corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Corpus-Paul
List archive
- From: Bob MacDonald <bobmacdonald AT shaw.ca>
- To: 'Corpus-Paul' <corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org>
- Subject: [Corpus-Paul] The use of shame in reasoning
- Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 17:35:17 -0800
Loren
In response to Runar, you say
>>The effectiveness comes by shaming the Judean group
while giving face to the Gentiles after the indictment
of 1:19-2:6: they are not the only ones who will be
judged by the law. <<
I have to ask: is Paul trying to 'shame' anybody? He begins
with 'for I am not ashamed of the gospel.'
If anything, his opening statement of the argument of the
letter that all are sinners is a statement that no one he is
addressing (neither Judean nor Gentile) would disagree with.
He later speaks of them saying "but you are not of the
flesh, but of the spirit", etc - If they were of the Spirit,
they would know that what he is saying on page 1 of the
letter is true - not from philosophical grounds but by the
teaching of the Spirit (these things are only received in
the Spirit).
It is not that there is no persuading in the letter. It is
just that it is not done by shame. He is persuading them not
to judge one another (consistently throughout the letter)
but he is not doing this by alternately shaming or not a
particular subgroup. He does not even appeal to the notion
of an 'in' group - for the whole thrust of the gospel is
that many should come to know this gift.
I now have another question: Esler says on p286 that "for
Paul there was no one between Abraham and Christ who pursued
righteousness by faith." ... "The centuries between Moses
and Christ comprised a period of unrelieved gloom."
I ask: what about the psalmists? What about Habakkuk who is
quoted in Romans and Galatians? How would they have known if
the experience of righteousness by faith was impossible for
the covenant people?
This has consequences on what is meant by the 'end' of the
law; and the rationale of the history of faith in the world.
BTW - no one has convinced me that 'whoever you are'
excludes anyone - though I see that there are many who seem
to agree with this thesis - as if Paul was implicitly
qualifying his 'whoever' with the group of sinners described
in chapter 1.
Bob
Bob MacDonald
http://bobmacdonald.gx.ca
Victoria, B.C., Canada
-
[Corpus-Paul] Who is addressed in Romans 2?
, (continued)
- [Corpus-Paul] Who is addressed in Romans 2?, Bob MacDonald, 01/22/2005
- Re: [Corpus-Paul] Who is addressed in Romans 2?, Jeffrey B. Gibson, 01/22/2005
- Re: [Corpus-Paul] Who is addressed in Romans 2?, Loren Rosson, 01/24/2005
- Re: [Corpus-Paul] Who is addressed in Romans 2?, Loren Rosson, 01/25/2005
- Re: [Corpus-Paul] Who is addressed in Romans 2?, Loren Rosson, 01/25/2005
- RE: [Corpus-Paul] Who is addressed in Romans 2?, Bob MacDonald, 01/25/2005
- RE: [Corpus-Paul] Who is addressed in Romans 2?, Loren Rosson, 01/25/2005
- Re: [Corpus-Paul] Who is addressed in Romans 2?, Runar M. Thorsteinsson, 01/26/2005
- Re: [Corpus-Paul] Who is addressed in Romans 2?, Loren Rosson, 01/26/2005
- Re: [Corpus-Paul] Who is addressed in Romans 2?, Runar M. Thorsteinsson, 01/27/2005
- [Corpus-Paul] The use of shame in reasoning, Bob MacDonald, 01/30/2005
- Re: [Corpus-Paul] The use of shame in reasoning, Loren Rosson, 01/31/2005
- Re: [Corpus-Paul] The use of shame in reasoning, Mark D. Nanos, 01/31/2005
- Re: [Corpus-Paul] Who is addressed in Romans 2?, Tim Gallant, 01/25/2005
- Re: [Corpus-Paul] Did Paul break the Law?, Mark D. Nanos, 01/19/2005
- Re: [Corpus-Paul] Did Paul break the Law?, Tim Gallant, 01/19/2005
- Re: [Corpus-Paul] Did Paul break the Law?, Edgar Krentz, 01/19/2005
- Re: [Corpus-Paul] Did Paul break the Law?, Tim Gallant, 01/19/2005
- Re: [Corpus-Paul] Did Paul break the Law?, Mark D. Nanos, 01/19/2005
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.