Back to Head's
Home Page Oak Hill College
Jesus'
Resurrection in Pauline Thought:
A
Study in the Epistle to the Romans
Dr Peter Head
Originally published in Proclaiming the Resurrection
(Papers from the First Oak Hill College Annual School of Theology;
ed. P.M. Head; Carlisle: Paternoster,
1998), pp. 58-80.
I.
Introduction
The
resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth, who came to be known as Jesus Christ, is
both foundational and central to the thought of Saul of Tarsus, who came to be
known as the apostle Paul. Indeed, I speak in this way of these two men
precisely because historically speaking it was the resurrection itself
which resulted both in Jesus being recognised as the Messiah by his disciples
and in the call and commission of Paul to be apostle to the Gentiles. Indeed,
one of my primary concerns in what follows will be to highlight the fundamental
connection in Paul's thought between that resurrection of Jesus as Messiah and
Paul's own apostolic mission to the Gentiles, particularly as expressed in his
letter to the Christians in Rome. This concentration is necessary because the
resurrection of Jesus Christ is so
central to the thought of the apostle Paul that we could not hope to cover the
whole of Paul's thought in relation to the resurrection within the scope of the
time or space available. Not only is the resurrection of Jesus mentioned in all
but three of the Pauline epistles (2 Thessalonians, Titus, Philemon), it is
also discussed explicitly in a number of passages on a number of subjects, with
a special role in Paul's ethics and eschatology; and dealt with at length in
the longest chapter in his epistles (1 Corinthians 15). Rather than focusing on
a single theme or passage we shall be investigating the role of Jesus'
resurrection in Paul's epistle to the Romans. This concentration could be
justified in a number of ways.
First,
even if we can no longer regard Romans as a compendium of Christian doctrine in
a systematic sense (after Melanchthon), it remains the case that in this
epistle Paul spells out the logic of the gospel at considerable length
precisely in order to persuade a church in which he has never ministered to
support the ministry of that gospel in regions west of Rome. No doubt (with
Wedderburn) the peculiar and specific situation in Rome did influence the
overall argument and content of the epistle, but one aspect of that situation -
the hearers' ignorance of Paul and his gospel, forces him to spell out his
teaching at greater length than in any other letter (as Cranfield insists).[1]
Secondly,
arising out of the point just made and enforced no doubt by its canonical
primacy, Romans has functioned in the history of Protestant thought mainly as a
resource for reformation in which justification by faith has been central. This
has placed justification and atonement at the forefront of the interpretation
and utilisation of Romans, especially for evangelical writers and preachers. A
reading of Romans which pays special attention to the resurrection of Jesus may
serve to highlight other themes of Romans which have perhaps played less
prominent roles in evanglical thought.
Thirdly,
although it is not my intention to focus on questions about the historicity and
reality of Jesus' resurrection, it is possible that a study of Romans may make
some tangential contribution to the perennial debates on this matter. Indeed,
precisely because, unlike for example in 1 Corinthians where the resurrection
is a matter of dispute and direct instruction, Romans may offer (and indeed, in
my view does offer) considerable support for the view that the resurrection of
Jesus is at the absolute heart of Pauline Christianity and that this centrality
could be assumed when writing to a (previously) non-Pauline Christian group in
Rome.
Fourthly,
it will shortly become clear that taking Romans as a whole, many fundamental
aspects of Paul's thought are
addressed in relation to the resurrection (e.g. Christology, apostleship,
justification, the Christian life and future hope). In this way Romans can
function as a window onto other aspects of Paul's thought. In addition, while
the general subject of the resurrection in Pauline thought has been given
considerable treatment in the scholarly literature, there is very little which
deals explicitly with its place in the argument of Romans.[2] Furthermore, I plan to make a strong new
argument emphasising the important place which Jesus' resurrection occupies in
Paul's appeal to the Roman christians. In fact the core of the argument I shall
be trying to make is precisely that it is
the resurrection of the Messiah which is at the heart of Paul's vision of the
gospel and his appeal to the Roman Christians.
This
paper begins with Paul in Romans 1 and deals with Jesus' resurrection and
Paul's gospel and apostleship (section II) and then moves directly to his
concluding appeal in 15:7-13. This establishes the main framework of the
argument and the heart of the argument: the risen Messiah as Lord as the agent
of Gentile inclusion (section III). Three more sections address the
relationship between Jesus' resurrection and the justification of the ungodly
(section IV: Rom 4:17-25); Jesus' resurrection and the resurrection of
believers (section V: Rom 6-8); and Jesus' resurrection and faith in Christ as
Lord (section VI: Romans 10, 14). A series of concluding observations follow
(section VII). An appendix listing all the references to resurrection in Romans
is added as an aid to further study.
II.
Jesus' Resurrection and Paul's Apostleship (1:1-7, esp. v4)
In
his opening salutation Paul makes a radical expansion to the core formula which
might be expected for a graeco-roman epistle: 'Paul, to the Romans, greetings'.
Most obviously, he fills out his own identity in such a way as to introduce
himself, specifically his gospel and his apostleship, to the Roman Christians.
The progression of thought is fairly straightforward: Paul's apostolic calling
involved a consecration to the gospel, a gospel which has its origin and focus
in God, and which was promised in the holy scriptures. In terms of content the
gospel finds its focus in a brief poetic narrative of the career of the Son of
God: his messianic ministry and his powerful resurrection to Lordship. It was
this Lord Jesus Christ who is the source of Paul's apostleship, which entails
bringing about the obedience of faith among all the Gentiles, thus including
the recipients of the letter: the christians at Rome.
It
is widely acknowledged that in verses 3&4 Paul describes the ministry of
the Son of God using traditional language and terminology ('the seed of David',
'the spirit of holiness', 'by the resurrection of the dead'), as he seeks to
gain the confidence of the Roman christians: confidence in Paul and his gospel
which would enable them both to accept his appeal for unity and to support his
Spanish mission. I doubt myself whether this utilisation of traditional
terminology provides sufficient evidence to enable the re-construction of a
pre-Pauline statement. If such terminology reassured Paul's Roman hearers that
his gospel was no novelty, but stood in continuity with the faith they knew, which
had been confessed since the foundational witness of Peter and the other early
apostles, then that would no doubt have increased the impact of his whole
argument. Nevertheless, as modern commentators are increasingly recognising, it
is the Pauline content that is crucial.
I
take the parallelism of verses 3 & 4 not as relating to the two natures of
Christ in a systematic or christological sense, but as reflecting two
historical modes of Christ's existence: his messianic ministry as Son of David
(according to the flesh) and his subsequent enthronement as powerful Son of God
(according to the Holy Spirit). A notable feature of these verses is the
emphasis placed on Jesus' Davidic descent, something that although
comparatively rare in the other epistles (cf. only 2 Tim 2:8 explicitly) is
prominent in Romans (cf. 9:5; 15:8f, 12) and, as we shall see, is twice
connected with Jesus' resurrection and the Gentile misssion. In verse 4 Paul
takes the resurrection of Jesus from among the dead as the moment of his
enthronement as 'Son-of-God-in-power'.
The
language and thought of this verse reflects two absolutely central passages in
the Old Testament, both of which played a prominent role in the eschatological
expectation of first-century Judaism and in the writings of the New Testament.
Firstly, we note God's promise to David in 2 Samuel 7:12-14:
When your days are fulfilled and you lie down with your ancestors, I will raise up your offspring after you, who shall come forth from your body, and I will establish his kingdom. He shall build a house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever. I will be a father to him, and he shall be a son to me.
The echoes are substantial, especially in
the Greek: God will raise up the seed of David, establishing his eternal
kingdom, and claiming him as his own son.
The
second passage contains these same themes: the role of the Davidic king, God's
pronouncement of the adoption formula and the granting of a universal kingdom.
In the second psalm God announces that he will set his anointed Davidic King on
Zion his holy hill:
I will tell of the decree of the LORD: He
said to me,"You are my son; today I have begotten you.
Ask of me, and I will make the nations your
heritage, and the ends of the earth your possession.
You shall break them with a rod of iron,
and dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel. (Ps 2:7-9)
This psalm finds associated with the
enthronement of the king a God-given invitation to exercise a universal
dominion. Paul, looking back to this psalm through the window of Jesus'
resurrection (and possibly in the light of 2 Samuel 7) finds a strong connection
between the resurrection of Jesus the Messiah and his messianic dominion over
the nations. From this perspective the resurrection of Jesus the Messiah is
both God's coronation decree: "You are my Son"; and the basis for the
Messiah's universal dominion.[3]
In
verse 5&6 it becomes transparently clear that the risen and powerful
messianic Lord has bestowed the grace of apostleship on Paul with the purpose
of advancing his universal dominion over all the nations through the preaching
of the gospel (the obedience of faith among all the nations). Paul's thought is
thoroughly eschatological: the resurrection of Jesus is the turn of the ages
and now he reigns as King.
That
the resurrection marked a decisive moment in the eschatological mission of
Jesus the Son is also emphasised in the speeches of Peter and Paul in Acts
(Acts 2, esp. v36).[4] The logic of the use of the OT is closely
paralleled in Paul's sermon in Pisidian Antioch (Acts 13:30-34):
But God raised him from the dead; and for
many days he appeared to those who came up with him from Galilee to Jerusalem,
and they are now his witnesses to the people. And we bring you the good news
that what God promised to our ancestors he has fulfilled for us, their
children, by raising Jesus; as also it is written in the second psalm, 'You are
my Son; today I have begotten you.' As to his raising him from the dead, no
more to return to corruption, he has spoken in this way, 'I will give you the
holy promises made to David.'
Here the resurrection of Jesus is
associated with both Psalm 2:7, 'you are my Son; today I have begotten you',
and Isaiah 55:3, 'Incline your ear, and come to me; listen, so that you may
live. I will make with you an everlasting covenant, my steadfast, sure love for
David.' In the sermon in Acts, Paul picks up the reference to life in the
preceding phrase of the verse as, apparently, the basis for applying the second
part of the verse to the risen Jesus: 'I will give you the holy promises made
to David' (although we should note that the 'I will give' comes not from Isaiah
55, but from an echo of Psalm 2:8 cited earlier). The point is the same as that
made in Romans 1:3f: by virtue of his resurrection God bestows upon the
messianic lord that extensive authority which was promised to the Davidic King:
rulership over the nations, that is, the Gentiles (cf. also Phil 2:9-11; Mt
28:18-20).
III.
The Risen Messiah as Lord and Gentile Inclusion (Rom 15:7-13, esp. v12)
Anders
Nygren asserted that 'in Romans 1:4 we have the whole message of the epistle in
a nutshell'.[5] This suggestion is supported not only by
the importance of the introductory greeting in setting the context for the
reception of the epistle, but also by Paul's return to the same set of ideas in
his concluding appeal to the Roman hearers. This represents a sort of inclusio, with the same biblical
theology undergirding the start and end of Paul's argument. The key passage is
15:7-13, clearly the practical (if not theological) climax of Romans: the
appeal to Jewish Christians and Gentile Christians to pull together and unite
in the gospel, an appeal that the rest of Romans prepares for theologically.
The theological basis for the appeal is the resurrection of Jesus as messianic
King over all the nations.
'Welcome one another', says Paul (15:7) to the factions
described previously as 'weak' and 'strong'. Reading between the lines of
chapter 14 suggests that these factions were aligned in terms of their approach
to food-laws and sabbath-observance, and the welcome of Jews and Gentiles alike
together becomes explicit in these following verses.[6] Christ's welcome functions as the model
and the means: he welcomes freely, graciously, by faith without deeds, through
his sacrificial death and powerful resurrection, and with a view to the glory
of God.
In verses 8 and 9 Paul returns to the thought of his
opening verses: Christ's messianic ministry confirms the patriarchal promises:
blessing to Israel and through them a blessing to all nations. Note that the
gospel for the Gentiles does not in any way transcend or negate the patriarchal
promises, it rather depends on Christ having fulfilled them so that the
Gentiles might also 'glorify God for his saving mercy'. In the following verses
Paul cites four different passages of Scripture, all of which point to the
united praise of the Messiah (or the Lord) coming from Israel (his people) and
the Gentiles/nations.[7] The last of these (in 15:12), the only one
introduced by name, provides the rationale:
'the root of Jesse shall come, the one who
rises to rule the Gentiles; in him the Gentiles shall hope' (Rom 15:12; cf. Is
11:10).
The inclusion of Gentiles in
the messianic people of God comes through the resurrection of the Messiah: he
shall come, he shall rise, Gentiles shall hope in him.
Paul takes this
passage almost directly from the LXX of Isaiah 11:10, itself already a
straightforward messianic passage (cf. 11:1; also alluded to in Rev 5:5;
22:16).[8] The terminology, using anistemi, refers to resurrection in
several key passages in the LXX (Is 26:19; Dn 12:2; cf. Ho 6:2; also PssSol
17.21).[9] It is also widely used of Jesus'
resurrection in the rest of the NT,[10] and by Paul when he seems to be citing
traditional material (as here, also 1 Thes 4:14; cf. Acts 13:33f; 17:3, 31;
also used of believers: 1 Thes 4:16; Eph 5:14). While not, therefore Paul's
most customary way of refering to Jesus' resurrection there is no doubt that
this is what he refers to here.
The inclusion of the Gentiles within the
saving purposes of God arises out of the resurrection of his Messiah. Jesus the
messianic Lord extends his universal dominion through the preaching of the
gospel and the inclusion of those from every tribe and tongue and people and
nation. It remains to be seen whether these perspectives are further
illuminated by an investigation of other references to Jesus' resurrection in
Romans.
IV.
Jesus' Resurrection and God who justifies the ungodly (Rom 4:17-25)
After
the introduction there are no references to the resurrection until several
which occur in a cluster towards the end of chapter four. Having announced
God's decisive action in revealing his saving righteousness in the cross as the
place where sin is dealt with (3:21ff), Paul shows that God had always purposed
to form a people of faith, following the example of Abraham: 'Abraham believed
God and it was reckoned to him as righteousness'. In the later part of chapter
four Paul outlines some important elements of the nature of Abraham's faith.
Abraham
believed in God the creator (4:17), God the promiser (throughout), and God the
life-giver (4:17). Abraham's faith in God contrasts with the Adamic fallenness
of humanity as depicted in chapter one of Romans: faith in the creator, faith
in his spoken promise, a faith strengthened in giving glory to God (contrast
chapter one).[11] In all of this Abraham is presented as the
model of Christian faith (explicitly in 4:11f, 23ff), not only for the
Christians in Rome, but for all those who like him trust in God's gospel
promise through Christ.[12] This last point is drawn out explicitly in
the closing verses (4:23-25:)
Now the words,"it was reckoned to
him," were written not for his sake alone, but for ours also. It will be
reckoned to us who believe in him who raised Jesus our Lord from the dead, who
was handed over to death for our trespasses and was raised for our
justification.
Paul
has deliberately portrayed Abraham's faith as directed towards 'God who
enlivens the dead' (4:17), a traditional description in OT and Judaism which
within the context is connected with his own deadness and the barrenness of
Sarah's womb (v. 19).[13] In other words, Abraham's faith in God's
promise included the idea that this promise would be fulfilled through a
"resurrection". It is possible, in view of parallels in Jewish
thought, that the reference to God the creator is similarly to be oriented to
his ability to bring 'resurrection'.[14] Paul's argument is clearly and
deliberately constructed in order to provide a close parallel between Abraham's
faith and Christian faith: faith in God who raised Jesus our Lord from the dead
(a designation which quickly became a foundational christian dogma).[15] God's gospel promises are realised through
the resurrection of Jesus, although as Paul continues, the twin axes of Jesus'
saving work are his death and resurrection:
'who was handed over to death for our
trespasses
and was raised for our justification'.
This
solemn formula brings the chapter to a close with a careful parallelism, both
elements of which echo Isa 53 (often thought to reflect a pre-Pauline
tradition).[16] Uniquely in Paul this passage connects our
justification with Jesus' resurrection, and it is this connection which will be
the focus of our interest here.
The
formula contains two passive verbs and two dia
clauses. We should probably take the passives as 'divine passives': it was God
who handed Jesus over (to death) for our trespasses, and it was God who raised
him up for our justification. The first line echoes Isa 53:12, especially in
the Greek version ('because of their sins he was handed over'). This suggests
that the first dia clause may best be
understood retrospectively or causally. It is difficult to understand the
second dia in the same way as the
first: how can our justification be the reason for Jesus' resurrection? Most
commentators sensibly opt for a prospective or final use of dia: 'Christ was raised "for the
sake of" / "because of the need for" our justification'.[17]
Some
scholars have taken the view that the two clauses are divided only for
rhetorical effect: Jesus' death and resurrection provides for forgiveness of
sin and justification.[18] On the other hand it seems likely that there
may be something altogether more significant here in terms of the link between
resurrection and justification. This view is made more likely when the parallel
in Is 53:11 is noted: the servant makes many to be accounted righteous in the
context of his own vindication (possibly resurrection).[19]
But
granted that Paul generally traces justification to the benefits of Jesus'
death (as already in 3:24ff; also in 5:9), what might he mean by connecting
justification to Jesus' resurrection? John Murray offered five examples of 'the
respects in which the resurrection of Christ may be conceived of as serving the
end of justification':[20]
Firstly, the means of justification is
faith directed to Jesus, and this is only appropriately directed to Jesus the
living Lord (3:22, 26).
Secondly justification comes about through
union with Christ, a union which can only have efficacy in relation to the
living Christ (8:1; 2 Cor 5:21).
Thirdly, the righteousness of Christ is
embodied in the risen, living Lord and thus bestowed upon believers (cf.
5:17-19; 1 Cor 1:30).
Fourthly, the death and resurrection of
Christ should be regarded as inseparable.
Fifthly, we come to stand in a justified
state through the mediation of Christ, a mediation which needs his resurrection
power (5:2).
It
may be asked whether, notwithstanding this impressive list, there is yet more
to be said in terms of an even more fundamental connection between Christ's
resurrection and our justification (further evidence might be gleaned from the references
to salvation through Jesus' life in
Rom 5:10, 17f). For Paul, the resurrection of Christ represented his vindication, the public declaration
of his righteousness by God, in other words, his justification (cf. Rom 1:3f; 1 Cor 15:17; esp. 1 Tim 3:16). Christ
was made sin (2 Cor 5:21); he became a curse (Gal 3:13); was 'in the likeness
of sinful flesh' (Rom 8:3); but this did not reflect his true standing with
God, and was overturned in the resurrection. Christ took the sinful pattern of
human existence, becoming what we were (sinners), so that we might become what
he was and is (righteous).[21]
God
“justified” Jesus by raising him from the dead: the one verdict has already
been given (following the act of obedience on the cross); by faith Christians
enter into Christ and are associated with that verdict. Therefore justification
for believers stems from the same act of God as does identification and
participation: the resurrection of Jesus. From this perspective the
resurrection of Jesus represents both the historical focal point which gives
substance and definition to faith in God who enlivens the dead and the
vindicatory means by which the righteous verdict of Christ can be applied to
the believer.
V.
Jesus' Resurrection and the resurrection of believers (esp. 6:4-10; 7:4; 8:11)
It
would not stretch the evidence to suggest that the main point of the argument
of Romans 5:12 - 8:39 is to affirm that just
as believers have been granted that verdict of righteousness-vindication
that was proclaimed in the resurrection of Jesus so too believers will be rescued from death and granted a part in
the resurrection life of Jesus. At the point where Paul turns from the
salvation-historical perspective (of 5:20f) to the individual (seeking to
return to the question first posed in 3:1-8), the unity of the believer with
the Lord Jesus Christ is pivotal. This is expressed firstly in terms of the
death of Jesus and the believer's death to sin (chapter 6), death of the law
(chapter 7), and death to the old life (chapter 8). It is also expressed in
terms of the resurrection of Jesus. In all three chapters the unity of the
believer with the Lord Jesus Christ, he who died and was raised to life,
involves a unity with his resurrection life. This unity has both present and
future eschatological elements (something that Paul had already hinted at in
passages such as 5:10).
In
Rom 6:4-10 Paul raises a number of important issues. The basic structure of the
argument concerns the believer's deadness to sin, based on the identification
of the believer with Christ's death:
Do you not know that all of us who have
been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? Therefore we have
been buried with him by baptism into death ... (Rom 6:3-4a).[22]
Associated with this is the
resurrection-tension which runs through this section: while believers have been
united with Christ in a death like his (a decisive death in relation to sin);
their association with Christ's resurrection seems to have a two-fold
aspect: present transformation ('the newness of life', 6:4, 11); and future
complete transformation (6:5, 8).
Without
entering into a detailed discussion of this passage, it is clear that the
eschatological perspective of Paul here is fundamentally that which he also
expressed in 1 Corinthians 15. Christ was raised as the first-fruits and the
resurrection and associated transformation of believers, while assured, remains
a future expectation associated with Christ's completed victory over death.
This is asserted in Rom 6:6f. In Adam we all share in a solidarity of sin and
death (as Paul has explained in Rom 5:12-21); this solidarity has been broken
by Christ’s death: we are included into Christ, identified with him.
The
logic of chapter six as a whole: that unity with Christ in his death and
resurrection enables a new aliveness to God; is echoed in compact form, in
relation to the Torah, in 7:4. Immediately prior to this, Paul has stated his
general principle in verse 1 - the Law is binding only during life - and illustrated
this principle from the practice that the marriage bond is anulled by the death
of a partner (v2&3). He then makes two points of application in verse 4: a)
a death frees one from the law; and b) such a death makes a new relationship
possible - the believer freed from the law is bound to the one who died and
rose again.
The
elucidation of this statement in verses 5&6 involves both a strong temporal
contrast ('we were then ... but now ...') and the introduction of a reference
to the Holy Spirit (v6): the new life (already mentioned in chapter 6 as the
consequence of resurrection with Christ) is here ascribed to the Spirit:
While we were living in the flesh, our
sinful passions, aroused by the law, were at work in our members to bear fruit
for death. But now we are discharged from the law, dead to that which held us
captive, so that we are slaves not under the old written code but in the new
life of the Spirit.
How
is this resurrection life, promised both in the present and in the eschatological
future, realised in the life of the believer? The answer, specified especially
in Rom 8:10f, is clear: 'through the work of the Holy Spirit':
if Christ is in you (through the indwelling
Spirit living in every believer), then while the body is dead because of sin,
the spirit is life because of righteousness. If the Spirit of he who raised
Jesus from the dead dwells in you, he who raised Christ from the dead will give
life to even your mortal bodies, through his indwelling Spirit in you. (Rom
8:10f)
These verses are somewhat difficult, due in
part to the compact nature of Paul's expression, but it seems likely that Paul
is affirming the Holy Spirit's role in the enlivening of our dead sinful bodies
in this life (v10) and in the resurrection of our dead physical bodies in a
future existence (v11). We shall have to defend this understanding briefly.
In
8:10b, 'the body dead because of sin' seems to refer to the physical body of
the believer in its subjection to death because of sin (hence the solution in
the next verse is resurrection). The following phrase, 'the spirit is life
because of righteousness', most probably refers to the enlivening activity of
the Holy Spirit.[23] The present provision for the deadness of
the body is thus the life-bringing activity of the indwelling Spirit.
In
verse 11 Paul continues the argument with a new focus on the final resurrection
of the believer indwelt by the Spirit. God the Father is twice described as the
one who raised Jesus / Christ from the dead (cf. Rom 4:24).[24] The indwelling Spirit functions as both
the guarantee and the agent of final resurrection. The God who gives life will
enliven the bodies subject to death through the indwelling Spirit.[25] The fact that the agency of the Spirit in the future resurrection is nowhere else
specified in the NT, and a large number of early manuscripts read here a dia followed by an accusative (i.e.
'because of his indwelling Spirit'), has led some scholars to deny that this is
what Paul is asserting here; rather the emphasis is purely on the assurance of
future resurrection.[26] Nevertheless the textual evidence is
divided, with most editions and translations reading dia followed by a gentive (i.e. 'through/by means of his indwelling
Spirit'); the agency of the Holy Spirit in connection with Jesus' resurrection
is apparently supported by Paul (cf. Rom 1:4; 1 Tim 3:16; 1 Cor 6:14); and the
agency of the Holy Spirit in connection with the future resurrection of
believers, which seems to be assumed by the argument here, is apparently everywhere
assumed in Jewish thought reflecting on Ezekiel 37:14.[27]
VI.
Jesus' Resurrection and faith in Christ as Lord (esp. 10:7-9; 14:9-11)
The
next references to Jesus' resurrection in Romans come in the midst of chapter
ten in a description of a believing response to the basic content of Paul's
gospel preaching:
because if you confess with your lips that
Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you
will be saved. For one believes with the heart and so is justified, and one
confesses with the mouth and so is saved. For the scripture says, 'Everyone who
believes in him will not be put to shame.' (Rom 10:9-11).
We
do well to take note of this final verse (v11 citing Is 28:16), rather than
simply citing verses 9&10, because it alerts us to both the destination of
Paul's argument and its point of departure. The destination is the universal
availability of salvation (v12&13), to which we shall return in a moment.
The point of departure is the earlier and fuller citation of this same passage
in 9:33: 'See, I am laying in Zion a stone that will make people stumble, a
rock that will make them fall, and whoever believes in him will not be put to
shame.' Paul has been contrasting the righteousness based on faith (which
Gentiles have received), with the righteousness based on Torah which Israel
strived for but did not attain. Israel failed to gain God's
saving-righteousness because they failed to acknowledge Christ, the one to whom
the law all along was leading.[28] Christ, says Paul in one of his more
enigmatic assertions, is the goal of the Torah (that to whom Torah always
pointed and in whom the era of Torah is brought to an end) so that there may be
a righteousness for everyone who believes (9:30-10:4).
The
next section (vv5-13) is basically a explanation of the second part of v4. It
opens with an expression of the righteousness based on Torah: it requires doing
(Lev 18:5), but turns more fully into an expression of the righteousness based
on faith (based on Deut 30:11-14). This faith-righteousness, like the covenant
promise of Deuteronomy, does not cry out for human effort to gain God's favour:
v6f: the righteousness that comes from
faith says, 'Do not say in your heart, "Who will ascend into
heaven?"' (that is to bring Christ down); 'or "Who will descend into
the abyss?"' (that is to bring Christ up from the dead).
Rather this faith-righteousness, says: 'The
word is near you, on your lips and in your heart'. It is this nearness of the
word (perhaps with the added thought that its nearness comes from Christ's
incarnation and resurrection) that Paul claims in identifying his gospel
preaching with the covenant word: that word of which the Scripture speaks is
the word of faith which which are preaching.
Verses
9&10 then pick up the two locations, mouth and heart, and explain the
metaphor of nearness in terms of confession and faith in Christ the risen Lord.
God's saving righteousness is granted to all those who believe in the one who,
having been a stumbling stone laid in Zion, was raised from the dead to become
Lord of all. The unusual order involved in refering to confession before he
refers to faith (unusual because confession arises from faith), is required by
the OT saying previously cited and is in fact reversed in verse 10 and again in
the following section in terms of faith (v11) and the invocation of the name of
the Lord (v13). This, in addition to the general use of "salvation"
terminology (v9, 10, 13), as well as the similarity of content suggests the propriety
of taking the two elements together. As Cranfield said: 'the two formulations
interpret each other, so that what is to be both believed and confessed is the
more precisly defined.'[29]
The
affirmation of Jesus as Lord, so characteristic of early Christianity,[30] arose from the resurrection, hence the
combination here in these verses. No doubt the application to Christ of Joel
2:32 (cf. Acts 2), which speaks originally about Yahweh the Lord, is of immense
christological significance (cf. 1 Cor 2:16; Phil 2:11; 1 Thess 5:2; 2 Thes
2:2).[31] The underlying theology is that we have
discerned previously, both in Romans 1 and in chapter 4: by his resurrection
Jesus is granted that universal lordship which is appropriate to the Messiah,
and as universal Lord he bestows his grace to all those who call upon him, both
Jews and Gentiles. In the new era inaugurated by his resurrection, gospel
proclamation displaces the commandments just as Christ displaces the law as the
locus [or focus] of God’s dealings with his people. And all those who confess
and believe enter the new community, based on saving-righteousness of God,
devoted to the same Lord.
It
is precisely this which also explains why an appeal to the resurrection of
Jesus is central to Paul's advice to the weak and the strong (14:9-11):
Christ's death and resurrection have established him as Lord of all his people,
this means that our actions are done first and foremost in relation to Christ
the Lord who will judge justly, and not for the benefit of others, who may
judge or condemn inappropriately.[32]
VII.
Conclusion
We
have covered a good deal of ground and even so have only begun to scratch the
surface of this incredible document. Without meaning to sideline any of the
many observations made throughout this paper it should be possible, in
conclusion, to highlight three areas of importance for our understanding of
Pauline theology and then make two final observations.
First
and foremost, this discussion has highlighted the importance and attention that
must be given to the OT background of Paul's thought if we are to make sense of
his teaching on the resurrection, especially in relation to the eschatological
orientation of his thought. Now that Messiah is raised he exercises his
universal lordly domain by calling Gentiles to himself through the proclamation
of the gospel without forcing them to come by way of the Torah. In our preaching and evangelism we continue
to do the same.
Secondly,
I think it is possible to conclude that the centrality of the resurrection for
Paul and its role as a shared assumption in his presentation in Romans (as
suggested by the traditional nature of much of Paul's resurrection language)
supports the conclusion that belief in the resurrection of Jesus was the shared
and universal faith of the earliest Christian communities. In the opinion of
the present writer the best historical explanation for this shared conviction
remains the Bible's assertion that it actually happened in Jerusalem in the
early 30s.
Thirdly,
although much of this is clearly of universal significance, it was also of
specific and strategic importance in persuading the mixed churches of Rome to
support Paul's gospel mission to Spain. The resurrection of Jesus is the
primary basis in Romans for the unity of Jew and Gentile believers. My two
concluding observations draw upon reflecting on the possible impact of this
letter.
One
of the features of Paul's thought is that Christian faith and confession is
focused on the resurrection-lordship of Jesus. Christians confess the public
truth that 'Jesus is Lord', and understand that lordship to have been conferred
at and by his resurrection (Rom 1:4; 4:24; 10:9f; 14:9). Thus consistency of
faith and confession is absolutely necessary, as Paul affirms: 'if you confess
with your lips that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him
from the dead, you will be saved' (Rom 10:9). Partly because of the success and
confidence of Christian testimony to Christ's Lordship in Rome and also because
of the increasingly arrogant utilisation of divine titles by emperors (from
Nero onwards), Christians in Rome could easily come into conflict with the
claim that the emperor was 'Lord'. Indeed, less than a decade after the writing
of this epistle, Nero had countless Christians put to death in the city of Rome
because of their confession (presumably that Jesus was Lord). The scene after
the fire of Rome is recorded in a well known passage in Tacitus:
Therefore, to abolish the rumour [that Nero
himself was responsible for the fire] Nero substituted culprits and inflicted
most extreme punishments on those, hateful by reason of their abominations, who
were commonly called Christians. Christus, the originator of that name, had
been executed by the procurator Pontius Pilate. The pernicious superstition,
checked for the moment, was bursting out again not only throughout Judaea, the
birthplace of the plague, but also throughout the city into which all that is
horrible and shameful streams from every quarter and is constantly practised.
Therefore, first those who confessed were arrested, then on their information a
huge throng was convicted not so much on a charge of arson as because of their
hatred of the human race. Mockery was added as they perished, so that they died
wither covered by the skins of wild beasts and torn to pieces by hounds or were
nailed on crosses to be set on fire and when daylight failed were burnt to give
illumination by night. Nero had offered his own gardens for the spectacle and
produced a show like that of the games, mingling with the common people in the
dress of a charioteer or driving his chariot. (Tacitus, Annals 15.44)
This
is a sobering account. Many of those who heard this letter read in their
gatherings were called upon to maintain their confession even unto death. This
ought to remind us that to confess faith in Jesus the risen Lord is to commit
ourselves to living and dying in submission to his will. Ironically Tacitus
himself helps us to see in their deaths a beacon of light lighting up the
darkness. For them, as for us, the sure and certain hope of the resurrection
from the dead provided assurance. This introduces my second concluding
observation.
In
the Jewish catacombs of Monteverde, the oldest of all the Jewish catacombs in
Rome,[33] reflecting Jewish thought in the Western
diaspora, there are a large number of epitaphs, or funerary inscriptions. Among
these inscriptions 'there is precious little evidence of hope in an afterlife,
and even less of the resurrection' reflecting, more than likely 'a syncretistic
assimiltation to the religious-cultural conceptions of the milieu.'[34] One rather pessimistic formula, which
recurrs on at least five inscriptions, is simply: 'Be brave, no one is
immortal'.[35] Into this context the confident Christian
assertion that God had broken into human history in the resurrection of Messiah
Jesus doubtless offered both new hope and new life in the gospel to many.
Indeed the later Christian catacombs reflect a much stronger eschatological
confidence with numerous portraits reflecting confidence in resurrection to
life.[36] We cannot, of course, trace this
specifically to the influence of Paul's letter to the Romans, but the change in
outlook is notable. Surely our 'hopeless' contemporaries need to see lives
dominated by resurrection-faith and hear the message of the resurrection so
that men and women can find hope and life in Christ.
To order the book: Amazon.co.uk:
At a glance: Proclaiming the Resurrection
[36] See J. Stevenson, The Catacombs: Rediscovered monuments of early Christianity (London, Thames & Hudson 1978).