During the summer I became fascinated with St. Paul’s epistle to the Romans. This was largely due to two factors: 1. the fact that I became obsessed with Pauline studies and Pauline literature due to taking several classes with the Esteemed Doctor Smith. 2. It was my job to teach an adult Bible Study on Romans while in Minnesota, and through this Bible Study I had to get well acquainted with the letter. I quickly fell in love with it. This adoration led me to begin writing an exegesis on St. Paul’s epistle to the Romans. I have completed the actual exegesis—at 247 pages—and am currently editing and revising the rough draft. The original title for the work was “St. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans: An Exegetical Analysis,” but I renamed it to “Re:Imagining Romans.”
This title is not only catchy but also fitting. The exegesis takes a route of interpretation upon Romans that, while not original, has been generally left untouched. The general consensus amongst theologians and biblical scholars—note: many biblical scholars agree with my interpretation; and I take pride in the fact that this interpretation evolved with my study of the text and on my own accords, and only later did I become aware that other scholars took the route I took—is that Romans is Paul’s doctrinal treatise, an exposition of his gospel for the Roman Christians in anticipation of his missionary work there. It is this mindset that paved the way to the “Romans Road Path of Salvation” that so many of us are taught in Sunday School. However, while Pauline theology is present, I believe that Romans is much more practical and pastoral in scope (even intoxicatingly so). It is my belief that there are four currents that run through Romans:
1. The Reconciliation of Jew and Gentile in the Roman Church
2. Opposition to Judaizers in the Roman Church
3. Opposition to Antinomians in the Roman Church
4. “The Jewish Question”
I believe that Paul has eloquently structured his letter in such a way that it forms a pseudo-chiasm, with the items of greatest importance in the Inclusio or “bookends” of the pseudo-chiasm:
Romans 1.18-3.19: The Reconciliation of Jew and Gentile
In this pseudo-chiasm, the items of greatest importance are, as aforementioned, the Inclusio, or “bookends”: The Reconciliation of Jew and Gentile. Thus of primary importance to Paul in regards to the church of Rome is the unity between the different ethnic classes. Unity is of primary importance elsewhere in his letters, and it makes sense that it would be of primary importance in Rome (the ethnic “divisions” between the Jews and Gentiles probably arose from events and circumstances following Emperor Claudius’ expelling of the Jews from Rome in A.D. 49).
“What happened to 1.1-17 and 15.14-16.27?” 1.1-17 is the classic introductory material found in ancient letters, including the propositio (Rom 1.16-17), and 15.14-16.27 form the classic benediction material found in classic letters (interestingly, 16.1-23[24] may not in fact be a part of the original letter; but I deal with that in the book).
This title is not only catchy but also fitting. The exegesis takes a route of interpretation upon Romans that, while not original, has been generally left untouched. The general consensus amongst theologians and biblical scholars—note: many biblical scholars agree with my interpretation; and I take pride in the fact that this interpretation evolved with my study of the text and on my own accords, and only later did I become aware that other scholars took the route I took—is that Romans is Paul’s doctrinal treatise, an exposition of his gospel for the Roman Christians in anticipation of his missionary work there. It is this mindset that paved the way to the “Romans Road Path of Salvation” that so many of us are taught in Sunday School. However, while Pauline theology is present, I believe that Romans is much more practical and pastoral in scope (even intoxicatingly so). It is my belief that there are four currents that run through Romans:
1. The Reconciliation of Jew and Gentile in the Roman Church
2. Opposition to Judaizers in the Roman Church
3. Opposition to Antinomians in the Roman Church
4. “The Jewish Question”
I believe that Paul has eloquently structured his letter in such a way that it forms a pseudo-chiasm, with the items of greatest importance in the Inclusio or “bookends” of the pseudo-chiasm:
Romans 1.18-3.19: The Reconciliation of Jew and Gentile
Romans 3.20-5.21: Opposition to JudaizersRomans 12.1-15.13: The Reconciliation of Jew and Gentile
Romans 6.1-8.39: Opposition to Antinomians
Romans 9.1-11.36: The Jewish Question
In this pseudo-chiasm, the items of greatest importance are, as aforementioned, the Inclusio, or “bookends”: The Reconciliation of Jew and Gentile. Thus of primary importance to Paul in regards to the church of Rome is the unity between the different ethnic classes. Unity is of primary importance elsewhere in his letters, and it makes sense that it would be of primary importance in Rome (the ethnic “divisions” between the Jews and Gentiles probably arose from events and circumstances following Emperor Claudius’ expelling of the Jews from Rome in A.D. 49).
“What happened to 1.1-17 and 15.14-16.27?” 1.1-17 is the classic introductory material found in ancient letters, including the propositio (Rom 1.16-17), and 15.14-16.27 form the classic benediction material found in classic letters (interestingly, 16.1-23[24] may not in fact be a part of the original letter; but I deal with that in the book).
No comments:
Post a Comment