When Paul says that the Gentiles do what the law requires because of the law written in their hearts, who is he talking about? Righteous pagans? Christians (as NT Wright and others have recently argued)? There seems to be an obvious third alternative: That is, Gentiles who are heirs of the . . . . Continue Reading »
What does Paul mean by “Greek”? Though often taken as simply synonymous with “Gentile,” it seems instead to have the more specific force of “Hellene,” someone who is part of the Greco-Roman empire. ETHNOS means simply “nation,” and refers to nations . . . . Continue Reading »
On Romans 2:1: In an earlier post, I pointed to the “exchange” that Paul describes in Rom 2:1, namely, that the one who judges another seeks to place the other under the judgment of God and thereby to escape God’s judgment on himself. Paul says that this in fact has the opposite . . . . Continue Reading »
What about taking “day of wrath” in Romans 2 as AD 70? Some arguments: 1) Dunn lists the verses that use similar phrases for “wrath and indignation” and “tribulation and distress,” and most of them are about historical judgments on Israel. There’s a cluster . . . . Continue Reading »
In the same issue of JSNT, Philip Esler examines ancient oleiculture to illumine Paul’s use of the olive tree image in Romans 11. When he describes branches being grafted into an olive tree, Paul refers to a common practice. But the normal practice is to graft cultivated olive branches onto a . . . . Continue Reading »
I’ve been running a little experiment: Working on Romans 2, I’m trying to determine who Paul’s interlocutor is, whether that can even be determined at all. Is he addressing a Jew or a Gentile or a colorless hypothetical human-in-general? My suspicion is that it’s a Jew, and . . . . Continue Reading »
“To the Jew first”: The first time this is used in Romans, it’s good news for Jews, because Paul says that the gospel is the power of God to salvation to the Jew first (1:18). The next time he uses the phrase, things are a bit different. He has been exploring and explaining the . . . . Continue Reading »
Romans 2:1 forms a rather neat chiasm, particularly if we follow the Greek word order: Therefore, you are without excuse O man everyone who judges for in that you judge (KRINO) the other yourself you condemn (KATAKRINO) for the same things you practice one who judges The exchange at the center is . . . . Continue Reading »
Jouette Bassler’s article on “Divine Impartiality in Romans” (NovT, 1984) also includes a neat discussion of the structure of Romans 2:12-29. She points out the sequence of terms as Paul introduces the issues of law (NOMOS) and circumcision (PERITOME). “Law” first . . . . Continue Reading »
Jouette Bassler’s 1984 article “Divine Impartiality in Romans” ( Novum Testamentum ) present structural arguments for saying that the section beginning in Rom 1:16-18 runs through the middle of chapter 2. This is evident from the repetition of the verb prasso in 1:32 and again in . . . . Continue Reading »
Subscribe
Latest Issue
Support First Things
