Who is “the Greek” in Romans 1? An Israelite? Surely not. A response to Jason Staples

There is much to like about and much to learn from Jason Staples’ book Paul and the Resurrection of Israel: Jews, Former Gentiles, Israelites, but I have serious doubts about the central thesis, which is that Paul’s overarching goal is the regathering and restoration of all Israel, including the tribes of the northern kingdom lost among the nations:

Paul argues that the incorporation of gentiles into the eschatological assembly is the necessary means for the reconstitution and restoration of “all Israel,” an entity not only including Jews but also non-Jewish Israelites restored from the nations among which northern Israel had assimilated. (45)

An immediate obstacle to the thesis would seem to be presented by Paul’s discussion of idolatry and its consequences in Romans 1:18-32.

2 comments | Read more...
Review of Matthew Bates, Gospel Allegiance. What is faith?
Chapter two of Matthew Bates’ Gospel Allegiance: What Faith in Jesus Misses for Salvation in Christ sets out his understanding of the Greek word pistis. In the first part he explains why he thinks that “allegiance” is a better translation of the word than “faith”. In the second… ( | 3 comments)
Review of Matthew Bates, Gospel Allegiance. What was the gospel?
I have spent way too much time finding fault with Matthew Bates’ argument that Paul alludes to the pre-existence of Jesus in Romans 1:3. Now to get on with the substance of Gospel Allegiance: What Faith in Jesus Misses for Salvation in Christ. It might be a bit ambitious to take this one… ()
Are Ignatius and Irenaeus reliable interpreters of Romans 1:3?
Well, we’re still not quite done with the purported incarnational christology of Romans 1:3. Matthew Bates makes the claim in a brief section of his excellent book Gospel Allegiance (51-52), and at greater length in a 2015 CBQ article (117-21), that in this verse the aorist… ()
More on the supposed incarnational christology of Romans 1:3
This is a rushed and rather technical addendum to the previous piece on the question of whether there is a reference to the incarnation in Romans 1:3. ( | 1 comment)
Gospel allegiance: coming into being bodily
There is much that is good about Matthew Bates’ Gospel Allegiance: What Faith in Jesus Misses for Salvation in Christ, which is the follow-up to his highly successful Salvation by Allegiance Alone. I plan to review it in some detail over the next few weeks, all being well, and… ( | 3 comments)
From theology to history: Oliver Crisp on the temptations of the Christ
Here’s my working assumption. From the second to the twentieth century Christian “truth” was sustained by a theological superstructure or scaffolding. Recently, that superstructure has begun to look unstable, indeed liable to collapse. If Christian “truth” is to survive into the age… ( | 5 comments)
What about the resurrection of the martyrs? When was that supposed to have happened?
So my argument is that the best way to make sense of Paul’s teaching about the parousia of Christ is to identify the apocalyptic event with the conversion of the nations of the Greek-Roman world through the faithful witness of the persecuted churches. Paul told the story looking forward,… ( | 21 comments)