The Ethnographic Character of Romans

The Dichotomies of Law-Faith and Jew-Gentile in Light of Greco-Roman and Hellenistic Jewish Ethnography

Susann M. Liubinskas

• Publisher: Pickwick Publications
• Year: 2019
• ISBN:
  9781532652141
• Topic: Theology & Religion
• Subtopic: Biblical Criticism & Interpretation

In this work Susann Liubinskas provides a coherent reading of Paul's letter to the Romans in light of ancient ethnography. Paul, like his contemporaries, harnesses the apologetic power of this genre in order to fortify the members of the Roman house churches to maintain their distinctiveness by arguing for the historical legitimacy of the Christ movement's laws, customs, and way of life. When the law-faith dichotomy is considered within the larger context of Paul's ethnic discourse, its primary function as the means by which Paul draws lines of continuity and discontinuity between the Christ-movement and its venerable Jewish roots comes to light. Rather than viewing Paul as dealing with two different religions, we see Paul working to position believing Jews and Gentiles in relationship to Israel's history with God, particularly as its finds its climax in Jesus Christ. Thus, Paul utilizes the law-faith dichotomy, not to describe two paths of salvation, but to redefine the people of God, in the new age, as ethnically inclusive.

chapter one

Introduction

When it comes to Paul’s letter to the Romans, it is fair to say that three interrelated dichotomies have by and large defined the course of scholarship on this epistle. First, there is the question of how to resolve the tension created by the apostle’s juxtaposition of the law and faith.1 This lack of resolution has, in turn, spawned a centuries-long debate over the respective roles of grace and works in salvation and the relationship between Judaism and Christianity. Scholarly consensus has proven to be elusive with respect to all three. This is no less true today, despite the fact that many of the assumptions underlying the traditional resolution of these polarities have been successfully challenged in recent decades.2

These developments have had a profound effect on the interpretation of perhaps the most challenging and intriguing of the Pauline Letters. Most, if not all, scholars, irrespective of where they stand with regard to the three dichotomies and the many other issues surrounding the interpretation of this epistle, agree that, among other things, Paul is intent on addressing the polarization among members of the Christ movement in Rome resulting from varying degrees of attachment to Judaism.3 In other words, there is the general acknowledgment that the issue of the law and its relationship to faith is itself intertwined with and embedded within the larger matter of the relationship between first-century Judaism and emerging Christianity as a sociohistorical phenomenon. However, despite the recognition that Paul’s theologizing occurs within a particular and concrete social matrix, the issue of how the key motifs, represented in the three dichotomies, are related and the nature of the role that each plays in Paul’s arguments, remain hotly contested issues.

1.1 Purpose of This Study

In this study, I maintain that the controversy surrounding the three dichotomies and their relationship to the issue of gentile inclusion is largely due to a failure to adequately define the purpose and genre of Romans. This has led to various bifurcations between its theological and sociological elements, such that the law-faith dichotomy, which underlies the other two, is misconstrued as referring to two incompatible paths of salvation. In other words, when the law-faith dichotomy is considered within the larger context of Paul’s ethnic discourse, its primary function as the means by which Paul draws lines of continuity and discontinuity between the Christ movement and its Jewish roots comes to light. Since the purpose and genre of Romans and the meaning of the three dichotomies are linked, I will demonstrate three interrelated points.

First, I will show that Paul’s main, although not sole, purpose in writing is not to heal ethnic divisions among its members, but rather to encourage the Christian community in Rome to continue in faithful obedience to the gospel in the face of general, social persecution by the larger nonbelieving community within which they live and with which they necessarily have contact. The call to unity/reconciliation reflects this guiding purpose and, as such, is secondary. Once the purpose of Romans is redefined as such, its primary function as an ethnographic apology directed to beleaguered insiders becomes apparent.

Thus, in the second place, I will argue that this epistle evidences many of the characteristics of Greco-Roman and Jewish ethnography, particularly as this genre was employed for the apologetic purpose of legitimizing a marginalized people group in order to create a positive social identity. In other words, I will demonstrate that Paul, like his contemporaries, harnesses the apologetic power of this genre in order to fortify the members of his group (in this case, members of the Christ movement) in their effort to maintain their distinctiveness vis-à-vis the larger sociocultural matrix within which they are embedded, and which is exerting pressure upon them to conform to its cultural, ethical, and social norms. Like his contemporaries, the apostle argues for the historical legitimacy of his group and the legitimacy of its laws, customs, and way of life, so as to create a favorable self-evaluation, thereby increasing the probability of continued group affiliation among its members.

Third, reading Romans as ancient ethnography not only brings into focus the organic links between the various parts of the letter, but also brings to light the coherence of its theological and sociological aspects. As a consequence, the meaning of and relationship between the three dichotomies is clarified. As I will show, Paul utilizes the law-faith dichotomy, not to describe two paths of salvation, but to redefine the chosen people of God, in the new age, as ethnically inclusive. In this way, working within the framework of a present, unfolding eschatological reality, the apostle maintains the new movement’s rootedness in its venerable, Jewish past, thus proving its historical legitimacy; the primacy of Israel and the Jewish people, thus clarifying the relationship between Judaism and the new movement; and the presence of ethnic diversity within a distinctive people group unified by an allocentric, Spirit-wrought identity, thus establishing both the legitimacy of the movement’s customs and way of life and the embodied, ethnic character of this life.4

1.2 Previous Studies: The Three Dichotomies and the Genre of Romans

1.2.1 The Law-Faith Dichotomy & Its Siblings

1.2.1.1 Traditional View

By and large, contemporary scholars writing in the traditional vein concur that the notion that the Judaism of Paul’s time was unequivocally a legalistic religion of works-righteousness can no longer be maintained on historical grounds. However, although writers in the traditional vein have reframed their questions to reflect this shift in scholarship, they nevertheless continue to maintain that salvation is by grace alone, exclusive of any and all works of the law, and that at least some strands of first-century Judaism were legalistic, with Paul reacting against these in his letter to the Romans.5 Accordingly, Paul’s theology is interpreted as mainly antithetical to Judaism.

This interpretation, however, results in an enigmatic Paul radically severed from his Jewish roots, since neither the Jewishness of Paul’s thought nor the points of continuity between the new movement and Judaism are explored in any meaningful way.6 There is little textual evidence that indicates that Paul challenges Judaism per se, and/or that he targets a specific Jewish teaching(s). Evidence from the apostle’s extant letters indicates that his invectives against Jews were specifically directed either toward judaizers who maintained that gentile Christians must become Jews in order to belong to the Christ community (e.g., Gal 6:12–16) or at nonbelieving Jews who were persecuting the community (e.g., 1 Thess 2:14–16). That is, Paul’s condemnation of fellow Jews is specifically directed against individuals who actively opposed or hindered his mission to the gentiles,7 whether this opposition came from inside or outside of the believing community.8 Similarly, there is little evidence indicating that Paul thought that certain strands of Judaism were legalistic and made these the target of his polemic. Such readings rest on the presupposition that the law versus faith dichotomy signifies specific doctrin...

Table of contents

• Title Page
• Acknowledgments
• Abbreviations
• Chapter 1: Introduction
• Chapter 2: Greco-Roman Ethnography & Ethnic Discourse: The Creation and Legitimization of Social Identity
• Chapter 3: Paul as an Ethnographer: Writing with an Ethnographic Purpose as a Reliable Interpreter of Tradition
• Chapter 4: The Historical Legitimacy of the Christ Movement (Part I)
• Chapter 5: The Historical Legitimacy of the Christ Movement (Part II)
• Chapter 6: The Historical Legitimacy of the Christ Movement (Part III)
• Chapter 7: Conclusion
• Bibliography