and then at Eastern (including this semester), and for those interested, here are the text books I use.<\/p>\n Luke Timothy Johnson, Reading Romans: A Literary and Theological Commentary<\/em> <\/a> Katherine Grieb,\u00a0The Story of Romans: A Narrative Defense of God\u2019s Righteousness<\/a><\/em>![\"\"](\"http:\/\/ir-na.amazon-adsystem.com\/e\/ir?t=inspirandinca-20&l=as2&o=1&a=0830821864\")
![\"Paul's](\"https:\/\/peteenns.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/03\/Paul_Winging_It-1024x753.jpg\")
<\/p>\nPaul\u2019s argument threatened to call into question the very faithfulness, justice, and righteousness of God. \u201cIf this is the kind of about-face God can pull, is this God trustworthy?\u201d Which is to ask, \u201cIs this\u00a0God<\/em> at all?\u201d<\/h2>\n
![\"\"](\"http:\/\/ir-na.amazon-adsystem.com\/e\/ir?t=inspirandinca-20&l=as2&o=1&a=0062272039\")
![\"\"](\"http:\/\/ir-na.amazon-adsystem.com\/e\/ir?t=inspirandinca-20&l=as2&o=1&a=1573122769\")
![\"\"](\"http:\/\/ir-na.amazon-adsystem.com\/e\/ir?t=inspirandinca-20&l=as2&o=1&a=066422525X\")
![\"\"](\"http:\/\/ir-na.amazon-adsystem.com\/e\/ir?t=inspirandinca-20&l=as2&o=1&a=080286290X\")
<\/em>\u00a0This academic but lucidly written volume pushes my students to grapple with some pretty serious Romans scholarship, but more importantly helps them see the centrality of the resurrection for Paul\u2019s thinking: \u201cIn Romans, the resurrection of Jesus becomes Paul\u2019s key for demonstrating that the promises contained in the Scriptures have been fulfilled in the Christ event. Once we recognize that the gospel is couched\u00a0in terms of the scriptually-attested resurrection of Jesus, we have the map we need for finding our way through Romans\u201d (p. 8).<\/p>\n<\/div>\n