Corpus-Paul

[Bob MacDonald <bobmacdonald AT shaw.ca>]

Esler in 'Conflict and Identity in Romans' seems to me to
contradict himself and the structure of Romans.

On page 145 he says he has argued (elsewhere) that in
1:18-32 Paul is referring only to Judeans contemporary with
him.

on page 151 after some discussion he says we have seen
1:19-32 is concerned with the behaviour of non-Judeans. ???

I Romans 2:1, Paul says: Therefore you have no excuse, O
human, whoever you are, when you judge another.

Esler says this includes only non-Judeans - His statement
seems to me contrary to both the meaning of 'whoever you
are' and to the obvious switch from third to second person
in Paul's argument.

This leads Esler to the conclusion that Paul's heart is not
in his indictment of all (Jew and Gentile, Greek and
Barbarian) in sin.

I think it might be true to say that although the Teaching
as pedagogue has kept some in the tradition from the
extremes of self-destructive behaviour, the conclusion that
Paul's 'heart is not in the production of such a list' for
Judeans p 153, undermines the power of the epistle to the
point that one might wonder why it had any effect in Rome,
let alone in history.

I think Esler's structure is inadequate (p144 - a 1:18-2:5,
b 2:6-16, c 2:17-29, d 3:1-8, and e 3:9-20) but I am
wondering if there is a good argument for ending the first
major component of the structure at 2:29 as I have done.
Perhaps Romans is a symphony in one movement :)

Note: I avoided using 'Law' in the above, because the notion
of law and 'breaking' it seems to me a modernism, not the
principle of a life or lives lived in faith (3:30), which is
where I think Paul is taking his argument in Romans based on
the testimony to faith's experience (Abraham, David -
Psalms) and invitations to such faith for all in TNK
(chapter 10:20 15:9).

Bob MacDonald
http://bobmacdonald.gx.ca
Victoria, B.C., Canada