Corpus-Paul

["David C. Hindley" <dhindley AT csi.com>]

I can't believe I did it again! Subject heading was not brought over to reply
post. My humble apologies! I have re-posted so the message will appear in
thread order. <I had half hoped the change in e-mail software would make these
tasks just a tad more intuitive ... >

Dave Hindley
Cleveland, Ohio, USA

-----Original Message-----
From: David C. Hindley <dhindley AT csi.com>
To: Corpus-paul <corpus-paul AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
Date: Monday, May 31, 1999 2:43 AM
Subject: Re: corpus-paul digest: May 29, 1999


Moon-Ryul Jung wrote:

>>The observation that Jews who observed the law were actually justified by
faith is quite true, because, as Mark always emphasizes, they observed
the law out of faith in the gracious God. Now the proposition I want to
discuss is:

(a) To reject Christ in favor of the Law proves that faith [in God]
      never really existed.

It seems that Jesus said a similar thing: If you had believed in Moses, you
would have believed in me. Anyway, I guess that Mark would not accept
statement (a). He would say that the situation would have been more complex
than the statement (a) would imply. I think he needs [a] listening [from us].

One may read (a) out of Rom 9:31-32 and Rom 10:3:

Rom 9:31-32.
But Israel who pursued the law of righteousness  has not attained it. Why?
Because they pursued it not by faith but as if by works.

[Rom] 10:3:
For, they,  being ignorant of God's righteousness, and seeking to
establish their own, they have not submitted to God's righteousness.

But these statements should be read in the context of the neighboring
paragraphs. For example, one needs to think about why Paul inserted
Rom 10:12 "For there is no distinction between Jew and Gentile" in the
text that talks about Israel's "unbelief". I am surprised to find
this statement here.<<

I reply as follows:

Yes, I also agree that we should look at these verses in relation to those
around them. Rom 9:1-5a,6-29 is related by subject and theme to the passages
we discussed in Gal 4:21-31. The author expands on the subject of why God
would elect Gentiles, as well as natural born Jews, as recipients of
justification. Still, starting in vss 9:30, there is one of those theme
changes that bother me so much:

Secondary idea:

Rom 9:30  What shall we say, then? That Gentiles who did not pursue
righteousness have attained it, that is, righteousness through faith;
31  but that Israel who pursued the righteousness which is based on law did
not succeed in fulfilling that law. 32  Why? Because they did not pursue it
through faith, but as if it were based on works. They have stumbled over the
stumbling stone, 33  as it is written, "Behold, I am laying in Zion a stone
that will make men stumble, a rock that will make them fall; and he who
believes in him will not be put to shame." (Is 28:16)

These continue in a mixed manner in ch 10, which I would separate as follows:

Continuous idea:

Rom 10:10:1  Brethren, my heart's desire and prayer to God for them is that
they may be saved. 2  [...]. 3  For, being ignorant of the righteousness that
comes from God, and seeking to establish their own, they did not submit to
God's righteousness. 4  [...]. 5  Moses writes that the man who practices the
righteousness which is based on the law shall live by it. (Lv 18:5) 6 - 9
[...] 10  For man believes with his heart and so is justified, and he
confesses with his lips and so is saved. 11  The scripture says, "No one who
believes in him will be put to shame." (Is 28:16) 12  For there is [thus] no
distinction between Jew and Greek; the same (one) is Lord of all and bestows
his riches upon all who call upon him. 13  For, "every one who calls upon the
name of (the) LORD will be saved." (Joel 2:32)

I am on the fence concerning the following verses, which appear as a set of
proof texts:

14  But how are men to call upon him in whom they have not believed? And how
are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard? And how are they to
hear without a preacher? 15  And how can men preach unless they are sent? As
it is written, "How beautiful are the feet of those who preach good news!"
(Nah 1:15) 16  But they have not all obeyed the good news; for Isaiah says,
"LORD, who has believed what he has heard from us?" (Is 53:1) 17 [...] 18  But
I ask, have they not heard? Indeed they have; for "Their voice has gone out to
all the earth, and their words to the ends of the world." (Ps 19:14) 19  Again
I ask, did Israel not understand? First Moses says, "I will make you jealous
of those who are not a nation; with a foolish nation I will make you angry."
(Dt 32:21) 20  Then Isaiah is so bold as to say, "I have been found by those
who did not seek me; I have shown myself to those who did not ask for me." (Is
65:1) 21  But of Israel he says, "All day long I have held out my hands to a
disobedient and contrary people." (Is 65:2)

However, a clear secondary idea is woven in as follows:

Rom 10:2  I bear them witness that they have a zeal for God, but it is not
enlightened

4  For Christ is the end of the law, that every one who has faith may be
justified

6  But the righteousness based on faith says, Do not say in your heart, "Who
will ascend into heaven?" (that is, to bring Christ down)  7  or "Who will
descend into the abyss?" (that is, to bring Christ up from the dead) 8  But
what does it say? The word is near you, on your lips and in your heart (that
is, the word of faith which we preach); Dt 30:12-14) 9  because, if you
confess with your lips that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God
raised him from the dead, you will be saved

17  So faith comes from what is heard, and what is heard comes by the
preaching of Christ.

The author of the former passages may complain that fellow Jews have for the
most part not accepted the idea of justification by faith (even though the
author felt that God had made the message clear), but the author of the
secondary ideas argues that Jews are wrong to seek justification by means of
the law (which I really do not see the former author categorically stating)
and replaces it by means of Christ's resurrection, which has nothing to do
with the concept of election, or of justification based solely on faith in the
promises made to Abraham's children.

Respectfully

Dave Hindley
Cleveland, Ohio, USA