Corpus-Paul

[Bob MacDonald <bobmacdonald AT shaw.ca>]

Loren,

thanks for this info. I did find another typo ('death' for
'sin') on page 218. I too know about typos :|

Nonetheless, the phrase - 'whoever you are' (2.1)- is not
exclusive of the religious (to use Barth's phrase in this
context). The sin of 'judging one another' is taken up again
later in chapter 14 and in some sense is present in the
potential for pride of achievement implied by following the
Law (chapter 7 where Adam is again in the background -
notwithstanding the appeals to Eve).

Dunn's description of Adam and Romans 1 (Christology p
101-102) is convincing to me and gives more point to the
warning in chapter 2 - 'whoever you are' as well as the
analogies between the one commandment for Adam and the
'later' Law of Deuteronomy.

Law seems to me to include more than a set of rules, or
orders to be followed - it is rather a co-mandate
(commandment) to be engaged in by faith. In effect, 'Adam to
Moses' (5:12) brings us a summary of the Teaching rather
than a time-based statement. All of this teaching is present
to us today from 'Augustine to Barth' - but we can equally
have no 'righteousness' simply because we think we live
within the flesh of this tradition.

I think this lessens the humour of the lists of sins and
more completely encompasses the unity of state with which
Paul begins his argument.

Re chapter 3: it divides into two: advantage and
disadvantage. The summary 'God is one' matches with the
conclusion of chapter 2. Here is my substructure:

A.Greetings, 1.1-7
B.Intro (travel), 1.8-15
C.Thesis: the righteous shall live by faith, 1:16-17
C.1 the state of truth: unrighteousness - third person,
1:18-32
C.2.1 judgment - second person - all are in the trap, 2:1-16
C.2.2 there is no escape for a [the] subgroup - no
partiality with God, 2:17-29
D.Argument (55 questions), 3-11
The first two questions in the argument (chapter 3) lead to
a confirmation of the thesis which Paul then applies
directly to Abraham (chapter 4); then he reverts his 'unity'
theme in the Adam section (chapter 5).

The inclusio suggested as a structural end to a first
section in 3:31 does not sit well with me as a termination
point, for the argument begins earlier and themes and
undercurrents carry it forward: particularly the themes of
solidarity in both Adam and Christ with Abraham as exemplar
of the common solution of this tension by faith. The role of
the Law and the chosen subset of humanity to whom it was
given as the bearers of this message in the flesh, a
profound and valuable role, is not to be diminished as
means; but equally it is not and was not its own end.

As I study this text, I am struck by how obvious some of the
structural elements are - I have put them in various colour
and bold highlights on my web page - there are so many
places where a single grammatical feature stands out of the
text.

Esler and Dunn are both helpful

Bob

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