Corpus-Paul

["John Brand" <jbrand AT gvsd.mb.ca>]

Let's meet on more specific grounds and apart from terminology. I am
open to correction. Why not consider the context of Romans 1-2 and
look at similarities between what he is addressing in these chapters
and what we find in Cicero's "Laws"

1. It affirms that Lex est ratio (latin ratio = Greek logos) 'Law is
the highest reason, inherent in nature, which enjoins what ought to
be done and forbids the opposite. When reason is fully formed in the
human mind, it, too, is law. So … [law's] function is to enjoin right
action and to forbid wrong doing.' (Laws.I.19)

2. It affirms that this Law is that which is common between man and
God: 'reason is present in both man and God, there is a primordial
partnership in reason between man and God. But those
who share reason also share right reason; and since that is law, we
men must also be thought of as partners with the gods in law … and
they do in fact obey this celestial system, the divine mind, and the
all powerful God. Hence this whole universe must be thought of as a
single community shared by gods and men' (Laws.I.23).

3. It affirms that 'corrupt habits and foolish opinions … twist and
turn aside our feeble minds from their original paths' (Ibid.29 cf.
Heraclietus fragments 1,2) so that there is a difference between
those who are wise and those who are foolish; or, there is a
difference between those have been turned aside by corrupt habits and
those who have attained moral excellence by using nature as guide
(Ibid.30).

4. It affirms that the highest moral virtue is when a wise man
'loves the other person as much as he loves himself' (Ibid.,34). 'The
essential feature of friendship is that, the moment one partner
prefers to have something for himself rather than for the other, it
vanishes' (Ibid., 34).

In addition, let's follow Edger's advice and agree upon the
guidelines of the Longman/Hallo school:

(1) Similarities/Contrasts should be carefully noted in the texts
or concepts being compared,
(2) Evaluate a given text within its literary context (i.e. the
Flood Narratives should not be evaluated by seeing parallels between
one ark, one person saved, three birds, sacrifice, etc. and then a
conclusion drawn without taking into account the theological
patterning of Genesis 1-11)
(3) Chronological Proximity: The closer the works are in time,
the more valid the comparison and vice versa.
(4) Geographical Proximity: The argument is stronger if the two
cultures are in geographic proximity to one another.
(5) Linguistic Proximity: The more similar the languages the more
valid the comparison.
(6) Generic Proximity: A consideration of the Genre of the
literature

All six of these criteria can be used to substantiate the parallel
between the works of Cicero and the Epistle of Paul to the Romans.
Should this not indicate our allowing the parallels to help us in our
understanding of Romans, the Jew/Gentile issues Paul sought to
address,  and how he sought to bridge the gap between these two
cultures in conflict?

Regards,

John Brand