Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

corpus-paul - Re: [Corpus-Paul] Audience of Romans/Symbolic Paul

corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Corpus-Paul

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Loren Rosson <rossoiii AT yahoo.com>
  • To: Corpus-Paul <corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [Corpus-Paul] Audience of Romans/Symbolic Paul
  • Date: Mon, 2 May 2005 13:31:17 -0700 (PDT)

[Tim]
>>In other words, just because Abraham
>>was not weak in faith, that means
>>that "weak in faith" necessarily means
>>failure to believe in the resurrection?
>>It seems to me that is a rather
>>large assumption.

[Loren]
> Yet this is exactly what Paul's language implies.
Why
> was Abraham "strong"? For believing in God's ability
> to give life to Sarah's dead womb (4:19-21).
> Christians are likewise strong for believing in
> Christ's resurrection (4:23-25). How could this
> be any clearer?

[Justin]
>I'm with Tim here: this is a real stretch,
>especially since in Rom 14 those in question have
>"weak" faith, not "no faith." The people under
>discussion in Rom 14 are different than Rom 9-11.

I'm afraid you've lost me. That Abraham had faith was
also a given. But it was "strong" on account of his
belief that he and Sarah could get Issac. Works (like
circumcision) are the subject of 4:1-17 but not
4:18-25. And 4:18-25 is relevant, despite Tim's recent
protest about "inappropriate context", because it's
the only place in the theology of Rom 1-11 where Paul
explains what the term used in Rom 14-15 actually
means. I don't see applying 4:18-25 to 14-15 a stretch
at all. I see it as completely appropriate -- even if
Mark and I are voices crying in the wilderness.

[Loren]
> And yet this is exactly what Paul's language does
> **not** imply. If eating vegatables and abstaining
> from meat were "weak", why would Paul advise doing
so,
> without reservation, in honor of God? The weak do
> these things, because they're Judeans, but their
> "Jewishness" itself isn't the weakness.

[Tim]
>I never claimed it was. The thing that Paul says
>is weak is the *belief* that one must observe
>these dietary rules, not *that* one does observe
>them. He considers the former a weak conscience.

I think you're the one imposing an outside context --
namely I Cor 8. Paul speaks nowhere in Rom 14-15 about
a weak conscience, and this is the real difference
between the Corinthian and Roman situations.

As for your other objections, Tim, they'll have to
await tomorrow. I'm leaving the office shortly.

Loren Rosson III
Nashua NH
rossoiii AT yahoo.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page