Corpus-Paul

["David Hindley" <dhindley AT compuserve.com>]

On Tuesday, February 01, 2005, Loren Rosson III says:

>>I'm actually in the process -- prodded by recent threads -- of outlining
the entire letter of Romans in terms of functionality (i.e. who is targetted
in each section; for what reason; etc). I'll try to have it posted by next
week.<<

Are you getting anywhere with this? It probably has been incredibly
frustrating.

By "outline," are you referring to an outline of the argumentative or
reasoning process, or a formal rhetorical analysis? I'd think the former has
to come before the latter, and that is where you will encounter the most
problems, based on my experience (such as it is). 

"Paul's" arguments are filled with so many (mainly odd or even
contradictory) digressions that it very easy to loose track of where a
thought has been dropped. All of us have been socialized by the Christian
dogma that permeates the very soul of western thought to think the
digressions are not actually odd or contradictory at all, but integral or
even key to every argument "Paul" makes. Even when we succeed in accepting a
digression as a digression, and bracket it off for later consideration, we
still have to identify where the thought picked up again in the ensuing
spaghetti.

Good luck!

Sincerely,

David Hindley
Cleveland, Ohio USA

FWIW, I found it helpful to ignore the greeting (Rom 1:1-7), and also
chapter 16 at the end. 

In 1:8 to 11:12, the core arguments are directed exclusively to
Jews/Judeans, and are concerned with explaining why *faithful* Gentiles
should be considered children of Abraham even if they do not fully convert
to Judaism or observe provisions of Mosaic law. Absolutely every statement
or argument relating to "Christ" is itself a digression or part of a
digression, and none are actually key or integral to the core arguments,
which are rather complete and unambiguous. Without reference to these
digressions, the faith of the Gentiles in question is in God's fulfillment
of promises, not in Christ. I seriously doubt that the author of this "core"
text was even a "Christian" or Christ believer.

The digressions are braggadocio (1:15-18); a theological lesson about faith
in Christ with a zinger about certain ungodly and wicked men who suppress
the truth (= Jews?) that interrupts an argument about how Jews and Gentiles
alike are sinners (3:21-22a plus 24-25a and 25c); and again a lesson about
faith in Christ interrupting an argument about the faith of Abraham even
before the argument concludes (4:23-25); glosses in 5:1b, 3-5a, 6-7, 8b-9; a
lesson about the antithesis of Adam and Christ woven into an argument that
Adam inaugurated sin so God could forgive it all as a free gift (5:12,
14b-15a, 15d, 17-19 & 21b); and words and short phrases inserted to modify
the sentences just a little (6:3b, 11b, 23b, etc). The list goes on and on.
Whoever added them was definitely a Christian or Christ believer who felt a
need to *more fully* explain or *excuse* Paul's arguments, always at some
tangent to them.

>From 11:13 to 15:33, the addressees are exclusively Gentile associates of
Jews, to explain what his message to faithful Gentiles means to them. It can
be ascertained that they are mainly slaves, and probably owned by Jewish
masters. To be considered a child of Abraham on the same footing as Jews is
a privilege, and their example will stir unfaithful Jews to faithfulness out
of jealously. He offers advise about proper conduct, telling them to accept
their place in their master's households, obey the governing authorities,
not to squabble among themselves about the degree of law observance they
chose to exercise (apparently varied quite a bit), and that he is about to
bring a (free will) offering to Jerusalem from faithful Gentiles in Asia
with the hope that he can count on contributions from those in Rome. Again,
all issues that might apply to slaves of Jews or clients of Jewish patrons,
but not requiring that they be Christ believers. In fact, he seems to be
offering them an alternative to full conversion, which for other reasons
than found in this letter I believe was being striven for by these Gentiles
as a means of achieving emancipation. 

Carrying over the principal that pericopes relating to Christ are
digressions, in these sections they are less frequent and often little more
than glosses: A little barb directed at Jews and probably related to the
Jewish revolt of 66-70 CE in 11:28; a list of later Christian offices,
indebted to Q6:27 & 29 and MARK 9:50, inserted from 12:6b to 21; another
fuller digression explaining how God gave authority to the rulers (= Romans)
to punish evildoers (= Jews, who are charged with being tax resisters,
haters, adulterers, drunks, debauched, licentious, quarrelsome and
maliciously jealous); a moral lesson in 14:9,15b and 15:3-4 plus 8a;
modification of subject matter by interjecting words like "Jesus" (14:14b)
and "Christ" (14:18) or short phrases (15:5b,6b,7b,16b,17a,18b,19b,20b);
etc. Again, the person(s) who interjected these words, phrases, glosses and
short treatises, were definitely Christ believers, and like the one(s) who
inserted the digressions of the earlier section, were not very happy with
Jews, making it very likely he is/they are same person(s) who wrote the core
text(s).