I am focused on the exegetical -- of the situation and interpretation of the letters. I figure other people can then determine doctrine and application in better light --if my explanations of the text prove valuable. I'm preparing a book proposal on this.
I modified the earlier post to add this:
One thing to remember is that only the Israel community had the knowledge of God sufficient to honor him (1:18) that could then could be rejected so as to dishonor God (1:21). The revelation through nature just would make Israel doubly wrong when turning away. I basically show that 1:18-32 reflects the history of Israel. But there also is an overlap of the problem among the gentile Christians in Rome. So Paul reveals their guilt as well -- but only after they are exposed for guilt in 2:1My starting point on Romans is with the discovery of the use of the juridical parable in1:18-2:1 which is what we see with Nathan-David in 2 Sam 12. I realized that the gentiles would see 1:18-32 as speaking of Jews.That is because the emotions behind the juridical parable are what drive its effectiveness. Then the rest of the letter begins to make sense in light of this gentile-only audience.
A significant problem in the treatment of 1:18-32 has been the lack of consideration how the text could speak of Jews/Israel. People have assumed that Paul is writing this as a typical and acceptable Jewish view. They fail to consider that Paul would have an updated and perhaps more sympathetic view of gentiles. However, the key point I show is that the passage, by showing a broad history of Israel (in an idealist fashion that forgets the initial idols at Mt. Sinai), the people of the present cannot be judged for the behavior of the past generations.
Last edited: