[B-Greek] Romans 1:16

David Rollins david87350 at earthlink.net
Fri Oct 10 13:29:37 EDT 2003


From: "Jeffrey B. Gibson" <jgibson000 at comcast.net>
Date: Fri Oct 10, 2003  9:44:37  AM US/Pacific
To: David Rollins <david87350 at earthlink.net>
Cc: b-greek at lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Re: [B-Greek] Romans 1:16

David Rollins wrote:

> Jeffrey:
>         The question you bring up really is answered in the 15 verses
> preceding verse 16 - but verse 15 I think answers your question:
>
> OUTWS TO KAT' EME PROQUMON KAI UMIN TOIS EN RWMH EUANGGELISASQAI
>
> Paul has not personally preached the gospel to the Romans - he wanted
> to come to them to do just that (v.13), but has been hindered - he
> feels his calling very deeply (v.14) - he then says , "so to the best
> of my ability I am eager to preach the gospel also to those of you in
> Rome" v.15).  There is no dispute that I can detect in these preceding
> verses that he wants to clear up - he is just eager to preach the
> gospel (as he sees it) to them through this letter, since he may be
> delayed in coming to them. Verse 16 is just the first statement of
> Paul's gospel ( the explanation of which concludes at the end of
> chapter 8) and is a sort of encapsulation.  Does any one else see any
> "controversy" that is up for discussion?
>

Thanks for your comments.

But doesn't your answer contain a hidden assumption that those to whom 
Paul
had long wished to come had not heard "the gospel" before. Is this 
possible
in the light of (what I assume to be) the fact that Paul uses a 
pre-pauline
statement about Jesus death that the Roman Christians with which the 
Roman
Christians were already familiar?

In addition, since much of Romans deals with warding off the charges 
that
God is not righteous (i.e., not faithful to his covenant with Israel) 
and
that the Gospel that the Romans are already familiar with entails the
abandonment of the promises he made to Israel,  is the view of  what's 
going
on in Rom 1:16 that I'm exploring really so unthinkable?

In any case,  and to avoid straying into off topic territory, let's 
return
to the question I posed:  is there anything in the syntax or grammar of 
the
verse or anything in what is known of Paul's style which would 
decisively
rule out t seeing the statement as a defensive and  not an explanatory 
one?

Yours,

Jeffrey
--

Jeffrey B. Gibson, D.Phil. (Oxon.)

1500 W. Pratt Blvd. #1
Chicago, IL 60626

jgibson000 at comcast.net


Jeffrey:
Looking at verse 11 and 12:
EPIPOQW GAR IDEIN UMAS, INA TI METADW XAPISMA UMIN PNEUMATIKON EIS TO 
STHRIXQHNAI UMAS, TOUTO DE ESTIN SUMPARAKLHQHNAI EN UMIN DIA THS EN 
ALLHLOIS PISTEWS UMWN TE KAI EMOU

Paul's stated purpose here seems to be that he wants to share some of 
the spiritual gifts he has ( as an apostle) to the end that they may be 
established ( which he puts in the passive - softening the idea that 
they "need" establishment - rather that he wants to "add" to their 
faith).  He makes this purpose more clear by saying that ( in verse 12) 
my purpose is that both of us would be encouraged - both you and me. I 
don't see this passage as defensive at all , but explanatory.

	I was not assuming that Paul thinks the Romans have not heard the 
gospel - he just wants to share in their growth.  He specifically says 
that he wants to have  "fruit among you"   (verse14).  This is not to 
say that he will not consider some controversies later - but that is 
not specifically in view in this first chapter in my view.

David.




More information about the B-Greek mailing list