A Brief Summary of "Mercy for All" by Robert Anderson

Swordman

Member
Since I am new to this group of forums, I was not sure where this would be appropriate. I was told that "Paul with Judaism" was a hot topic on these forums, and I have written a book on how this approach affects the interpretation of Paul with a particular focus on Romans 9-11. This is a revision of my dissertation (PhD) and is a bit academic. So I thought a brief summary might help those who want to study this approach.

The book is available on Amazon and in the Kindle Edition it is about $10. Here is the link.


Shameless advertisement over, let's get to the summary.

After the introduction, the book examines three approaches to Paul that are present within the church historically -- Paul against Judaism, the not-Jewish Paul, and Paul within Judaism. In each case, I give examples of how Paul has been interpreted with historical interpretations and scholarly insight, and give summaries of the view. In the first two approaches, I give reasons why I reject the views. The final view (Paul within Judaism) approaches Paul through what James Dunn sees as key aspects of Palestinian Judaism, and I show how Paul's writings and acts fit within this framework. (I also include adherence to Jewish Scriptures as one of these aspects.) Scripture is leveraged throughout.

I should note here that there is not one single view of "Paul within Judaism." Various approaches have been provided by both Christian and Jewish scholars. My view is that Paul is a Jew (a Pharisee even) who has embraced Jesus as Messiah and Lord.

Once this is established, there is a chapter on the rhetorical situation in Rome. That is, what is driving Paul to write to the Romans in the first place? Who is the audience, and what are the constraints in his approach to the problem?

Two chapters are provided on the interpretation of Romans 9-11 as a defense of Israel against the Gentile claim that they have been cut off. I take an intertextual approach, reviewing how Paul is using Jewish Scripture to support his defense of his kindred.

The final chapter summarizes both the current state of affairs between Israel (the Jews) and the church with some concrete advice on how we should relate to each other.

In a nutshell, that is the book. I invite any questions you might have, but you might want to pick up a copy of the book to review. (Another shameless appeal.) :)
 
Once this is established, there is a chapter on the rhetorical situation in Rome. That is, what is driving Paul to write to the Romans in the first place? Who is the audience, and what are the constraints in his approach to the problem?

I can appreciate a "systematic approach". It is rare to see such with the "advent" of internet scholars of all sorts ruling the conversation today........

No offense, I'm not going to read your book... :)

Not that I'm not open to learning. I am. However, this subject has long been important to me. The book of Romans is the "quintessential" canonical Christian reference to be found in all of extant Biblical history. I have found that understanding the book of Romans is essential to knowing God. Everyone has an opinion on the book of Romans because it is easily recognizable as the "titan" of Christian thought. I personally "picture" Atlas holding the book of Romans toward the sky......

I've quoted you above.

1. The audience goes far beyond the immediate context in the Divine purpose of God. It is however essential to understand Paul's thoughts relative to those at Rome. These were not disciples of Paul. Thusly, Paul begins by establishing the Gospel as he would to any learned Christians. He began at the beginning of man.

2. Paul is face seemingly endless threats of death Jewish men via Roman authority. As such, Paul is not only seek to clearly establish his Gospel to those that had never heard from him directly. (verbal handed down claims from his haters had no doubt came to their ears).

Paul clearly established in Chapter 1 that the Gospel began before Abraham. Chapter 1 deals extensively to the world that perished before the flood/judgement of God. A world that lead to faithful Abraham.

These are my thoughts relative to your comments. Thanks
 
Since I am new to this group of forums, I was not sure where this would be appropriate. I was told that "Paul with Judaism" was a hot topic on these forums, and I have written a book on how this approach affects the interpretation of Paul with a particular focus on Romans 9-11. This is a revision of my dissertation (PhD) and is a bit academic. So I thought a brief summary might help those who want to study this approach.

The book is available on Amazon and in the Kindle Edition it is about $10. Here is the link.


Shameless advertisement over, let's get to the summary.

After the introduction, the book examines three approaches to Paul that are present within the church historically -- Paul against Judaism, the not-Jewish Paul, and Paul within Judaism. In each case, I give examples of how Paul has been interpreted with historical interpretations and scholarly insight, and give summaries of the view. In the first two approaches, I give reasons why I reject the views. The final view (Paul within Judaism) approaches Paul through what James Dunn sees as key aspects of Palestinian Judaism, and I show how Paul's writings and acts fit within this framework. (I also include adherence to Jewish Scriptures as one of these aspects.) Scripture is leveraged throughout.

I should note here that there is not one single view of "Paul within Judaism." Various approaches have been provided by both Christian and Jewish scholars. My view is that Paul is a Jew (a Pharisee even) who has embraced Jesus as Messiah and Lord.

Once this is established, there is a chapter on the rhetorical situation in Rome. That is, what is driving Paul to write to the Romans in the first place? Who is the audience, and what are the constraints in his approach to the problem?

Two chapters are provided on the interpretation of Romans 9-11 as a defense of Israel against the Gentile claim that they have been cut off. I take an intertextual approach, reviewing how Paul is using Jewish Scripture to support his defense of his kindred.

The final chapter summarizes both the current state of affairs between Israel (the Jews) and the church with some concrete advice on how we should relate to each other.

In a nutshell, that is the book. I invite any questions you might have, but you might want to pick up a copy of the book to review. (Another shameless appeal.) :)
Interesting topic. I believe Paul heralds from and is influenced by both of his Jewish and Greek backgrounds. He was educated in both environments. Both worlds are both perfectly aligned in his mind so he's the perfect spokesman for both cultures.

As for his Roman Epistles, Paul was writing to Hellenized Greek-speaking Jews and Gentiles who recently converted to Christianity. The Hellenized Greek speaking Jews already possessed the Greek OT (LXX) to properly assess that Paul's teaching were correct. The LXX Text was already spread out throughout the Empire by Hellenized Jews. It was the LXX that was adopted by the Apostolic Church before Paul's writings and the Gospel writings made their way across the Empire. That's why all Apostolic writings are in Greek.
 
@praise_yeshua @Rockson @TibiasDad @synergy @Theophilus @TheLayman @The Rogue Tomato @makesends @Fred @SteveB @Redeemed @Complete @JD731 @mailmandan @TomL @Studyman and many others just to name a few should be interested. I’ll tag some others here as well.
I got my copy


Mercy for All: Paul, Judaism, and the Salvation of “All Israel” will be auto-delivered wirelessly to Kindle for Web. You can go to your device to start reading.

See you I have to go start reading😀
 
Interesting topic. I believe Paul heralds from and is influenced by both of his Jewish and Greek backgrounds. He was educated in both environments. Both worlds are both perfectly aligned in his mind so he's the perfect spokesman for both cultures.

As for his Roman Epistles, Paul was writing to Hellenized Greek-speaking Jews and Gentiles who recently converted to Christianity. The Hellenized Greek speaking Jews already possessed the Greek OT (LXX) to properly assess that Paul's teaching were correct. The LXX Text was already spread out throughout the Empire by Hellenized Jews. It was the LXX that was adopted by the Apostolic Church before Paul's writings and the Gospel writings made their way across the Empire. That's why all Apostolic writings are in Greek.
Well said. As such, Timothy and Titus both were a natural fit to be his "sons* in the faith.
 
I grabbed a copy of the book for my Kindle and it looks excellent. I jumped around a bit and I'm looking at chapter 7. In defense of Israel Romans chapter 9 and 10. Looks like it's going to be a great study.
Lets get this thread rolling along :)
 
I grabbed a copy of the book for my Kindle and it looks excellent. I jumped around a bit and I'm looking at chapter 7. In defense of Israel Romans chapter 9 and 10. Looks like it's going to be a great study.
Chapter 7 look quite interesting to me also.

In the book of Romans, Paul addresses Israel's past, present, and future. He recalls the story of the Torah and the rest of the Old Testament, which showed that Israel was just as sinful, idolatrous, and morally broken as the rest of humanity. In fact, Israel is actually more guilty than the Gentiles because they have the Torah and should know better.

 
Chapter 7 look quite interesting to me also.

In the book of Romans, Paul addresses Israel's past, present, and future. He recalls the story of the Torah and the rest of the Old Testament, which showed that Israel was just as sinful, idolatrous, and morally broken as the rest of humanity. In fact, Israel is actually more guilty than the Gentiles because they have the Torah and should know better.

N. T. Wright tends to view Romans as a recounting of Israel's history, particularly in 9-11.

When I was working on this project many years ago, one of my advisors reminded me that when this text was written, there were no chapters and verses. To reference a text, the author would quote or allude to a commonly known portion of the story. That is why in intertextual analysis, you have to read both the referenced text and the primary text (Romans in this case) in context.
 
N. T. Wright tends to view Romans as a recounting of Israel's history, particularly in 9-11.

When I was working on this project many years ago, one of my advisors reminded me that when this text was written, there were no chapters and verses. To reference a text, the author would quote or allude to a commonly known portion of the story. That is why in intertextual analysis, you have to read both the referenced text and the primary text (Romans in this case) in context. The two text are interacting with each other.
 
N. T. Wright tends to view Romans as a recounting of Israel's history, particularly in 9-11.

When I was working on this project many years ago, one of my advisors reminded me that when this text was written, there were no chapters and verses. To reference a text, the author would quote or allude to a commonly known portion of the story. That is why in intertextual analysis, you have to read both the referenced text and the primary text (Romans in this case) in context.
Yes I've heard it before that sometimes in the Bible there shouldn't be a chapter break.

I love Wright's writings. I have several. I'm actually 10 days older than him and still kicking, but not against the goads.

I'm so glad that God will not give up on his covenant people as Paul explains In Romans chapter 9 through 11.
 
Last edited:
Brother I'm very interested in reading this from you. I read on another forum you said the following @Swordman

" I analyzed John 6 for a session at the Society for Biblical Literature (International Group) in San Antonio (2021). The moderator said he came in as a skeptic of my position and left convinced. However, my focus was on 6:35-40. I touched on 6:44 and the language infers that this is an enabling.

I think the key to understanding this chapter is that it is part of the question of whether Jesus is the prophet who was to come. It is answering that question in the affirmative. "

Thanks !
 
Hello there, @Swordman,

As an Apostle of the risen Christ, I believe that Paul wrote at the impulse of His Lord's will and not his own.

Thank you
In Christ Jesus
Chris
 
Brother I'm very interested in reading this from you. I read on another forum you said the following @Swordman

" I analyzed John 6 for a session at the Society for Biblical Literature (International Group) in San Antonio (2021). The moderator said he came in as a skeptic of my position and left convinced. However, my focus was on 6:35-40. I touched on 6:44 and the language infers that this is an enabling.

I think the key to understanding this chapter is that it is part of the question of whether Jesus is the prophet who was to come. It is answering that question in the affirmative. "

Thanks !
This is a difficult passage and it really depends on the broader context. In fact, the immediate context runs from John 5 though 7, where the question is raised. (It is actually raised repeatedly through John.)

I am under to gun to finish some projects, so I have put that conversation over there on hold. For some reason, the people in that forum do not think participants have a life. ;)

My study in that text led me to Wayne Meeks and Peder Borgen's works. While I differ with them in some aspects of the analysis, they are important scholars in this area.

I actually am making some revisions to the analysis and plan to submit it to JETS or JBL. If I get a chance, I will send it to you. (Sorry, but low on my to do list.)
 
Back
Top Bottom