nuance

I figured I’d post my notes after each Romans study in order to give everyone something to review. Last time was a review of Romans 1-4 and a discussion on Romans 5:1-11. Here they be:

Recap Romans 1-4: Liberal Theology Deathmatch

The Illustration: Rabbi JC vs. The Angry Apostle

• Jesus - Mystical and eastern/postmodern (all about spiritual experience, love, and acts of kindness). Paul - Doctrinal and western/modern (all about right thinking and proving that everyone who doesn’t think the right theology is damned to hell).
• Jesus - A Jewish rabbi bringing reform. Paul - An anti-Semitic inventor of a new religion.
• Jesus - Progressive (questioned authority, brought new freedom to uptight religious people). Paul - Fundamentalist (all about bogging us down in the same old intolerant religious information, rules, and regulations).
• Jesus - All about social justice in this life. Paul - All about soul-salvation and the afterlife.
• Jesus - Pacifist (Lu.6:27-36). Paul - Militarist (Ro. 13:1ff.).
• Jesus - Inclusivist/Egalitarian/Feminist. Paul - Misogynist (male family headship, female head coverings, female silence in church, male eldership, etc.).

Liberal theology [EXPLAIN] often sets up an antithesis between Jesus and Paul; they say that Jesus and Paul taught contradictory ideas; and they say that Paul, not Jesus, is the one who founded “Christianity” as we now know it (esp. evangelical or fundamentalist Christianity).

Some will also try to “redeem” Paul from his bad fundamentalist reputation by claiming that he did not actually write many of the letters attributed to him (e.g., Karen Armstrong: held Paul responsible for all that went wrong in Christianity; he perverted the loving teaching of Jesus and made it into something doctrinal and harsh; but then discovered that many of the texts associated with Paul were not really written by Paul; the most misogynist writings were not written by him at all; he was much more egalitarian; brought the richness of the Jewish tradition, esp. compassion and love [1 Cor. 13].).

Don’t have time to address all the liberal claims, but let’s just look at a couple of ways that these first chapters in Romans are demonstrating the consistency of Paul’s doctrine with Jesus’ doctrine.

Jesus and Paul as civil rights leaders: the Ethnic Emphasis.
So far in Romans we notice a distinct ethnic emphasis in Paul’s discourse. This is evident

• in the way that 1:18ff. shows that all men, regardless of race, posses knowledge of God and evidence of God by virtue of creation (which they have suppressed),
• in the way that ch. 2 turns to show that the religious Jewish person is guilty of the same sins he opposes in the Gentiles,
• in the way that ch. 3 concludes that according to the Jewish law and the law written on our hearts as human beings, we are all guilty and are all under sin,
• and in the way that chs. 3 and 4 explain that it is faith alone - not ethnic or religious heritage, ritual, or work - that justifies us before God and unites us in the Abrahamic covenant.

The result is that there are two great equalizers: Sin and Faith. (There is another great equalizer, less emphasized - creation and the image of God.)

Faith is obviously positive - no matter what our backgrounds are, we are brothers and sisters in Jesus! (Think of Paul’s appeal to Philemon to free Onesimus.)

I propose that sin is also positive - it allows us to see that no individual, culture, or race is superior to another; we are all struggling, all jacked up, all under sin and in need of a savior. This causes us to not think too highly of ourselves or look down on others (cf. Ro. 3:9). (If slave owners and segregation supporters really believed in sin, they would have to stop!)

Jesus and the ethnic emphasis: the Samaritan woman at the well (John 4). Cf. the Good Samaritan (Luke 10), the Centurion’s faith (Matt. 8), the thankful leper (Lu. 17).

Jesus and Paul as “religion” fighters: the Heart Emphasis.

• We also see a focus on faith from the heart in Paul’s discourse so far. This could be summarized in the phrase “justified by faith apart from works of the law” (Ro. 3:28).
• Because faith from the heart is the main thing, there is no room for boasting in outward religious achievement or pedigree (3:27). Real circumcision is that which happens when the heart is transformed to love God (2:28). The kind of self-righteous, hypocritical, religious attitude that some Jewish folks had is utterly incompatible with the gospel. The heart of faith is focused on the work of Jesus to save helpless sinners; it is not focused on its own righteousness but the righteousness of God that comes through believing in Jesus.
• Jesus’ teaching is replete with this emphasis on the heart over and against outward religious deeds. Just look at the sermon on the mount (Matt. 5-8), and you will see this over and over again. Further, his teaching that you must be born again spiritually to enter the kingdom of God, which is taught as a parallel to believing in him (John 3), is the fulfillment the OT prophecies regarding the new covenant (Jer. 31:31-34).
• Result: Jesus and Paul were teaching the same things.

Read Romans 5:1-11
How does this passage demonstrate the importance of the heart in Christianity?
How might we define a real Christian as opposed to a fake one?
What do you feel ought to be the attitude of your heart overall?