Things James has tried to put in his mouth in the last hour

A quarter

A pebble

Multiple old cheerios under the table and radiator

A piece of old cheddar cheese on the underside of his high chair

Multiple books

The corner of a door

A box fan

A twenty dollar bill

My fingers

His fingers

His binky

His toy bear

Something small and white that was on the floor, but never retrieved from his mouth

A plastic measuring cup

My iPhone

My coffee cup

A cereal box

His pants

A table leg

Romans Commentary Project, chapter 10

9:30 What then shall we say? That the Gentiles not seeking for righteousness have received it, and that righteousness by faith

9:30-10:21 recapitulates Paul’s argument about the “fall” of ethnic Israel, stated first within the historical words of YHWH through his prophets, now through the events of the Messiah’s actions and the new covenant life through faith being preached to the Gentiles—and that through faith, not works of Torah. Righteousness here is, again, dikaiosunen. Keep in mind that our functional definition is “covenant membership.” The following verses will serve to sharpen and enhance that usage in the preceding chapters. The Gentiles, not looking for covenant membership, have received, and that by faith.

31 But Israel seeking the Torah of righteousness unto Torah did not attain it.

Or, “looking for righteousness/covenant membership/dikaiosunen in Torah did not attain (ephthasen) it.

32 Why this? Since not by faith but as by works. They have stumbled upon the stumbling stone

Dia ti. Probably means: “and why not?” (dialectical) Since [their dikaiosunen] is not by faith but by the works of Torah. These works of Torah seem to be the stumbling stone that was part of the plan all along. (see next verse)

33 Even as it is written Behold I am placing in Zion a stumbling stone and a rock to make them fall, and he believing upon it will not be put to shame

Upon it could also mean upon him. Rock to make them fall is petran skandalou (hence the stone of scandal of old translations.) The closest meaning of skandalos is “that which causes sin.” It was YHWH’s intent, paradoxically, to cause the stumble and the failure. (With the purposes of ch. 7-8 in mind.)

10:1 Brothers, my heart’s desire and my prayer to God concerning them is unto salvation

Paul again states his deep personal affectation. He does not wish this upon his kinfolk.

2 For I witness for them that they have zeal of God but not according to knowledge

Knowledge is epignosin. Witness is marturo, legal language of testifying.

3 For not knowing God’s righteousness and seeking to establish their own [righteousness], they have not submitted to God’s righteousness

The second dikaiosunen is not attested in all manuscripts, but the sense remains the same. Israel’s sin is not only personal shortcomings within Torah, but also an attempt to twist Torah into something it was never intended to be—an ethnic marker of covenant membership. In doing so, they have not submitted to God’s righteousness/justification/covenant membership. (Which is, by faith.)

4 For the climax of Torah is the Messiah unto righteousness for all believing

Telos nomou could be translated a number of different ways: The end, the perfection, the completion or the satisfaction—and I like N.T. Wright’s take on it: The Climax of the Covenant. Righteousness is, again, dikaiosunen. Special weight on all.

5 For Moses writes the righteousness from Torah is “The man doing these will live by them”

Paul does not quote from Leviticus here to show the old “bad” way of doing Torah in contrast with the good new Christian one. Rather, as in the similar passage in Galatians, he is demonstrating that the true keeping of Torah is what he describes, whether for Jew or Gentile: hearing and believing.

6 And the righteousness from faith thus says “Do not say in your heart, who will ascend unto heaven? (That is to bring the Messiah down)

These two verses could easily become a quagmire if we assume that Paul, when speaking about ascending to heaven and descending to the abyss, is writing from our familiar concerns of “going to heaven or hell when we die” as the principal concern of religion and the only terms of post-mortem experience. Observe the context: the “do not say in your heart” comes from Deut 9:4—the first stern warning to Israel as it prepared for conquest that it was not from their righteousness that they would inherit the land, and that they are indeed unworthy of it because of their sin and failure. Following Moses’ guarantee of Israel’s failure in ch. 30, he tells them in v. 12-14 not to wish for someone to ascend into heaven or cross the sea that they might be able to keep Torah. (v.11 says “it is not too hard for you, nor far off.”)

7 Or, Who will descend unto the abyss? This is to raise the Messiah from the dead.

Rather, reading from Deuteronomy in the context of post-exile 2^nd temple Judaism, this is Paul’s sense: Do you want to know what doing the covenant really looks like? It isn’t waiting for someone to go do it by force—we already have a Messiah ruling above! And isn’t to call back one of your old prophets—the Messiah was already raised! Your hope isn’t in some faraway kingdom to be won by swords and Sabbaths—its to hear the word of Jesus.

8 But what does it say? The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart, this is the word of faith which we preach

Here the powerful quote from Deuteronomy is finished. Word is hrema, not logos. Preach is kerussomen, which can also be herald or proclaim.

9 Because if you might confess with your mouth Jesus is Lord and you might believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.

Iesoun is the object, kurion the complement. There’s much that can be said of this verse on any number of levels, but it certainly takes on a new and robust meaning here when placed in the context of “doing Torah” in the Israel story. Incidentally, this verse is a strong endorsement for what I’ve pushed in separate discussions about the original euangelion meaning “Lordship and Resurrection.” Believe is pisteuses. (Have/keep faith) Note the consecutive effect with v. 8.

10 For in the heart one believes unto justification, and by the mouth one confesses unto salvation.

This is the true keeping of Torah…this is what Paul means in v. 5

11 For the scripture says He believing upon him will not be put to shame

Put to shame is kataischunthesetai. Believing is pisteuon. (Have/keep faith). Explains Paul’s contrast to those stumbling in 9:33. (Original reference is Is. 28:16)

12 For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek, for the same one is Lord of all, generous unto all calling upon him

Distinction is diastole. Generous is plouton. (Enriching) Once again, emphasis on all.

13 For all which call upon the name of the Lord will be saved

Joel 2:32, buttressing salvation by confession of Lordship, which segues quite naturally into the Gentile mission.

14 How therefore might they call unto he which they have not believed? And how might they believe him they have not heard? And how might they hear without someone proclaiming/preaching?

It’s been argued that Paul’s theological point here shares an important practical concern—he wanted to use Rome as a base for a Gentile mission in Spain, as he used Antioch to Asia Minor. Proclaiming/preaching is kerossontos again. Note that Paul regards the mission to the Gentiles as an essential part of YHWH’s covenant purpose…not keeping the Gentiles out by ethnic borders.

15 And how might they preach unless they might be sent? Even as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of those pronouncing the good news

Sent is apostalosin. (Hence, apostles) The well-known reference is from Isaiah 52 and Nahum. Pronouncing the good news is euangelizomenon [ta] agatha. Good news is euangelion.

16 But not all have obeyed the good news. For Isaiah says “Lord, who has believed our message?”

Paul establishes, not only that “not all” have obeyed the gospel, but that this in fact was foreseen and forepurposed.

17 Therefore faith is from hearing, and hearing through the word of the Messiah

Word is hrematos again, not logos. Lost in translation is the interplay between the word for hearing—akoes—and the word for obedience—upakoes. It might well read “But not all have really heard the good news. Note too that the “hearing” carries with it, not only an aural reception, but an obedience to the hearing.

18 But I say, have they not heard? Indeed, Unto all the land their voice has gone out, and unto the boundaries of the inhabited world their words

Again, have they not obeyed? The particle menounge provides the effect of “on the contrary.” Have they heard? Yes, everyone has heard… Voice is “cry,” “shout,” or “clatter.” (phthongos)

19 But I say, did Israel not understand? First Moses says “I will make you jealous upon those not a nation, with a foolish nation I will make you angry”

But Israel did not hear what they heard. They did not understand. What is more, this was done on purpose, that they might be provoked. Indeed, their stumble and provocation is forepurposed. Foolish is asuneto. (Without understanding) The Jews should be jealous of the Gentiles.

20 And Isaiah says in boldness “I am found by those not seeking me, I am become visible to those not asking for me

And Isaiah will come straight out and declare, as Paul began in 9:30, that those not seeking have found, but those seeking are lost.”

21 But for Israel he says “The whole day I have held out my hands to a disobedient and contrary people.”

Again, YHWH is just, for he has been patient with Israel, but they have disobeyed his purposes.

International Date Night, Hibachi edition

Other blogs

Check out J's foray back into the blogging world here:

http://julie-smith.blogspot.com/

and my review of Richard Hays' book at the Old Crow:

http://oldcrowlibrary.blogspot.com/2012/09/the-moral-vision-of-new-testament.html

Romans Commentary Project, chapter 9

As we enter this most contentious section of the letter I take for granted that Paul is working out the faithfulness of the covenant of God through his Messiah Jesus despite the apparent failure of ethnic Israel. The real question for our purposes is the meaning of 11:25-27, which I will present as the logical outworking of chs. 5-8 in general and chs. 9-11 specifically.

1 I am speaking the truth in the Messiah, I do not lie, by the co-witness of my conscience in the Holy Spirit

Following the conclusion of ch. 8, Paul prefaces his new argument with a solemn oath regarding his own conscience toward his subject matter—the faithfulness of God despite the ‘failure’ of ethnic Israel.

2 Since it is great sorrow to me and constant pain in my heart.

Paul answers in advance any possible interpretation of vengeful anti-Semitism from his Gentile Roman audience.

3 For I pray myself to be anathema from the Messiah for the sake of my brothers, my kinfolk according to the flesh

Kinsfolk are sungenon, sometimes “cousins” or “relations.” Anathema.

4 Which are the Israelites, of whom the sonship and the glory and the covenants, and the law-giving and the worship and the promises

Note that Paul is listing the privileges of Israel which have now, as was demonstrated earlier, been transferred to the Messiah-people. Of particular interest are the law-giving (following my argument about ch. 7) and the worship (latreia), which highlights the often overlooked transference of temple rights to the new Messiah-people.

5 Of whom the patriarchs and from whom the Messiah, according to the flesh, he being upon all blessed of God unto the ages, amen

Patriarchs or “fathers.” (pateres) An interesting alternate translation for this verse is to read Theos eulogetos as the subject instead of predicate—[The Messiah] being the blessed God upon all unto the ages—but the textual evidence is spotty.

6 And this is not that the word of God has failed, for not all those from Israel are of Israel

Ho logos tou theou here does not mean “the Christian Bible.” As in v. 28, logos means more “plan” “purpose” or “action.” (As, especially considering its LXX context, would the Hebrew davar) The sense is: YHWH didn’t mess this up—this was the plan all along. Paul again, as in v. 5, will put forth his theological argument by the characteristic Jewish mode of retelling the Israel story. His purpose here: Exactly because “Israel” does not have to mean “ethnic Jews,” YHWH has been faithful to his promises. (This is very important, obviously, to 11:25-27) I’ll take for granted the following points in the course of this argument 1) Israel’s vocation as the covenant people was always the means of rescuing the whole world. 2) The vocation was distorted by ethnic privilege, but made clear in the Messiah 3) The divine intention (or ho logos tou theou) was always to deal with evil (Sin in ch. 7) in one place (execution and judgment) 4) That place was always to be the Messiah. We must read this section as the defense to the question that Paul answers “no” in v. 14—there is no injustice on God’s part in his actions through Israel.

7 Nor is it that the descendants of Abraham are all his children, but “in Isaac descendants to you will be named”

Throughout descendants are sperma (sometimes seed) and children are tekna. In other words, “not all who can claim Abraham as their forefather are biologically related.” (See ch. 4) Explanation for the second half below.

8 This is, not these which are the children of the flesh, but those children of the promise will be reckoned unto descendants

Instead of succession through the “flesh”—which Paul has likened to the illegitimate Hagar/Ishmael relation—Paul declares that the son of the promise (epangelias) is the legitimate heir.

9 For this is the word of the promise “In this time I will come and a son shall be to Sarah”

epangelias gar o logos. Paul connects the promise to Isaac through the birth of Jacob to Sarah…but the promise had to wait.

10 And not this alone, but also Rebekah had from one husband, from our father Isaac

One husband is koiten “bedfellow.” The implication is “and something like this happened again when Rebekah had her child.” It could become a mare’s nest if not read in the context of v. 12—the similarity comes from the dispute of legitimate succession between two sons.

11 For they not yet having been born nor doing anything good or bad, that the forepurposed election of God might continue,

eklogen prothesis tou theou mene. This was not an after-the fact judgment on God’s part, but his elevation of Isaac was according to his just purpose.

12 Not from works but from the call, It was told to her that “The older will serve the younger”

And that the promise in v. 7 might be fulfilled

13 Even as it is written “Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated”

The younger son, the son to whom is promise given over the natural birthright or the birth according to the flesh, is preferred.

14 What then will we say? Surely there is not injustice on God’s part? May it not be!

Another me genoito. Paul defends YHWH’s purposes by virtue of who YHWH is as the sovereign God.

15 For he said to Moses “I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.”

Eleeso and oiktireso. Quote is from Ex. 33:19.

16 Therefore it is not then of will nor of exertion but of God’s mercy

What is not of will or exertion? (trechontos) The privilege of sonship (and all the other privileges of 9:4-5) which are claimed via biological succession.

17 For the scripture says to Pharaoh that “Unto this one thing I have raised you up, that I should demonstrate in you my power and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.”

As YHWH has done before, he will elevate to one place a means of executing his just judgment.

18 Therefore he then has mercy on whom he wills, and he hardens he whom he wills.

And as God hardened Pharaoh’s heart so to demonstrate his power, so might he harden Israel to demonstrate his long-promised rescue.

19 You will then say to me: Why them does he yet find fault? For who is able to stand against his will?

The following is one of the hardest passages in Paul to read. He offers no comfort about God’s goodness and kindness…he simply takes away our prerogative to question. Will (boulemati) might make better sense as “choice” throughout.

20 O man, on the contrary, who are you to be answering back to God? Surely that which is molded does not say to the molder “Why have you made me in this way?”

We are, first of all, created beings. The creator is not subject to the created.

21 Or doesn’t the potter have authority over the clay to make form his own lump one vessel of honor and another of dishonor?

Echoes much of the O.T. language about YHWH as the potter and Israel as the clay/vessel. Some translations have atimian as “ordinary use.” (Honor is timen.) One is too harsh, the other too soft, neither quite captures the original verbal effect.

22 And if God willing to demonstrate his wrath and to make known his power carried in much long-suffering the objects of wrath which are supplied unto destruction

Longsuffering is makrothumia. Israel was given plenty of time, but ultimately will function as the means by which God’s judgment is carried out…and that unto apoleian.

23 Even in order that the wealth of his glory might be made known upon the objects of his mercy which he prepared beforehand unto glory

And yet in that same act those which YHWH chose for legitimacy will be given unto glory

24 Which he also called us not alone from the Jews but also from the Gentiles (?)

Not sure whether 24 and 25 are supposed to be 2 clauses (w/a question mark) or one.

25 That even as he says in Hosea “I will call those not my people ‘my people,’ and those not beloved ‘beloved.’

Therefore the call (24) is extended to those “not his people.”

26 And it shall be in the place where it was said to them ‘You are not my people,’ there they will be called sons of the living God.”

And sonship is extended.

27 And Isaiah cried concerning Israel: “If the number of the sons of Israel were as the sand of the sea, a remnant will be saved.”

Is. 10:22-23

28 For completely and decisively the Lord will make his word upon the earth.”

Word is logos.

29 And even as Isaiah forespoke: “If the Lord of hosts had not left descendants to us, as Sodom we would have become, and even as to Gomorrah would we be likened.”

Stopping here for now, because the last 3 verses in ch. 9, I think, belong to the next stage of the argument.

Chicago!

The beautiful Chicago skyline from the air

The actual picture that I took with my iPhone of the beautiful Chicago skyline

Some fun links...

Unfortunately, this breviary is set to London time, so you have to read Vespers and Compline in advance...but the services are beautiful!

http://www.breviary.info/office.html

A great collection of medieval primary sources from Fordham University:

http://historymedren.about.com/gi/o.htm?zi=1/XJ&zTi=1&sdn=historymedren&cdn=education&tm=8&f=00&tt=14&bt=1&bts=1&st=25&zu=http%3A//www.fordham.edu/halsall/sbook1k.html

Romans Outline Chs. 1-8

While I'm working on Ch. 9 for next week, here's a critical outline of the project's progress so far. Many details within the commentary I've written so far support this structural analysis. Some fine points are much more structurally important than others, but at this moment in our analysis the minutiae start to matter very little. What I think about chs. 9-11 is, however, entirely dependent on the larger shape of chs. 1-8. Please let me know if there appears to be anything suspicious or unfounded in what you see below. If so, that ought to be sorted out before going on to the controversial material.

Romans 1-4 The Faithfulness of God

1:1-15 Exposition, God’s gospel and Paul’s service

1:16-17 The Gospel is God’s righteousness

1:18-32 Idolatrous Gentiles dehumanized by God’s wrath

2:1-16 “You” (judging) also under impartial unfavorable judgment

2:17-“You” the Jew directly challenged

3:1-8 Israel unfaithful but God faithful

3:9-20 Torah indicts Jew and Gentile alike

3:21-26 But now, God’s righteousness through the faithfulness of Jesus

3:27-38 One God of One Faith for Jews & Gentiles

4:1-8 Abraham the covenant father (by faith)

4:9-15 Abraham the father by faith, not by circumcision or Torah

4:16-17 Abraham the father of Jew and Gentile faithful

4:18-22 Abraham trusting in him giving life to the dead

4:23-25 And likewise to “us”

Romans 5-8 God’s people in the Messiah

5:1-5 Exposition, hope in suffering

5:6-11 Love demonstrated in the Messiah’s death

5:12-21 The Messiah greater than Adam

6:1-11 Dying and rising (baptism) with the Messiah—Exodus through the waters

6:12-23 No longer in slavery, but redeemed into freedom

7:1-6 Two marriages; being “widowed” to Torah

7:7-12 Is Torah sin? No, but its arrival (read Sinai) is Sin’s opportunity

7:13-20 Torah does not kill “me” (Israel) but Sin through it; Torah and “I” exonerated

7:21-25 The Torah bifurcates and so do “I”—I need rescue

8:1 Therefore, no condemnation

8:2-11 Because God has done what Torah could not in Messiah’s defeat of Sin; gives resurrection life

8:12-17 Therefore we are not people of flesh (circumcision) but heirs in the Spirit

8:18-30 The promised renewal of all things; recap of 5:1-5, hope in suffering

8:31-39 Nothing to separate us from God’s love