paul's redefinition of jewish identity (romans 2:17-29) · paul’s redefinition of jewish identity...

Lionel Windsor

Pauls Redefinition of Jewish Identity (Romans 2:17-29)

Paper Presented at the Durham New Testament Seminar, Durham University,

October 2011

This document is intended for personal supporters , family and friends of

Lionel Windsor only. Please don t copy or distribute.

3

What do you say to St Paul, itching with a

Jewishness he couldnt scratch away until hed

turned half the world against it?

I say thank you, Paul, for widening the argument.

Libor and Finkler, The Finkler Question1

The relationship between Pauls Jewish identity and his Christ-identity is complex and

disputed. I argue that Paul neither affirms Jewish identity as it stands nor rejects the

value of Jewish distinctiveness altogether. Rather, Paul redefines Jewish identity in light

of the gospel of Christ. For Paul, Jewishness retains a distinctive value (e.g. Rom 3:1-2).

However, this value should not be conceived principally in terms of salvation. Rather,

Jewish identity should be understood primarily in terms of a special divine vocation

(i.e. a role or task in the world) which springs from the law as a gift of divine

revelation. Thus there is a close relationship between Pauls Jewish identity and his

apostleship. Romans 2:17-29, which is located in the social context of the synagogue, is

intended by Paul as a summary of his redefinition of Jewish identity.

Part A: Pauls Redefinition of Jewish Identity

1. Paul the Jew?

The Apostle Paul was a Jew who fought with Jews. At certain key points in his

letters, Paul emphatically asserts his Jewish identity.2 He describes Jews as his

brothers,3 his family,4 his race,5 and his flesh.6 He grieves for Jews,7 prays for Jews,8

seeks to win Jews,9 works alongside Jews,10 and shapes his ministry in service of

1 Jacobson 2010.

2 Most notably Rom 11:1, 2 Cor 11:22.

3 Rom 9:3.

4 Rom 9:3; 16:7, 11, 21.

5 2 Cor 11:26, Gal 1:14.

6 Rom 9:3, 11:14.

7 Rom 9:1-3.

8 Rom 10:1.

9 1 Cor 9:20, cf. 1 Cor 1:22-23 (Watson 2007, 72-73).

10 Rom 16:7, cf. Col 4:11.


4

Jews.11 Yet he also fights his fiercest battles with Jews.12 In the course of these

battles, he abandons Jewish commitments,13 trivialises Jewish lifestyles,14 curses

preachers of Jewish circumcision,15 dies to the Jewish law,16 and at times

seemingly renounces his Jewish identity altogether.17

At first glance, Pauls varied statements about Jewishness seem mutually

incompatible. 18 They certainly constitute a wide spectrum, from heartfelt

identification through to bitter denunciation. Not surprisingly, then, scholars have

come to many different conclusions about Pauls Jewishness. Those who examine

Pauls overall worldview, for example, often conclude that Paul has recognisably

Jewish convictions.19 Mark Nanos, who is concerned with Pauls attitude towards

other Jews, concludes that Paul never challenged Jewish Torah observance; thus

Paul was a good Jew.20 John Barclay, on the other hand, who is concerned with

whether Pauls Jewish contemporaries accepted him as Jewish, concludes that they

did not; thus Paul was an apostate Jew.21 Love Sechrest, moreover, asks about

Pauls group affiliation, and concludes that he felt a deeper kinship bond with the

Christian community than with the Jewish community; and so Paul is a former

Jew.22

11 Rom 11:14; 15:25-28, 31; 1 Cor 16:1-4.

12 Rom 15:31; 2 Cor 11:22, 24; Gal 6:12-13; Phil 3:2-6; 1 Thess 2:14-16.

13 Gal 1:13-14.

14 Gal 2:14-15, 1 Cor 9:20 (Dunn 1999, 182).

15 Gal 1:6-9; cf. Gal 5:6, 11; 6:12-15; Phil 3:2-3; cf. Tit 1:10.

16 Gal 2:19.

17 Phil 3:5-8.

18 Risnen (2008, 319-22) demonstrates the diversity and apparent contradiction in Pauls stance towards Judaism.

19 E.g. Frey 2007, 299-310.

20 Nanos 1996, 9, citing Barth (1979). See also Rudolph (2011), who critiques the consensus reading of 1 Cor 9:19-23 and argues that Paul did not necessarily abandon a Torah-observant lifestyle. Rather, consistent with contemporary Jewish practice of accommodation, Paul ate with Gentiles but did not personally transgress the Mosaic food laws. See also Eisenbaum 2009; Rudolph 2010.

21 E.g. 2 Cor 11:24, 26; 1 Thess 2:15-16. So Barclay 1995, 111-19. Cf. Barclays description of Paul as an anomalous diaspora Jew (1996b, 381-95).

22 Sechrest 2009, 157-64. Cf. Sanders (1983, 171-79) who argues that even though Paul did not intend to make the church into a third race, his ministry inevitably had this effect.

1. Paul the Jew?

5

Even this small selection of scholarship demonstrates that the question of Pauls

Jewishness can be asked, and answered, in many different ways. This plurality is

not in itself problematic. After all, each of the various aspects of Pauls Jewishness

which scholars choose as a focus for study represents a legitimate scholarly

concern, and provides valuable, discrete insights. Nevertheless, the question of

Pauls Jewishness is not easy to confine; it has the unsettling tendency to break

through narrowly defined areas of scholarly concern. Because it is such a

significant topic, individual pronouncements about Pauls Jewishness in one area

often influence studies in many other areas of Pauls life and thoughthis

theology, Christology, soteriology, ecclesiology, hermeneutics, missiology, social

views, etc.23

In my overall dissertation, I am taking yet another approach to the question of

Pauls Jewishness. I am seeking to investigate Pauls Jewish identity; that is, I am

seeking to understand who Paul himself thought he was, in light of his Jewish

context.24 My aim is to identify similarities and differences between Paul and his

Jewish contemporaries, and to discern how these similarities and differences

generate Pauls own individual Jewish identity.

Of course, my approach, like any other, is selective. My primary aim is to

understand aspects of Pauls own Jewish identity, not to judge his Jewishness

against an independent, external standard (historical or otherwise). Nevertheless,

despite its selectivity, an approach based on identity is capable of making

significant contributions to other areas of Pauline studies. This is precisely because

the approach seeks to understand Pauls own personal perspective on Jewishness.

It therefore provides immediate points of integration with other areas of his life,

his thought and his influence.

23 Hagner (2007) discusses the way in which Pauls Jewishness is inseparable from other key areas of his life and thought.

24 Cf. Dunns question: Who did Paul think he was? (1999, 174-77). My approach is informed by the notion of social identity, which conceives of an individuals identity in a dialogical relationship with his or her social world through a dynamic interplay of similarity and difference. For general discussions of social identity, see Giddens 1993; Jenkins 2008; Lawler 2008. See also the foundational work of Berger and Luckmann (1971, 194-96), discussed and critiqued by Horrell (2001). Like Meeks (1983, 5), our use of social theory will be suggestive, rather than generative.


6

The notion of identity is, in fact, particularly valuable for examining the numerous

elements of conflict and dissonance in Pauls statements about Jewish identity.

Theorists frequently describe identity formation as an evolutionary process, a

constant interaction between individuals and their social world which changes

both the individuals and the world.25 We can examine Paul in these terms, as an

agent of identity, who by his apostolic ministry is both reproducing older

conceptions of Jewish identity and simultaneously creating newer conceptions.

2. Pauls gospel and his Jewish identity

However, Pauls identity-shaping activities are more drastic and disruptive than

might be suggested by a term such as evolutionary. Paul is convinced that

something revolutionary has occurred in the life, death and resurrection of Christ,

an event which he proclaims in his gospel. This radical Christ-event pervades

Pauls letters and undergirds both his own identity and his conception of his

readers identities.26 It creates new communities with new social realities.27 It even

challenges elements of Jewish distinctiveness.28 Pauls Jewish identity, therefore,

cannot be understood without reference to this even more fundamental Christ-

identity.29 The relationship between Pauls Jewish and Christian30 identities has

itself been conceived in different ways by different scholars.31

25 E.g. Giddens (1993): Every act which contributes to the reproduction of structure is also an act of production, a novel enterprise, and as such may initiate change by altering that structure at the same time as it reproduces itas the meanings of words change in and through their use. (134)

26 E.g. Rom 1:1-7; 1 Cor 15:1-11; Gal 1:1-5; 1 Thess 1:4-10; etc.

27 E.g. Rom 14:1-15:7; 1 Cor 1:2; 2 Cor 1:1; Phil 2:1-11; etc.

28 E.g. Rom 3:29-30, 10:12; 1 Cor 12:13; Gal 3:28; cf. Col 3:11.

29 Barclay (2010) contends that in Galatians, The Christ-gift is the fulfilment of the divine promises to Abraham, but is neither prepared for nor conditioned by Israels prior history (53). Jewish identity, then, as expressed in Torah-observance, can no longer be seen as something intrinsically valuable in and of itself. Ethnicity, including and especially Jewishness, retains no value, as a mark of status, within the new reality created by the gift (50).

30 Henceforth we will use the adjective Christian as shorthand for pertaining to faith in relation to Jesus Christ (cf. Rom 3:22). Although the term Christ-believing would be closer to Pauls usage, it is too cumbersome to use repeatedly.

31 For the feasibility of the idea that Paul could have multiple, nested identities, see Hodge (2005).

2. Pauls gospel and his Jewish identity

7

According to Mark Nanos, for example, Pauls view of Christian identity provides

little direct challenge to Jewish identity at all.32 The Christians to whom Paul is

writing are non-Torah-observant synagogue-attending righteous Gentiles.33 In

Romans, Paul is urging these gentiles to regard the weak, i.e. non-Christian Jews,

as brothers and sisters in faith; hence the Christians should respect the Jewish

identity of their brothers and sisters while seeking to win them for Christ if they

can. It has been demonstrated that are a number of significant flaws with Nanos

proposal, most seriously in aspects of his exegesis of Rom 14:1-15:6.34 Nanos

proposal, therefore, while provocative, ultimately lacks firm exegetical support.

Daniel Boyarin, on the other hand, argues that Pauls gospel is a universalistic

system which effectively (if not quite intentionally) supersedes and eradicates

Jewish identity by rendering any concept of Jewish distinctiveness meaningless.35

Boyarin, it must be said, has self-consciously limited himself to reading Paul

through the lens of Gal 3:28-29, which affirms the relative unimportance of Jewish

distinction.36 Boyarin does not fully explore the significance of Pauls closely

argued affirmations of on-going Jewish advantage (e.g. Rom 3:1-2, 9:4-5, 11:28-

29).37 Nevertheless, Boyarins challenge must be recognised by anyone who seeks

to examine Pauls view of Jewish identity.

A number of scholars have attempted to reconcile Pauls affirmation of the unity of

Jew and Gentile in Christ with his statements about an on-going, distinct, Jewish

identity. William Campbell, Philip Esler and Bruce Hansen, in different ways and

32 Nanos 1996.

33 See also Nanos 2010. Nanos argues that Paul and his Christian contemporaries were claiming that non-Jews, by way of their response to the gospel of Christ, have become included in the Jewish communities, in Judaism, as equal members, apart from them becoming Jews, that is, without undertaking proselyte conversion (157). Nanos article is nuanced and at points persuasive, but continued insistence on using terms of Jewish identity such as Judaism to describe the Christian communities as a whole seems strained and paradoxical.

34 E.g. elsewhere in Romans, Paul describes non-Christian Jews, not simply as weak in faith, but without faith, (Rom 11:20, 23) (Das 2003, 69-74, 2007, 115-48; cf. Fisk 2008, 176; Gagnon 2000; Hvalvik 2007, 193-96). See also Esler (2003, 120), who notes that Pauls failure to mention any connection with the social and architectural forms typical of the Judean community in Rome in the mid-first century in Romans 16 poses a significant obstacle to this pioneering thesis.

35 Boyarin 1994, 152, cf. 7-8.

36 Boyarin 1994, 5-6.

37 Texts such as these are discussed by Stowers (1994, 129-34).


8

with different emphases, argue that Paul affirms Jews as members of an ethnic

group whose distinction from non-Jews must be protected within the Christian

community.38 Gentiles do not have to become Jews in order to be Christian; but

neither do Christian Jews have to give up their Jewish identity. In order for Pauls

vision to be put into effect, however, the Mosaic law must be divested of its

theological significance. According to these interpreters, Paul views the law of

Moses simply as a set of cultural norms and practices which must be affirmed

within his multicultural Christian communities.

While the studies I have just mentioned are thorough and insightful attempts to

account for Pauls affirmations of a distinct place for Jewish identity within the

Christian community, in the end they are still subject to Boyarins critique.39 They

claim that Paul both denied any kind of ultimate theological significance to the

Mosaic law and that he also affirmed a distinct ethnic identity for Jews. However,

this does not fit with what we know about Pauls understanding of Jewishness.

When Paul asserts the value of a distinct Jewish ethnic identity, he implies that this

identity is closely bound up with the theological significance of the Mosaic law (e.g.

Rom 3:1-2, 9:4-5, 11:28-29). Given his Pharisaic background, Paul would also have

been intimately aware that any suggestion that the law should be robbed of its

theological significance entirely would cause uproar amongst his Jewish

contemporaries.40 Paul, in other words, could not have denied any ultimate

theological significance to the Mosaic law without destroying the distinctiveness of

Jewish identity.41 But, as we have seen, Paul did affirm the value of Jewish identity.

38 Campbell 1991, esp. 98-116, 2006, 104-20; Esler 2003; Hansen 2010

39 This is despite Hansens claim that he has answered Boyarin (2010, 60-62, 103-04, 202).

40 Given Pauls background as a Pharisee (Phil 3:5-6) and zealot, (Gal 1:13-14), he must have been aware that his negative statements concerning the law would immediately threaten the core of Jewish ethnic identity and thus risk intense social disharmony, even in the short term. Thus Pauls statements cannot be explained simply as part of a well-intentioned conflict-reduction strategy which only later caused unintended problems for Jewish identity, as claimed by Esler (2003, 354-56) and Campbell (2006, 116). Cf. Acts 6:13-14, 13:38-47, 18:13-15, which imply that even before Paul wrote to the Romans, the gospel had been preached in a form that implied an unorthodox view of the Law which induced heated conflict, and may well have contributed significantly to the disturbances which led to the expulsion of the Jews under Claudius at the instigation of Chrestus. (Suetonius 1914-1920, Claud. 25.4) (Hvalvik 2007, 182).

41 To render a practice that was so central to Jewish identity ultimately unnecessary implies a similar judgment regarding that identity itself (Das 2003, 78; cf. Barclay 1996a, 308). While this

3. The vocational dimension of Jewish identity

9

This, in turn, must imply that Paul saw some theological value in the law of

Moses.42

What, then, was Paul doing with the law, and thus with Jewish identity? I have

argued that he wasnt simply affirming it as it stood (Nanos), or dissolving it in a

Hellenistic sea of universalism (Boyarin), or preserving it in a relativised ethnic

form by removing its deep theological significance (Esler, Campbell, Hansen). In

my dissertation, I argue that Paul is doing something else with the law and with

Jewish identity. He is simultaneously affirming that Jewish identity and the law

have immense theological significance, and is profoundly redefining the nature of

that theological significance, in light of the gospel of Christ. My research, therefore,

is an exploration of how this transformed understanding of the law and Jewish

identity informs Pauls activity as apostle and gospel preacher. What, in other

words, does Paul see as the on-going significance of distinctive Jewishness?


The theological value which Paul ascribes to Jewishness is clearly not soteriological

in any straightforward sense. Paul repeatedly declares that Jewish identity is not a

deciding factor in a persons salvation,43 justification,44 divine inheritance45 or

membership in the Christian community;46 since these things are all obtained

through Christ regardless of whether one is a Jew. What, then, is the value of being

Jewish for Paul?

I contend that the concept of a divine vocation for Israel undergirds many of Pauls

discussions of Jewish identity. The word vocation or calling in this context is

meant to refer to any kind of conviction that God has given Israel a special role or

kind of tolerance appears positive from a Christian perspective, it is disastrous from a Jewish perspective (Boyarin 1994, 31-32).

42 So Das 2003, 141. Das does outline a positive vision for the Mosaic law in the life of Christians in general (166-186) but doesnt explore the implications of Pauls view of the law for the on-going existence of a distinct Jewish identity in Pauls communities. It is our intention to explore this issue further.

43 E.g. Rom 10:12-13.

44 E.g. Rom 3:29-30.

45 E.g. Rom 4:13-14, Gal 3:28-29.

46 E.g. 1 Cor 12:13.


10

task within his wider purposes. The concept is referred to and developed by a

number of scholars, especially those who are particularly conscious of a Jewish

perspective in their biblical interpretation. Such scholars speak of exclusive Jewish

cultural practice as a task and calling in the world47 or as a distinct vocation,

, within the Christian community, a vocation that is not coterminous with

Gods call to salvation.48 The purpose of this special call is to promote Gods

wider purposes in the world not simply to create an inward-looking triumphant

exclusivism.49

A sense of Israels vocation is usually closely related to the conviction that the law

of Moses, and the scriptures more generally, are a gift of divine revelation to Israel.

Since God has uniquely revealed himself to Israel in the law, Israel has a unique

task to perform in response to that law. The exact nature of Israels response was

conceived in different ways by Pauls Jewish contemporaries; e.g. obedience to the

law, enforcing purity, mediating divine wisdom to Gentiles, etc. I contend that Paul

affirms that the revelation of the law to Israel provides them with a unique gift and

thus a significant divine vocation. However, in light of the gospel of Christ, Paul

radically redefines the significance of the law,50 and so also redefines the nature of

Israels distinct vocation.

47 Boyarin 1994, 32.

48 Rudolph 2011, 75-89. See also Kaminsky (2007, 2011; 2006 and Levenson (1996, 154-56).

49 Nanos 1996, 9. An emphasis on the vocation of Israel is also a feature of the work of Stanley Stowers and N. T. Wright, although their particular interpretations of the nature of Israels vocation and its relationship to Israels salvation are problematic. Stowers (1994, 189-91, 299-300, 06-12) claims that Paul is only wrestling with vocational issues and not with soteriological issues. However, Stowers does not deal adequately with Pauls very strong statements about the soteriological nature of Israels problem (e.g. Rom 3:20; 10:21; 11:20, 23) and his clear concerns about Israels salvation (e.g. 9:3, 10:1) (Longenecker 2007, 27-31). For other critiques of the Sonderweg approach of which Stowers is a representative see Risnen (1988, 180); Hvalvik (1990); Donaldson (2006, 39-44). Wright (1991, 20-21, 231-57) conceives of Israels divine vocation primarily in terms of incorporation. Israels greatest sin (which nevertheless achieved Gods purposes) was her failure to include Gentiles; her positive role is to incorporate others into herself, thereby becoming Gods new saved humanity, the church. Wrights particular conception of Israels vocation ultimately undercuts the very issue we are trying to address: the value of a distinct identity for Jewish identity within Christian identity. Israels ultimate vocation, for Wright, is precisely to abandon her distinctiveness. This is because Wright connects Israels vocation with incorporation, which is a unifying concept, rather than with revelation, which is a more distinctive concept.

50 Cf. Watson 2004, 16-17.


11

To reiterate: Paul did not conceive of the distinct value of Jewishness principally in

terms of salvation, but rather in terms of a special vocation springing from a

unique divine revelation. For many other Jews in Pauls context, such a distinction

between vocation and salvation would have been largely irrelevant, since Israels

response to the divine revelation of the law was thought to lead to salvation in a

fairly straightforward manner. However, in Pauls discussions of Jewish identity, it

is important to distinguish soteriological and vocational elements. This is because

Paul views the relationship between the law-revelation and salvation as

contentious and problematic. For Paul, the possibility that Israels response to the

law may achieve Gods purposes in the world but not thereby ensure salvation for

Israel itself is a topic of intense discussion, especially in his letter to the Romans.

13

Part B: Romans 2:17-29

In Rom 2:17-29, many of the key interpretative puzzles associated with the

complex relationship between Pauls Christian identity and his Jewish identity rise

to particular prominence. This passage appears within a letter whose overarching

theme is the Christian gospel;51 yet the passage itself is a discussion of Jewishness.

Many contemporary exegetes therefore assume that Pauls aim here is to

demonstrate that the true Jews are in fact all Christians, not ethnic Jews.52 Daniel

Boyarin, while agreeing with this line of interpretation, points out that it therefore

constitutes an effective dissolution of Jewish identity.53 I have maintained,

however, that Boyarins interpretation does not take Pauls affirmations of on-

going Jewish advantage into account. In fact, Pauls very next statementRom 3:1-

2is a strong affirmation of Jewish advantage. I contend, rather, that Paul should

be seen as redefining Jewish identity in light of the Christian gospel without

thereby denying its distinctiveness. In fact, I wish to argue that that Rom 2:17-29

itself constitutes a carefully crafted summary of this very process of Jewish identity

redefinition in light of the gospel.

In the remainder of this paper, I will locate this passage within its context in

Romans, describe its intended social setting and purpose, and then present my key

conclusions about the nature of Pauls redefinition of Jewish identity.

1. The location of Romans 2:17-29 within the argument of Romans

Pauls thematic statement in Rom 1:16-17 shows that the Jew-Gentile dynamic is

an important factor in his gospel presentation.54 Paul is not ashamed of the gospel

because it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, both to the

Jew first, , and also to the Greek. On the one hand, this means that

believing Jews and Greeks are united in salvation through the gospel. On the other

51 Rom 1:1-5, 1:16-17.

52 E.g. Cranfield 1975, 1.176; Dunn 1988, 1.125; Jewett 2007, 236; Ksemann 1971, 144; Moo 1996, 175; Schmidt 1966, 53-55; see also Barclay 1998, 546; Das 2003, 184; Schreiner 1998, 141-45; Watson 2007, 215; Wright 1996, 133-39. Schmithals (1988, 101) is an exception.

53 Boyarin 1994, 94-95.

54 Rom 1:16-17 is the thematic statement of Romans (Cranfield 1975, 1.87-102; Dunn 1988, 1.37; Fitzmyer 1993, 98; Jewett 2007, vii; Moo 1996, 63-79; Schreiner 1998, 58-76).


14

hand, within this fundamental unity, Jews have a certain pre-eminence.55 This

signals a dialectic between Jewish equality and Jewish pre-eminence which

remains active in Pauls subsequent discussions.

In Rom 2:1-16, Paul envisages a representative judgmental human being, actively

condemning members of his surrounding society. A Jewish figure is probably

envisaged here;56 nevertheless he is addressed as in order to highlight

his equality with Gentiles with respect to the criteria by which God will judge

him.57 Paul argues that Jewish status and possession of the law provides no special

protection from Gods judgment.58 The function of Romans 2:1-16, as a whole, is to

deny salvific advantage to Jews who possess the law. Gods eschatological

judgment is impartial, according to works. Thus mere possession of the law of

Moses provides no security in the face of this judgment, because possession of the

law does not define the limits of knowledge of, or obedience to, the divine moral

will.

Many contemporary exegetes treat our passage, Rom 2:17-29, as an elaboration

upon vv. 1-16. Paul, according to this view, explicitly names the imaginary

interlocutor whom he has so far been addressing implicitly and then uses sharper,

more polemically crafted statements in order to drive home points similar to those

already introduced in the first part of the chapter.59 However, closer scrutiny

shows that the second part of Romans 2 has its own quite distinct purpose and

setting.

The two passages do, of course, exhibit numerous parallels, as Simon Gathercole

has shown.60 Despite these parallels, however, the two passages differ significantly

with respect to their setting and function. In the former passage, Rom 2:1-16, Paul

55 Stenschke 2010, 202-03.

56 Dunn 1988, 1.78-82.

57 Rom 2:9-11, cf. 3:28.

58 Rom 2:9-10, 2:13, 3:19-20.

59 E.g. Dunn 1988, 1.108-09; Fitzmyer 1993, 315; Gathercole 2002; Jewett 2007, 221; Ksemann 1980, 72; Moo 1996, 157-58; Schreiner 1998, 127; Watson 2007, 198-99; Wright 1996, 147-48.

60 Gathercole 2002.

1. The location of Romans 2:17-29 within the argument of Romans

15

addresses his interlocutor as ,61 highlighting his humanity. In the latter

passage, Rom 2:17-29, however, he addresses his interlocutor as ,62

highlighting his Jewish identity. The former passage opens and closes with the

theme of divine eschatological judgment using the keyword ; the latter

passage contains no explicit references to divine judgment (just a single reference

to human judgment!).63 In the former passage, Paul frequently uses words

emphasising universality, such as ,64 65 and .66 All of these

words are absent from the latter passage.67 In the former passage, there is no

indication of any social contact between Jews and Gentiles: Jews hear the law;

Gentiles are simply described as not having the law. In the latter passage,

however, those who have the law are described as teachers of others, which

implies significant social contact between Jews and Gentiles. In the former passage,

the unspecified Gentiles simply do the generalised things of the law,68 implying

that they havent heard the specific law of Moses. The uncircumcised man in the

latter passage, on the other hand, keeps the specific precepts of the law,69

implying that he has heard direct Jewish instruction in the law. This all implies that

Paul has moved from a wider world-setting in verses 1-16, to a more specific and

concrete setting in verses 17-29.

61 Rom 2:1, 3.

62 Rom 2:17.

63 Romans 2:1-16 begins with the human, , who judges, , and concludes with the day when God will judge, , the secrets of humans, .

64 Rom 2:1, 3, 9, 16.

65 Rom 2:1, 9, 10.

66 Rom 2:6.

67 Apart from a negative reference in 2:29, where praise is denied significance.

68 Rom 2:14.

69 Rom 2:26.


16

2. The synagogue social context of Pauls argument in Romans 2:17-29

In fact, the concrete setting of Rom 2:17-29 can be specified precisely. There are a

number of strong indications that Paul wishes his Christian readers to envisage

this passage in the context of the mainstream Jewish synagogue.70

The first, and most obvious, indication is that Paul deliberately addresses his

interlocutor, for the first and only time in his letter, as a . Paul opens his

diatribe with the phrase . Some scholars have suggested

that Paul is addressing here a Gentile who wants to be called a Jew or who calls

himself a Jew.71 This suggestion assumes that the verb is being used

in the middle voice to refer to a personal act of self-designation which challenges

the public consensus. However, this would not fit with the known usage of the

word. This verb is frequently used in the LXX and Josephus to describe the act of

giving a publically available name to an individual or place.72 Since such public

names are conferred by others or come about through general consensus, the verb

never appears in the middle voice.73 The passive voice is, however, used; and when

it is used it means publically known by the name of 74 This suggests that the

verb in Rom 2:17 should also be understood in the passive voice; and that we

should paraphrase Pauls opening statement: If you are generally acknowledged

as entitled to the name Jew Paul is emphasising the public nature of his

interlocutors Jewishness, and hence the interlocutors membership of the

mainstream Jewish community situated in the synagogue.

70 In 2 Cor 11:24, Paul reports that five times he received thirty-nine lashes by the Jews. This implies that he repeatedly expressed vocal opposition to authorities in a synagogue context for at least some time after his conversion (Frey 2007, 304; Watson 2007, 80); cf. Josephus, A.J. 4.238. Paul is letting his Christian recipients overhear his synagogue debate; he may perhaps also be demonstrating his ability to conduct debates in the Roman synagogues during his forthcoming visit.

71 Campbell 2006, 108; Thorsteinsson 2003, 197-204.

72 The many instances include, e.g., Gen 21:31, 25:25; Jos. A.J. 7.21.

73 Pace Jewett 2007, 222. Jewett cites Thucydides Hist. 7.69, but there the verb is in the active voice, not the middle voice.

74 e.g. Jos. A.J. 2.1; Exod 15:23. See also the use of the passive in the Papyri to denote publically acknowledged names (Moulton and Milligan 1914-1924, 3.251).

2. The synagogue social context of Pauls argument in Romans 2:17-29

17

Secondly, there is a strong emphasis on the law, , as the basic constitutive

element for all the other activities in this passage. The word appears 10

times in the space of 13 verses and is a key element in Pauls discussion. Even the

uncircumcised person in vv. 26-27 is said to observe, , the

regulations of the law, , and to keep the law,

. As we have already stated, this indicates that the uncircumcised

person has had an opportunity to learn particular requirements relating to the law

of Moses.75 It is highly unlikely that Paul is referring to the use of the law in the

Christian community, because Paul never speaks of the relationship between

Christians and the law in these terms.76 On the other hand, this description

conforms very closely to what we know of the diaspora synagogue. The synagogue

was the social centre of the Jewish community, where membership of the

community was thoroughly integrated with its key defining activity: reading of and

instruction in the law.77

Thirdly, the argument about the reckoning, , of circumcision to this

physically uncircumcised person also indicates that Pauls argument is set in the

synagogue. Jews in Pauls day debated the issue of whether uncircumcised Gentile

synagogue adherents should be welcomed or treated like Jews.78 This indicates

that Paul is referring to a known Jewish debate. We should not, as some scholars

do, see the reckoning of circumcision in this passage as an equivalent to Gods

reckoning of righteousness in chapter 4, because in chapter 4 Paul explicitly

denies that that circumcision has anything to do with Gods reckoning of

righteousness.79 The phrase makes sense, however, if Paul is entering into a

75 Cf. similar language used of Jewish Torah-observance in Gal 6:13; Acts 7:53, 21:24.

76 Paul nowhere speaks of Christians relying on the law, boasting in the law, knowing Gods will through the law, being educated in the law, observing the law, keeping the law, or transgressing the law (Rosner 2010).

77 The second-temple synagogue was both a community centre, hosting a range of activities such as communal meals, forensic discipline, hospitality for travellers, the distribution of welfare, and education of children in basic literacy; and also a place of religious instruction in the Torah (Levine 1999, 124-59). Torah reading was usually accompanied by a didactic activity such as a sermon or word of exhortation or time of communal study (e.g. Josephus C. Ap. 2.175, A.J. 16.43; Philo Legat. 156; Acts 13:13-15) (Schiffman 1999, 46-48).

78 Watson 2007, 74-79. We shall discuss this debate in more detail below, pp. 202-207.

79 Rom 4:9-12. See Nygren 1952, 134.


18

mainstream Jewish debate about whether Jews should welcome law-keeping

synagogue adherents as if they were Jews. The law-keeping Gentile is thus best

understood as a synagogue adherent, who has been introduced into Pauls

argument as part of his polemic against his Jewish interlocutor.

Finally, Pauls conclusion concerns the meaning of the terms Jew and

circumcision. In the rest of Pauls writings, these terms refer to ethnic Jewishness

and physical circumcision.80 We should assume the same is true here also. Paul is

making a point about the significance of ethnic Jewishness, not robbing Jewishness

of its ethnic significance altogether.

3. Jewish identity according to Paul

Thus Romans 2:17-29 is a summary of Pauls redefinition of Jewish identity. By

presenting this argument, Paul wants to persuade his readers to reject the

mainstream Jewish communitys view of Jewish identity and to see how Jewish

identity finds its true significance in the Christian community, in light of his own

teaching about Christ and the gospel.

In my dissertation, I examine in more detail the similarities and differences

between Pauls view of Jewish identity and that of his contemporaries. Here I will

briefly summarise my findings.

Firstly, Jewish identity, for both Paul and his contemporaries, has an essentially

hermeneutical dimension. A Jew is, fundamentally, a person who reads and knows

Gods will as revealed in Israels Scriptures. Paul, however, has redefined this

hermeneutical dimension of Jewish identity in light of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

The mainstream Jewish community defines itself by its possession and knowledge

of the law of Moses, which it views as a complete and largely sufficient revelation

from God. Paul, however, believes that the law, along with the prophets, are open

texts, fulfilled in the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Paul also believes that Jews have a real advantage over non-Jews. However, he

redefines the nature of this advantage. For the mainstream Jewish community,

80 I deal with Phil 3:3 and Col 2:11 elsewhere.

3. Jewish identity according to Paul

19

Israels privilege consists in the fact that the law is a gift from God which enables

Israel to be obedient to Gods moral will and hence gives them a soteriological

advantage. Paul affirms the reality and value of the epistemological privilege that

comes from the possession of Gods word in the law. Yet he also argues that

because of human sin, the law does not lead to ethical conduct or therefore to

salvation in any such straightforward manner. This, in fact, fits well with Pauls

subsequent statements in Rom 3. Paul affirms that the possession of divine

revelation is the key Jewish advantage, but denies that the law-revelation leads to

salvation in any straightforward sense.

Jewish vocation is also a prominent theme in Rom 2:17-29 (e.g. vv. 19-20). The

mainstream Jewish community sees it as their collective vocation to illuminate

gentiles, especially synagogue adherents, by teaching them Gods will from the law.

Paul redefines the Jewish vocation in light of the gospel of Christ. By examining

other passages from Romans, we can see that the collective vocation of Christian

Jews according to Paul is not simply to teach Gods moral will from the law, but to

teach the Scriptures as a whole and to proclaim the eschatological fulfilment of the

law and the prophets in the gospel, so that the Gentiles come to praise God

alongside them (e.g. Rom 15:7-12).

21

Part C: The wider concern of my research

This fact that Pauls redefinition of Jewish identity includes a strong vocational

element is directly relevant to the wider concern of my thesis. Very often, when

Paul explicitly mentions Jewish identity,81 he is talking about his own vocation as

apostle to the Gentiles or issuing warnings about potential rivals or opponents to

his apostolic vocation.82 Not only does this suggest that Paul himself saw a strong

connection between Jewish identity and apostolic vocation; it also suggests that

other Jewish teachers and their Gentile hearers also connected Jewish identity with

a preaching ministry to Gentiles. In fact, my dissertation aims to show how many of

Pauls discussions are generated directly by conflicts over the legitimacy of various

conceptions of Jewish vocation and its outworking in ministry among Gentiles.83

81 There are approximately 28 discrete places (23 in the undisputed letters) where Paul uses terms explicitly related to Jewish identity. The relevant terms are , , , , , , , , , , (see chapter 1, pages 43-91). The discrete places where Paul discusses these terms (grouping verses together wherever they form a connected discussion) are: Rom 1:15-16, 2:9-3:9, 3:29-30, 4:1-16, chs. 9-11, 15:7-33; 1 Cor 1:22-24, 7:18-19, 9:20-23, 10:18, 10:32-33, 12:13; 2 Cor 3:7-16, 11:22-24; Gal 1:13-14, 2:1-15, 3:6-29, 4:21-31, 5:2-6, 5:11-12, 6:12-16; Phil 3:2-6; 1 Thess 2:14-16 and cf. Eph 2:11-3:8; Col 2:11, 3:11, 4:11; Tit 1:10-14.

82 Rom 1:15-16, chs. 9-11, 15:7-33; 1 Cor 9:20-23; 2 Cor 3:7-16, 11:22-24; Gal 1:13-14, 4:21-31 (cf. vv. 17-19), 6:12-16; Phil 3:2-6; 1 Thess 2:14-16 and cf. Eph 2:11-3:8; Col 4:11. Tit 1:10-14 also mentions a Jewish form of teaching which is opposed to Pauls preaching vocation (1:3).

83 E.g. 2 Cor 11:22-23; Gal 6:11-16; Phil 3:2-7 (see ch. 1) and esp. Rom 2:17-29 (see ch. 3).

23

Bibliography

Barclay, John M. G. 1995. "Paul Among Diaspora Jews: Anomaly or Apostate?" Journal for the Study of the New Testament 60 (1995): 89-120.

Barclay, John M. G. 1996a. "Do we Undermine the Law? A Study of Romans 14.1-15.6." Pages 287-308 in Paul and the Mosaic Law: The Third Durham-Tbingen Research Symposium on Earliest Christianity and Judaism (Durham, September, 1994). Edited by James D. G. Dunn, Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 89. Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck.

Barclay, John M. G. 1996b. Jews in the Mediterranean Diaspora from Alexander to Trajan (323 BCE 117 CE). Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark.

Barclay, John M. G. 1998. "Paul and Philo on Circumcision: Romans 2:25-29 in Social and Cultural Context." New Testament Studies 44, no. 4 (1998): 536-56.

Barclay, John M. G. 2010. "Paul, the Gift and the Battle over Gentile Circumcision: Revisiting the Logic of Galatians." Australian Biblical Review 58 (2010): 36-56.

Barth, Markus. 1979. "St PaulA Good Jew." Horizons in Biblical Theology 1 (1979): 7-45.

Berger, Peter L. and Thomas Luckmann. 1971. The Social Construction of Reality: a Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge. London: Penguin Books.

Boyarin, Daniel. 1994. A Radical Jew: Paul and the Politics of Identity. Contraversions: Critical Studies in Jewish Literature, Culture and Society 1. Berkeley / London: University of California Press.

Campbell, William S. 1991. Paul's Gospel in an Intercultural Context: Jew and Gentile in the Letter to the Romans. Studies in the Intercultural History of Christianity 69. Frankfurt / Bern / New York / Paris: Peter Lang.

Campbell, William S. 2006. Paul and the Creation of Christian Identity. Library of New Testament Studies. London / New York: T. & T. Clark.

Cranfield, C. E. B. 1975. The Epistle to the Romans. 2 vols. The International Critical Commentary on the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark.

Bibliography

24

Das, A. Andrew. 2003. Paul and the Jews. Library of Pauline Studies. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson.

Das, A. Andrew. 2007. Solving the Romans Debate. Minneapolis: Fortress.

Donaldson, Terence L. 2006. "Jewish Christianity, Israel's Stumbling and the Sonderweg Reading of Paul." Journal for the Study of the New Testament 29, no. 1 (2006): 27-54.

Dunn, James D. G. 1988. Romans. 2 vols. Word Biblical Commentary 38. Dallas: Word.

Dunn, James D. G. 1999. "Who did Paul think he was? A study of Jewish-Christian identity." New Testament Studies 45, no. 2 (1999): 174-93.

Eisenbaum, Pamela. 2009. Paul was Not a Christian: The Original Message of a Misunderstood Apostle. New York: HarperCollins.

Esler, Philip F. 2003. Conflict and Identity in Romans: the Social Setting of Paul's Letter. Minneapolis: Fortress.

Fisk, Bruce N. 2008. "Synagogue Influence and Scriptural Knowledge among the Christians of Rome." Pages 157-85 in As It Is Written: Studying Paul's Use of Scripture. Edited by Stanley E. Porter and Christopher D. Stanley, Society of Biblical Literature Symposium Series 50. Leiden / Boston: Brill.

Fitzmyer, Joseph A. 1993. Romans: a New Translation with Introduction and Commentary. The Anchor Bible 33. London: Geoffrey Chapman.

Frey, Jrg. 2007. "Paul's Jewish Identity." Pages 285-321 in Jewish Identity in the Greco-Roman world (Jdische Identitt in der griechisch-rmischen Welt). Edited by Jrg Frey, Daniel R. Schwartz, and Stephanie Gripentrog, Ancient Judaism and Early Christianity 71. Leiden / Boston: Brill.

Gagnon, Robert A. J. 2000. "Why the "Weak" at Rome Cannot Be Non-Christian Jews." Catholic Biblical Quarterly 62, no. 1 (2000): 64-82.

Gathercole, Simon J. 2002. "A Law unto Themselves: The Gentiles in Romans 2.14-15 Revisited." Journal for the Study of the New Testament 24, no. 3 (2002): 27-49.

Giddens, Anthony. 1993. New Rules of Sociological Method: A Positive Critique of Interpretative Sociologies. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Polity.

Bibliography

25

Hagner, Donald A. 2007. "Paul as Jewish Believer: According to his Letters." in Jewish Believers in Jesus: The Early Centuries. Edited by Oskar Skarsaune and Reidar Hvalvik. Peabody: Hendrickson.

Hansen, Bruce. 2010. All of You are One: The Social Vision of Gal 3.28, 1 Cor 12.13 and Col 3.11. Library of New Testament Studies. London / New York: T. & T. Clark.

Hodge, Caroline J. 2005. "Apostle to the Gentiles: Constructions of Paul's Identity." Biblical Interpretation 13, no. 3 (2005): 270-88.

Horrell, David G. 2001. "Berger and New Testament Studies." Pages 142-53 in Peter Berger and the Study of Religion. Edited by Linda Woodhead, Paul Heelas, and David Martin. London / New York: Routledge.

Hvalvik, Reidar. 1990. "A Sonderweg for Israel: a Critical Examination of a Current Interpretation of Romans 11.25-27." Journal for the Study of the New Testament 38 (1990): 87-107.

Hvalvik, Reidar. 2007. "Jewish Believers and Jewish Influence in the Roman Church until the Early Second Century." Pages 179-216 in Jewish Believers in Jesus: The Early Centuries. Edited by Oskar Skarsaune and Reidar Hvalvik. Peabody: Hendrickson.

Jacobson, Howard. 2010. The Finkler Question. London / Berlin / New York / Sydney: Bloomsbury.

Jenkins, Richard. 2008. Social Identity. 3rd ed. Key Ideas. London / New York: Routledge.

Jewett, Robert. 2007. Romans: A Commentary. Minneapolis: Fortress.

. 1926-1965. Josephus. Translated by H. St. J. Thackeray et al. 10 vols. Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Kaminsky, Joel S. 2007. Yet I Loved Jacob: Reclaiming the Biblical Concept of Election. Nashville: Abingdon.

Kaminsky, Joel S. 2011. "Election Theology and the Problem of Universalism." Horizons in Biblical Theology 33, no. 1 (2011): 34-44.

Kaminsky, Joel and Anne Stewart. 2006. "God of all the world: universalism and developing monotheism in Isaiah 40-66." Harvard Theological Review 99, no. 2 (2006): 139-63.

Bibliography

26

Ksemann, Ernst. 1971. Perspectives on Paul. Translated by Margaret Kohl. The New Testament Library. London: SCM.

Ksemann, Ernst. 1980. Commentary on Romans. Translated by Geoffrey W. Bromiley. London: SCM.

Lawler, Steph. 2008. Identity: Sociological Perspectives. Cambridge / Malden, MA: Polity.

Levenson, Jon D. 1996. "The Universal Horizon of Biblical Particularism." Pages 143-69 in Ethnicity and the Bible. Edited by Mark G. Brett. Leiden: Brill.

Levine, Lee I. 1999. The Ancient Synagogue: the First Thousand Years. New Haven / London: Yale University Press.

Longenecker, Bruce. 2007. "On Israel's God and God's Israel: Assessing Supersessionism in Paul." Journal of Theological Studies 58, no. 1 (2007): 26-44.

Meeks, Wayne A. 1983. The First Urban Christians: The Social World of the Apostle Paul. New Haven and London: Yale University Press.

Moo, Douglas J. 1996. The Epistle to the Romans. The New International Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids / Cambridge: Eerdmans.

Moulton, James H. and George Milligan. 1914-1924. The Vocabulary of the Greek Testament: Illustrated from the Papyri and Other Non-Literary Sources. 5 vols. London / New York / Toronto: Hodder and Stoughton.

Nanos, Mark D. 1996. The Mystery of Romans: The Jewish Context of Pauls Letter. Minneapolis: Fortress.

Nanos, Mark D. 2010. "Paul and Judaism: Why Not Pauls Judaism?" Pages 117-60 in Paul, Unbound: Other Perspectives on the Apostle. Edited by Mark D. Given. Peabody: Hendrickson.

Nygren, Anders. 1952. Commentary on Romans. Translated by Carl C. Rasmussen. London: SCM.

. 1929-1962. Philo. Translated by Francis H. Colson, G. H. Whitaker, and Ralph Marcus. 12 vols. Loeb Classical Library. London: William Heinemann.

Risnen, Heikki. 1988. "Paul, God and Israel: Romans 9-11 in Recent Research." Pages 178-206 in The Social World of Formative Christianity and Judaism:

Bibliography

27

Essays in Tribute to Howard Clark Kee. Edited by Jacob Neusner, Peder Borgen, Ernest S. Frerichs, and Richard Horsley. Philadelphia: Fortress.

Risnen, Heikki. 2008. "A Controversial Jew and His Conflicting Convictions: Paul, the Law, and the Jewish People Twenty Years After." Pages 319-35 in Redefining First-Century Jewish and Christian Identities: Essays in Honor of Ed Parish Sanders. Edited by Fabian E. Udoh, Christianity and Judaism in Antiquity 16. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame.

Rosner, Brian S. 2010. "Paul and the Law: What he Does not Say." Journal for the Study of the New Testament 32, no. 4 (2010): 405-19.

Rudolph, David J. 2010. "Pauls Rule in All the Churches (1 Cor 7:17-24) and Torah-Defined Ecclesiological Variegation." Studies in Jewish-Christian Relations 5, no. 1 (2010): CP1-24.

Rudolph, David J. 2011. A Jew to the Jews: Jewish Contours of Pauline Flexibility in 1 Corinthians 9:19-23. Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2. Reihe 304. Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck.

Sanders, E. P. 1983. Paul, the Law and the Jewish People. Philadelphia: Fortress.

Schiffman, Lawrence H. 1999. "The Early History of the Public Reading of the Torah: Cultural Interaction during the Greco-Roman period." Pages 44-56 in Jews, Christians and Polytheists in the Ancient Synagogue. Edited by Steven Fine, Baltimore Studies in the History of Judaism. London / New York: Routledge.

Schmidt, Hans Wilhelm. 1966. Der Brief des Paulus an die Rmer. Theologischer Handkommentar zum Neuen Testament 6. Berlin: Evangelische Verlangsanstalt.

Schmithals, Walter. 1988. Der Rmerbrief: Ein Kommentar. Gtersloh: Gtersloher Verlagshaus Gerd Mohn.

Schreiner, Thomas R. 1998. Romans. Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic.

Sechrest, Love L. 2009. A Former Jew: Paul and the Dialectics of Race. Library of New Testament Studies 410. London: T & T Clark.

Stenschke, Christoph. 2010. "Rmer 9-11 als Teil des Rmerbriefs." Pages 197-225 in Between Gospel and Election: Explorations in the Interpretation of Romans 9-11. Edited by Florian Wilk and J. Ross Wagner, Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 257. Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck.

Bibliography

28

Stowers, Stanley K. 1994. A Rereading of Romans: Justice, Jews and Gentiles. New Haven / London: Yale University Press.

. 1914-1920. Suetonius. Translated by John C. Rolfe. 2 vols. Loeb Classical Library. London: Heinemann.

Thorsteinsson, Runar M. 2003. Paul's Interlocutor in Romans 2: Function and Identity in the Context of Ancient Epistolography. Coniectanea Biblica New Testament 40. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.

Watson, Francis. 2004. Paul and the Hermeneutics of Faith. London: T. & T. Clark.

Watson, Francis. 2007. Paul, Judaism and the Gentiles: Beyond the New Perspective. Rev. and expanded ed. Grand Rapids / Cambridge: Eerdmans.

Wright, N. T. 1991. The Climax of the Covenant: Christ and the Law in Pauline Theology. London / New York: T. & T. Clark.

Wright, N. T. 1996. "The Law in Romans 2." Pages 131-50 in Paul and the Mosaic Law: The Third Durham-Tbingen Research Symposium on Earliest Christianity and Judaism (Durham, September, 1994). Edited by James D. G. Dunn, Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 89. Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck.

paul's redefinition of jewish identity (romans 2:17-29) · paul’s redefinition of jewish identity...

Documents