Corpus-Paul

["Neil Elliott" <elliott AT igc.org>]

On Romans 13:1-7, a vexing text but one regarding which Jeffrey 
Gibson has invited my comments--I take the bull by the horns!

I'm NOT convinced this is EITHER merely expedient, "survival"
talk; NOR that it is "naivete."  Some relevant observations
(spelled out a bit more fully in an article in HORSLEY, Paul
and Empire):

1. This is NOT a "theology of the state"; the RELATIVIZATION
   implied by TETAGMENAI ("put in their place") and HYPOTASSES-
   THAI, not HYPAKOYW, are relevant here.

2. This is nevertheless far more "naively" positive than many
   contemporary Jewish texts with which Rom 13 is often
   compared.  So what's going on?  This reads, on the surface,
   as more naive than PAUL usually is!

3. Kaesemann notices, and I emphasize, that the scheme of
   rulers-rewarding-good-behavior-so-there-is-nothing-to-fear-
   and-we-submit-out-of-conscience, SYNEIDHSIS, is inconsistent
   with comments about fear, PHOBOS:  exactly which IS our motive,
   "conscience" or fear?  I notice that political rhetoric from
   the early principate usually DISTINGUISHES these as SEPARATE
   motives--for the elite, consent is gladly granted to the rulers;
   for the humiliores, a salutary level of terror must be main-
   tained (references so abundant this is practically a TOPOS).

4. Goodenough notices Philo makes a similar "double-talk" in
   De Somniis--under the right circumstances, given some freedom,
   we bravely defy the tyrant; but in straitened circumstances,
   caution (EULABEIA) requires we rein in our tongue and appeal 
   gently to the ruler's "better nature."

5. I conclude Paul is being diplomatic in a tough spot:  he's
   perfectly aware (not "naive" at all) that "the ruler does
   not bear the sword in vain," or more forcefully, "the sword
   is not an empty threat" (as Nero's propagandists insisted
   it WAS).  Still Paul (like Philo) wanted to avoid any civil
   provocation that could elicit Roman repression like that 
   most recently visited on the Jewish communities (edict of
   Claudius).

More details in Paul and Empire; comments, anyone?

Neil Elliott