Chapter Ten: A Mighty Fortress: Justification Theory's Textual Base
S.1. Preamble
Some Programmatic Issues
1.1 The Basic Thesis - Romans 1-4 as the Textual "Citadel: R 1.16-4.25 (p313).
1.2 The general Structure of the Conventional Reading of Romans 1-4: R 1.16-17 linked with R 3.21-26, 31 (p314). R 1.18-3.20 contains the argument of "plight"; R 4.1-22 Scriptural verification; R 4.25 further statement (p315).
S.2. The Problem: Romans 1.18-3.20.
The indictment; humanity's inescapable culpability; the reality of divine retributive justice, a strict soteriology of desert.
1.18-2.8 ((I)) Universal sinfulness leads to a verdict of condemnation, leaving humanity "without excuse". Divine judgment will take place in accordance with works of law and desert, retributively and based on universal perceptions, establishing universal culpability. ((II)) 2.9-3.9 over-rides special pleading for Jews. (III)) 3.9-20 inevitable verdict of sinfulness which all know in advance (p316).
2.1 Stage One: Romans 1.18-2.8: 1.19-21a Judgment requires an ethical code. Pagans know God's eternal divinity and power but castigates them for idolatry and sexual deviance (so that must be part of the code); but the theology says nothing of the sexual ethics; so God's ethical demands are appreciated innately (2.14-15); a universal external and internal mechanism. God condemns idolatry by pagans and sexual immorality and then other ((strangely assorted - KC)) vices 1.29b-31 (p317). All pagans will be "worthy of death" and they know it (R 1.32). The argument 'slips' from paganism to universalism. God will repay according to each one's deeds (R 2.6). But 2.7-10 promises reward and condemnation on a cosmological basis.
2.2 Stage Two: Romans 2.9-3.9: Equality of Jews and pagans by virtue of universal knowledge and conscience; challenges Torah-conscious Jews; challenges the advantage of circumcision; drives the point home against the "faithfulness" and "righteousness" of God (p319); Jewish privilege and universal judgment on desert not necessarily compatible (p320); Paul implies that Jews will fail the final judgment.
2.3 Stage Three: Romans 3.9-20: No-one is sinless and sin is deeply ingrained; the total failure of humanity (p322).
S.3. The Solution - Romans 1.16-17 and 3.21-31 (and 4.23-25) (p323)
Construal of motifs: God has made righteousness (I) and atonement (III) through Christ to those who appropriate them by faith (II); the Gospel is salvation for those who have faith; the righteousness of God is revealed through faith for faith." This process forgives the believer's transgressions imputing Christ's righteousness, promising a verdict of innocence/acquittal at the divine judgment (p324) referred to as "justification". (IV) God "justifies those who have faith in Jesus"; the problem of transgression has been resolved; hope replaces law; in justifying all believers God affirms retributive justice (VI), displaying forbearance (VII). This (contradiction) 'squared' by Christ's atonement (III). This is Paul's gospel (VIII) under-written by Jewish Scripture (IX) and is taking place now (X) (p325) following on from but the failure of J by works (V).
S.4. Scriptural Attestation - Romans 4.1-25
4.1-8 cf Genesis 15.6; 4.9-12 Circumcision; 4.13-22 "opaque" nature of faith; 4.23-25 transition to a Christological focus (p326).
4.1 Sub-Section One: 4.1-8: Scriptural Corroboration of Key Soteriological Principles (p327): Abraham believed in God and was credited with righteousness. Psalm 32.7-8 cf Motif (X).
4.2 Sub-Section Two: 4.9-12: application to the Specific Issue of Circumcision (p328): Abraham's belief prior to circumcision.
4.3 Sub-Section Three: 4.13-22: Discussion of the Nature of Faith: the transition to "promise" (p329). Abraham believes in the "resurrecting God", in hope.
4.4 Sub-Section Four: 4.23-25: Christologicaly Focused Summary: Linking Christians with the believing Abraham (p330).
S.5. Some Implications
Correspondence with the theory in Chapter One (p331-32).
S.6. Survey
Unanimity of conventional reading outside Dunn and Jewett (p333). Wilkens, Kasemann, Barth, Schlatter. French commentaries; Cranfield, Sanday, Headlam. Moo, Schreiner, Fitzmoyer, Byrne, Esler, Tobin, Withrington. Even Jewett is conventional (p334); popular commentaries conventional (p335).
Excursus: Additional Sources: Wider studies conventional (p336-37).