1 Paul, a slave of Christ Jesus, called [to be] an apostle, having been set apart for [the] gospel of God, 2 which he announced beforehand through his prophets in the holy scriptures, 3 about his son,
Jesus Christ our Lord.
- who came from the seed of David according to the flesh,
- 4 who was appointed son of God with power according to the spirit of holiness by the resurrection from the dead,
One of the complicating factors of this passage is the relation of 1.2 with the formula in 1.3–4. In verse 2, Paul refers to "the holy scriptures" [γραφαῖς ἁγίαις] as the location in which God announced beforehand the gospel. These are the last two words of the verse. The very next verse then begins with the words "about his son" [περὶ τοῦ υἱοῦ αὐτοῦ]. I'm sure I've heard/read somewhere that Paul here frames the Hebrew scriptures in terms of their witness to Jesus; i.e., the scriptures are "about his son." Theologically, of course, this isn't a problem; Paul will say something similar in 3.21. But I don't think this is what Paul is saying here.
Here's my question. Would you Pauline and/or Romans scholars be comfortable describing verse 2 as a parenthetical adjectival phrase modifying "the gospel of God" [εὐαγγέλιον θεοῦ]? In this case, we should read verse 3, which begins "about his son," in connection with the end of verse 1. A modified translation might be:
1 Paul, a slave of Christ Jesus, called [to be] an apostle, having been set apart for [the] gospel of God—(2 which [gospel] he announced beforehand through his prophets in the holy scriptures)—3 [the gospel] about his son,
- who came from the seed of David according to the flesh,
- 4 who was appointed son of God with power according to the spirit of holiness by the resurrection from the dead,
Jesus Christ our Lord.
What think ye?
3 comments:
I agree with your understanding of these verses. He is saying two things about the gospel of God: It was attested to by Scripture, and its content concerned the Son. I would choose the NRSV over the NIV here.
I'm not quite as convinced--though I rather like your interpretation.
I'm seeing relative clauses broken down further with prepositional phrases.
which he announced beforehand:
according to. . .
in the . . .
concerning . . .
Who . .
from the seed. . .
according to. . .
I would be more convinced if there were another relative to anchor the phrase to a specific antecedent. But then again, I don't think Paul was terribly concerned about grammatical transparency, so my guess is (probably not quite) as good as either of yours.
Hope all is well with you,
JACK
And upon further reflection, I see that what I wrote is, actually, basically what you are suggesting (at least about the last prepositional phrase).
That said, I think your case would be stronger if you affirmed that "according to the prophets" and "in the scriptures" were each independently modifying "the Gospel of God," rather than building off of each other.
In other words, I'm agreeing with Dr. Linton, except I think Paul may be saying three things about the scriptures, not two.
JACK
Post a Comment