Romans 2 … Again

I’m spending a lot of time in Romans 2 recently as part of some commentary writing. It’s really a case of deja vu, as I’ve been here before (see Saving Righteousness of God, chap. 7), but there is always so much to mull over. Along the way, I was struck by an interesting comment made by Francis Watson (Paul, Judaism, and the Gentiles, 211) that: “A comparison between Cranfield and Kasemann shows the Reformed commentator to be more at home in this passage than the Lutheran one.” So true.

I have to say that Stowers is interesting here, Campbell is on his own, Bassler is half right, and there is a broad and yet strange coalition of agreement about how to handle Rom 2:14-15, 25-29 by Barth, Cranfield, Watson, Gathercole, and Wright, who see it as referring to Christian Gentiles who fulfil the law by their life in the Spirit.

In a nutshell, Paul argues in Romans 2 that there is no superiority for his imaginary Jewish opponent by presiding in judgment (vv. 1-11), by possessing the Torah (vv. 12-16), by a privileged ethnicity (vv. 17-24), or by practicing circumcision (vv. 25-29). God is impartial, each will get their just rewards, and when the rewards are handed out, well, some Gentiles might even be better off than some Jews at the final recompense.

"Splits and schism's per se in the church are never to be celebrated but unfortunately ..."

A Reforming Catholic Confession
"It's all about JESUS CHRIST, the only begotten "SON OF GOD!" What mankind is saying ..."

Can You Pass a Christology Quiz?
"The Great Schism is not celebrated in either Catholic or Orthodox Churches. I think Protestants ..."

A Reforming Catholic Confession
"It's a real pity that Nanos and Zetterholm do not engage with Stephen Carlson's work, ..."

Latest Issue of JSPL

Browse Our Archives



What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • gary

    Hi Dr. bird

    Which group would Mark Nanos line up with? Thanks

    blessings
    gary

  • Sean LeRoy

    Proving…that the Bible is more than accessible for the average reader.