tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16959378.post5073660104852028186..comments2023-10-16T04:58:53.689-04:00Comments on Verily Verily: more on "weakness" in Romans 8Rafaelhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14471888340005683193noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16959378.post-32254406256210227732012-02-11T09:59:06.049-05:002012-02-11T09:59:06.049-05:00Unfortunately, Ralph, my answer is, I don't kn...Unfortunately, Ralph, my answer is, I don't know. But my initial response to your question is that the "blameless" persons under Torah in both Luke and Philippians were people under Torah. Paul, however, doesn't seem to think everyone falls under its aegis. In 1 Corinthians 9 Paul separates "those under Torah" from others, so I think we might start by noting that Paul thinks Torah doesn't apply to everyone.<br /><br />My reading of Romans, so far, has emphasized his gentile audience. In fact, I'm persuaded by Stowers, Das, Thorsteinsson, and others that Paul writes Romans for gentile believers in Jesus in Rome <i>and not</i> for Jewish believers (even if there were some Jewish believers among the Roman house churches). So when Paul says, for example, "Torah results in the knowledge of sin" (3.20), I think he's saying how Torah affects his gentile readers and not a universal consequence of Torah. After all, Torah clearly promised life to Israel if she kept its terms (Deut. 30, which Paul cites later in Romans). So when he says "all flesh is not justified by Torah," he's speaking to gentiles.<br /><br />One last thought. I'm not saying that Paul offers Torah as the basis of Israel's relationship with God and the gospel as the means of the gentiles' reconciliation with Israel's Creator God. Perhaps Paul <i>would</i> have said that, for Israel, Torah only resulted in knowledge of sin. But he doesn't say this in Romans. In Romans, he's speaking to gentiles, and given the attraction that Torah had for at least some gentiles (God-fearers, proselytes, those who advocated and pursued self-mastery, etc.), Paul has to demonstrate that the gospel, not the Law, leads to freedom, life, adoption as children, etc.Rafaelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14471888340005683193noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16959378.post-13991808855054510062012-02-10T21:55:14.374-05:002012-02-10T21:55:14.374-05:00A further thought: Paul describes the Law as "...A further thought: Paul describes the Law as "weak" due to the flesh, as you've pointed out, and he also stresses its inability to save (e.g., Gal 3:11). In fact, he argues that it was not designed to save, but to serve as a pedagogue (Gal 3:19-4:7). There are two passages in the NT, however, that describe certain persons as "blameless" under the Law. In Luke 1:6, Zechariah and Elizabeth are described as "righteous before God, living blamelessly according to all the commandments and regulations of the Lord." And, in Phil 3:6, in reviewing his achievements prior to encountering the Messiah, Paul claims that "as to righteousness under the Law [I was] blameless." How would you reconcile these passages with Paul's teaching on the Law in the passages I mentioned above, as well as the one's you've mentioned in Romans? I have worked out a hypothetical interpretation of these passages, but I'd appreciate hearing your view.Ralph K. Hawkinshttp://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=68263710&trk=tab_pronoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16959378.post-40491219557612407592012-02-10T21:30:25.699-05:002012-02-10T21:30:25.699-05:00Rafael, I really like your musings on this subject...Rafael, I really like your musings on this subject. In both my OT classes and in the church, I find that many of my students and parishoners both have been conditioned to think that both Jesus and Paul were hostile to the Torah, and that the whole concept of Torah is in antithesis to the Gospel. A nuanced reading, such as the one you have shared here, shows that this is not true.Ralph K. Hawkinshttp://www.linkedin.com/profile/edit?trk=hb_tab_pro_topnoreply@blogger.com