Rowe: NT754 (b)
Text Analysis 2
Romans 5:1-11
NT754 – Dr. Kavin Rowe, March 6, 2013
I. OUTLINE (Romans 5:1-11)
"Hope for Peace with God Through Justification"
- Rejoice in hope despite sufferings (vv.1-2)
- Hope reinforced by being grounded in God's love (vv.3-4)
- Evidences for the love of God (vv.6-8)
- Rejoice in God for we are reconciled (vv.9-11)
II. EXEGETICAL ISSUES
A. Boundaries and Placement of the Pericope. (5:1-11)
1) Placement: In ch.3, Paul claims that justification is by faith, and uses ch.4 to illustrate this with the example of Abraham. This pericope, then, serves to drill deeper (hence the use of "therefore" in v.1) into Paul's explanation of the particularity of justification before he moves into its universality in vv.12-21 to close out ch.5.
2) Structure: Martin Luther, the 16th century reformer, adds v.12 to the pericope identified here, and adds a lengthy commentary to defend this structuring of the text this way in order to associate it with original sin.[1] Matthew Henry, commenting in the 18th century, suggested the pericope could be split in two, with vv.1-5 focusing upon "The happy effects of justification through faith in the righteousness of Christ" and vv.6-11 defending Paul's argument "That we are reconciled by [Christ's] blood." In our own century, N.T. Wright uses the same two-fold structure, calling the first five verses "Peace, Patience, & Hope," and the trailing six verses "The Death of the Messiah and the Love of God."[2] John Murray similarly splits this pericope between vv.5 & 6, but seems to do so only for the sake of simplicity,[3] whereas Karl Barth[4] and James Dunn[5] makes no such distinction (with Barth calling the entire pericope "The New Man" and Dunn, "The new perspective on the believer's present and future").
B. Textual Problems.
Tenses are very important in this pericope, especially those used for salvation and justification. Paul is trying to make it clear that what God did in Christ is still being worked out in the lives of believers but has not yet reached consummation. Wright calls this Paul's "inaugurated eschatology,"[6] and what others have called the "already-not-yet" nature of God's work.
C. Translation Problems.
"Saved" in vv.9-10 is future tense, as in not yet saved, and will come at a time Paul does not know. However, if we have already been "justified," it seems that salvation (or something like it) occurred in the past, has its effect right now, and will be finalized sometime in the future. Or perhaps there is a sharp contrast between being "saved" and being "justified"…? Furthermore, why does "justification" only appear twice in these 11 verses, if it is presumed by commentators to be Paul's special concern in this portion of his epistle?[7] For commentators to refer to justification in their titling of this pericope,[8] and it appearing only twice therein, seems noteworthy.
D. Analysis of Key Words.
1) "die" [apothnesko, 599][9] – vv. 6, 7(x2), 8, & "death" [thanatos 2288]) in v.10. Occurs more than any other single word in this pericope. However, it is occasion for joy and faith, for it was Christ's that has made us right with God. After all, "hope," "rejoice," and "salvation," when taken together, easily outnumber the frequent use of "die" and "death."
2) "reconcile" [katallasso, 2644] – v.10(x2), & "reconciliation" [katallage, 2643] in v.11. According to Mounce's Greek Dictionary, 'to change or exchange' (what is unclear).[10] When used by Paul in reference to God in this pericope, the verb form is always active. Elsewhere, when Paul uses it in reference to humans, the verb is passive.
3) "justified" [dikaioo, 1344] – vv. 1 & 9. To vindicate or make guiltless. The New Living Translation[11] interprets dikaioo as "made right," whereas most other translations stick with some form of "justification." Luther has done much to confuse this term for the modern reader, but for Paul there seems to be a much clearer contrast between this and salvation (see #4 below).
4) "saved" [sozo, 4982] – vv. 9 & 10. To be rescued from harm and preserved from injury. Used in close relation with "justified" in this pericope. Could make sense if harm and guilt are also very distinct for Paul, for salvation deals with harm and justification deals with guilt.
4) "rejoice" [kauchaomai, 2744]– vv. 2, 3 & 11. Another word used with surprising frequency in this text, it bookends the pericope and places the focus on death in its proper place. We rejoice in hope (v.2), in our sufferings (v.3), and in God (v.11). "Hope" occurs three times as well (vv.2, 4, 5), though not in such a surprising way as rejoicing in suffering.
E. Form-Critical Issues. N/A
F. Use of the OT.
1) v.5 & Psalm 119:116 ("Uphold me according to your promise, that I may live, and let me not be put to shame in my hope.") – Paul is evoking the Psalmist's reference to hope and shame. Hope is uncertain, and when it proves poorly placed, it can be embarrassing. The Psalm records Israel's plea that their hope in God not be in vain, that they not be embarrassed before the gentiles. Paul assures the Romans as he would Israel, that hoping in God will not be embarrassing, for God has, does, and will respond by filling our hearts with love.
2) v.6 & Hosea 13:9 ("He destroys you, O Israel, for you are against me, against your helper.") – Destroying God's enemies is God's prerogative, but God does not destroy us, even though we are weak and helpless. In fact, Christ himself is destroyed on the cross for ungodly sinners. Paul even calls the Roman church (and, by extension, the universal church) "God's enemies." (v.10)
G. Use of Other Sources.
Perkins claims that Paul wrote Romans after the rest of his undisputed epistles.[12] Apart from these texts (the Gospels did not exist yet), there is very little here that he might have drawn from, and other Pauline texts would not exactly constitute uniquely "other" sources.
H. Cultural Background.
1) "Blood" (v.9) would have hade specific connotations to Jewish readers. In the Old Testament, "The life of a creature is in the blood."[13] However, here Paul uses blood to evoke images of death, specifically Christ's. How would the Roman church, made up of mostly gentile converts,[14] understood blood?
2) Being "justified" in Jewish culture was not a moral status assigned to a person's character, but simply a description of a person acquitted of the charges brought against them. How does Paul use this language carefully in light of the fact that most Christians in Rome were probably gentile converts? He seems to blur distinctions that might have been clearer to people with Jewish backgrounds than to (former) gentiles.
I. Relation to Other NT Texts. (By verse)
2) Gospel/grace "in which you stand" = 1 Corinthians 15:1
3) "Rejoice" in suffering/persecution = Matthew 5:12
5a) "Pouring out" God's Spirit = Acts 2:17, 18, & 33 and Titus 3:6.
5b) To be without "shame" = Philippians 1:20
6) "When we were" weak or sinful = Ephesians 2:5
8) God's love = John 3:16
9) Saved from "the wrath" of God = 1 Thessalonians 1:10 & 2:16
10) "Reconciliation" appears also in 2 Corinthians 5:18-20, Ephesians 2:16, & Colossians 1:20
11) Reconciliation from God, through Christ = 2 Corinthians 5:18
J. Problems of History.
The dating of Paul's Epistle to the Romans plays heavily into historical analysis. If it was written prior to his imprisonment in Rome (which was the first time he visited the city), how could he speak authoritatively about the particularities of the Roman church, as he does to other churches in earlier epistles?[15] Did Paul anticipate his mortality and therefore focus less on particularities in favor of producing a more systematic work of his theology before being martyred? Another possibility is that the church in Rome was communicating with Christians in Jerusalem, forcing Paul to work from local hearsay, for which generalization would have been more appropriate.[16] Perhaps more importantly, if his letter to Rome was the last work prior to his "prison letters,"[17] as some have suggested,[18] did it have anything to do with his arrest?[19]
K. Literary Observations and Questions.
Wang posits that our pericope rests within a two-fold literary structure that Paul employs concerning salvation broadly construed in order to focus first on justification (3:21-5:21) and secondly on sanctification (6:1-8:17).[20] If indeed justification is Paul's central concern in this two-fold structure, it appears surprisingly infrequently. If this pericope constitutes Paul's forceful conclusion of his extrapolation on justification, why does it occur only twice?
L. History of Interpretation.
1) Ancient Christian commentaries, having been steeped in the age of the martyrs, emphasized vv.3-5 and produced important reflection upon God providing courage in the face of danger and persecution. God's peace soothes the spirit for it "is no longer at war with the flesh."[21] Their appreciation for Paul's use of "death" in direct relation with "rejoicing," while perhaps noteworthy and perplexing to modern readers, was without scandal in their own day. Justification remained in the background for these commentators, for martyrs and innocents were killed alongside the guilty (as Christ was) – being "made right" was less an issue of justice than it was eschatology.
2) Martin Luther associates peace with God (v.1) with "spiritual peace," a confidence in God's promises.[22] His arguments against the works-righteousness of his day confirm this interpretation. He uses "faith" in Paul's letter to decry those who would deny that salvation is by and through Christ, and not in mere belief apart therefrom. Furthermore, the love that enables the kind of long-suffering that produces the character described in vv.3-5 is no lowly affection, but the highest form of love, such that it comes only from God – alone, we are incapable of loving in the way Paul describes.
3) John Locke sees this pericope as heavily contrasting the gentile converts with the circumcised Jewish Christians.[23] While he shows a keen sense of the Greek in question here, his insistence upon this contrast is noteworthy, since Paul never once uses the words for Gentile or Jew. Locke nonetheless adds "gentile" in vv.6 & 8 of his paraphrase, though it is not present in the text upon which he relies. While this may follow from Paul's use of Abraham as an example in the previous chapter, Locke seems to take what Paul was using as a helpful comparison and twisting it into a polemical contrast.[24]
4) Contemporary interpreters follow in the vein set by Luther and later enlightenment-influenced thought. The working of God is done largely inwardly and on a spiritual plain. Unlike the immediate and pragmatic focus of ancient commentators, who saw this pericope in relation with physical and tangible persecution, modern exegesis tends to emphasize spiritualizing the texts. Dying and suffering are not markers of virtue for readers in first world contexts, from which many commentaries emerge.
III. SIGNIFICANCE FOR THEOLOGY AND PREACHING
A. Is being "made right" a spiritual occurrence, as Luther and many modern interpreters assume, or is it more tangible and immediate, as it was for the early Church? The spiritualizing of salvation should not come at the price of embodied faith; the nature of God's justifying work in Christ is indivisibly incarnational.
B. Paul's Epistle to the Roman church is often taken as something like his systematic theology, but how does such an instinct threaten to ignore the deep cultural differences that separate us from him? On the other hand, how can this letter to the Christians at the center of the most powerful empire of his day speak to our contemporary social location as an American church at the center of global power?
IV. SOURCES CONSULTED
Bible Translations
- Revised Standard Edition, Catholic Edition (Oxford, 2004)
- New International Version (Zondervan, 2009)
- New Living Translation (Tyndale, 2008)
- English Standard Version (Crossway, 2007) <Accordance software>
- Barth, Karl. The Epistle to the Romans, Trans. Edwyn Hoskyns (Oxford, 1933)
- Bray, Gerald (ed.). Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture, Volume VI (Fitzroy Dearborn, 1998)
- Dunn, James. "Romans 1-8", World Biblical Commentary, Vol.38 ed. David Hubbard and Glenn Barker (Word, Inc., 1988)
- Fitzmyer, Joseph. "Romans" Anchor Bible. Ed. William Albright and David Freedman (Doubleday, 1993)
- Guthrie, Donald and Motyer, Stephen. "The Letters," Zondervan Handbook to the Bible. Ed. Pat and David Alexander (Zondervan, 1999)
- Henry, Matthew. Commentary on the Whole Bible. (Hendrickson, 2008) <Accordance software>
- Locke, John. A Paraphrase and Notes on the Epistles of St. Paul. Ed. Arthur Wainwright (Clarendon, 1987)
- Luther, Martin. Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans. Trans. Theodore Mueller (Zondervan, 1954)
- Mounce, William. Mounce's Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words (Zondervan, 2006) <Accordance software>
- Murray, John. The Epistle to the Romans; The English Text with Introduction, Exposition, and Notes. (Eerdmans, 1959)
- Perkins, Pheme. Reading the New Testament: An Introduction (Paulist, 1988)
- Strong, James. Strong's Exhaustive Concordance to the Bible. (Hendrickson, 2009)
- Wang, Joseph. "Romans," Asbury Bible Commentary. (Zondervan, 1992)
- Wenham, Gordon (ed.). New Bible Commentary (InterVarsity, 1996) <Accordance software>
- Wright, Tom. "Romans," The New Interpreters Bible, Vol. X. ed. Leander Keck (Abingdon, 2002)
Footnotes
[1] Luther, 72 & 77
[2] Wright, 515, & 518
[3] Murray, 158 & 165
[4] Barth, 149
[5] Dunn, 245
[6] Wright, 514
[7] Wang, 981
[8] Matthew Henry, for example (See section II.A.2), as well as Luther (p.72 – "The Abundant Blessings of Justification by Faith"), and Fitzmyer (p.93 – "Justified Christians are Reconciled to the Love of God").
[9] Numbers in brackets refer to Strong's Concordance system, based on the King James Version of the Bible.
[10] Wang, 981
[11] English Standard Version (ESV)
[12] ESV
[13] Perkins, 4-7
[14] Leviticus 17:11, New International Version (NIV), emphasis added.
[15] Wang, 981
[16] Guthrie & Motyer, 686
[17] Ibid., 681. Scholarly consensus also confirms this.
[18] Fitzmyer, 55
[19] Guthrie & Motyer (678) posit that the "prison letters" included Ephesians, Colossians, Philemon, and (possibly) Philippians.
[20] Wang, 977, 979, & 983. Here again we see a definitive contrast between justification and salvation. Murray and Luther agree with a two-fold structuring. Fitzmyer, however, disagrees – claiming not two segments, but three: 1:16-4:25, 5:1-8:39, and 9:1-11:36.
[21] Bray, 126
[22] Luther,73
[23] Locke, 516-521. He footnotes his commentary/paraphrase extensively, using the Gentile/Jew language noticeably and prolifically.
[24] Ibid. Before he offers his own paraphrase, he includes a portion that he titles "Text," though it is unclear whether the translation he offers is his own from the Greek or an extant text popular at the time. A noticeable similarity exists between his "text" (p.517) and the one used by Luther (p.72) as well as Barth (p.161) in the use of the archaic word "peradventure" in v.7 that the New Revised Standard Version renders "perhaps."
