The rhetoric of Romans : argumentative constraint and strategy and Paul’s dialogue with judaism

337 Pages·1990·16.49 MB·English

by  Neil Elliott

l i b r a ry o f n e w t e s ta m e n t s t u d i e s
THE RHETORIC
OF ROMANS
Argumentative Constraint and Strategy
and Paul’s Dialogue with Judaism
NEIL ELLIOTT
JOURNAL FOR THE STUDY OF THE NEW TESTAMENT
SUPPLEMENT SERIES
45
Executive Editor, Supplement Series
David Hill
Publishing Editor
David E Orton
JSOT Press
Sheffield

THE
RHETORIC
OF
ROMANS
Argumentative Constraint and Strategy
and Paul's Dialogue with Judaism
Neil Elliott
Journal for the Study of the New Testament
Supplement Series 45
Copyright © 1990 Sheffield Academic Press
Published by JSOT Press
JSOT Press is an imprint of
Sheffield Academic Press Ltd
The University of Sheffield
343 Fulwood Road
Sheffield S10 3BP
England
Typeset by Sheffield Academic Press
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data
Elliott, Neil
The rhetoric of Romans
1. Bible. N.T. Romans—Devotional works
I. Title II. Series
227.106
EISBN 9781850752615
CONTENTS
Preface 7
Introduction
THE STARTING POINT OF
ARGUMENTATION IN ROMANS 9
1. The 'Historical Problem of Romans' as the
Problem of the Letter's 'Double Character' 9
2. The Double Character' Problem as a
Rhetorical-Critical Problem 15
3. The Historical Background of the
Roman Christian Community 43
4. A Rhetorical-Critical Approach to the
'Historical Problem' of Romans 60
Chapter 1
PAUL'S PURPOSE IN WRITING TO THE ROMANS 69
1. The Question of Method 69
2. Exordium (Rom. 1.1-17) 70
3. Peroratio (Rom. 15.14-32) 86
4. The Letter's Macro-Structure: A Clue 94
Chapter 2
PAUL'S USE OF TOPICS ON THE LAW IN
ROM. 1.13-4.25: THE 'DEBATE WITH
JUDAISM' REEXAMINED 105
1. Introduction 105
2. The Starting Point of Argumentation in
Romans (1.16-32) 108
3. The Rhetoric of Apostrophe (Rom. 2.1-16) 119
4. The Second Apostrophe: To the Jew (Rom. 2.17-29) 127
5. The Nature of Israel's 'Privilege' and the
Accountability of the Jew (Rom. 3.1-9) 132
6. Proof from Scripture (Rom. 3.10-20) 142
7. The Revelation of God's Righteousness and the
Exclusion of Human Boasting (Rom. 3.21-31) 146
8. The Heritage of Abraham's Children (Romans 4) 157
Excursus
ROMANS 1-4 AS A DEBATE WITH JUDAISM' 167
1. Introduction: The Rhetorical Problem 167
2. The Indictment in Rom. 1.18-2.16:
A Trap' for the Jew? 173
3. The Apostrophe to the Jew in Rom. 2.17-3.20:
An Indictment? 191
4. Circumcision and the Covenant in Rom. 2.25-3.20:
The Demolition of Jewish Privilege'? 198
5. The Righteousness of God' and Uoasting in Works'
in Rom. 3.20-4.25: Against the Jew? 205
Chapter 3
THE MODIFICATION OF A RHETORICAL SITUATION
(ARGUMENTATION) IN ROMANS 5-11 225
1. The Pivotal Role of Romans 5:
Polemical Christology 225
2. Freedom from Law and Obligation to its Requirement:
Rom. 6.1-8.13 235
3. The Heritage of the Children of God:
Rom. 8.14-11.36 253
4. Conclusions: The Argumentative Coherence
of Romans 5-11 271
Chapter 4
CONCLUSIONS 277
1. The Rhetorical Macro-Structure of the Letter 277
2. The Torah-fopos in Romans 283
3. Results: Romans 290
4. Results: Pauline Theology 292
Bibliography 301
Index of Biblical References 317
Index of Authors 329
PREFACE
It would, I confess, be a mark of downright envy to want to
compete with scholars such as these, and it never occurred
to me to detract in the least from their praise. Let them
retain both the favour and authority which, by the confession
of all good men, they have earned. It will, however, I hope,
be admitted that nothing has ever been so perfectly done by
men that there is no room left for those who follow them to
refine, adorn, or illustrate their work. I do not dare to say
anything of myself, except that I thought that the present
work would be of some profit, and that I have been led to
undertake it for no other reason than the common good of
the church...
When, therefore, we depart from the views of our predeces-
sors, we are not to be stimulated by any passion for innova-
tion, impelled by any desire to slander others, aroused by any
hatred, or prompted by any ambition. Necessity alone is to
compel us, and we are to have no other object than that of
doing good.*
The seeds of this book were sown in J. Christiaan Beker's
graduate seminar on Romans at Princeton Theological Semi-
nary in 1983. My initial disappointment at drawing the
assignment of no less worked-over a pericope than 1.18-2.16
quickly gave way to fascination with the difficulty many
interpreters had in getting out of the text what they knew
must be there, namely Paul's rhetorical assault on the Jew.
The emerging problem, how to integrate the apostrophe to the
Jew that begins in Rom. 2.17 within a letter explicitly directed
to a Gentile-Christian congregation, became the focus of my
From the preface to John Calvin's commentary on The Epistles of
Paul to the Romans and to the Thessalonians, trans. Ross
Mackenzie [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1960], pp. 2-3.
8 The Rhetoric of Romans
PhD dissertation, which now appears in revised form before
the reader.
For the growth of that first germ into the present work I
have to thank friends and colleagues in the New Testament
Colloquium at Princeton, and in particular the two men who
have taught me Paul by sharing not only their critical
acumen, but also their passion for Paul's Gospel: Professors J.
Christiaan Beker and Paul W. Meyer (now emeritus). It was
their generous encouragement that prodded me forward, no
less when I disagreed with their views than when we agreed,
and it was their wisdom that saved me from greater errors
that, due to no fault of theirs, remain in what follows. To Dr
David Hill, who accepted my manuscript for publication, to Dr
David Orton, who has overseen its production with grace and
efficiency, and to Professor David Clines, who gave close
attention to the accuracy of the Greek, I offer my thanks.
I dedicate this work to the memory of my father, Rodger N.
Elliott, whose legacy to me includes the conviction that inter-
preting the Bible is one of the most important vocations to
which one may aspire.
INTRODUCTION
THE STARTING POINT OF ARGUMENTATION
IN ROMANS
1. The 'Historical Problem of Romans' as the Problem of the
Letter's 'Double Character'
Why did Paul write Romans? He seems to declare his inten-
tions toward the Roman congregation clearly enough in 1.11-
15:
For I long to see you, that I might impart to you some spiri-
tual gift to strengthen you, that is, that we may be mutually
encouraged by each other's faith, both yours and mine. I
want you to know, brethren, that I have often intended to
come to you (but have thus far been prevented), in order that
I may reap some harvest among you as well as among the
rest of the Gentiles. I am under obligation both to Greeks
and barbarians, both to the wise and to the foolish: so I am
eager to preach the gospel to you also who are in Rome (RSV).
Exactly what these statements mean, however, and precisely
how they relate to Paul's immediate purposes in writing this
letter, are questions that remain controversial today, chiefly
because what the apostle says itself seems to defy any single
cohesive explanation.
By way of illustration: does Paul's desire to 'strengthen' the
Roman congregation (1.11) imply that he perceives that they
are somehow deficient in faith? The commendation in 1.8
would seem to contradict such an implication, and the qualifi-
cation in 1.12 is, for many interpreters, a sign that Paul heard
in the phrase a tone more harsh and aggressive than he
intended to sound, and immediately sought to soften it.
Further: what does the apostle mean when he says that he has
long desired to 'reap some harvest' among the Romans (1.13),