Wednesday, 1 February 2012

Romans Exegesis

Hey,

So this is a hefty topic, but I'm more or less posting it for my own documentation. I am going through the book of Romans (in the Bible) in Greek. I decided I should start recording my findings because isn't that just a much brighter thing to do? So I've already done a bit, but here's where this thing will start

Romans 3:25b

"This was to demonstrate His (emphasis on the His, so maybe I'll write it like this from now on (i.e. HIS) when emphasized) righteousness because of ... okay now here the sentence is getting really tricky. The word, "because of -(dia)" is a preposition, which is pointing to the accusative (The noun receiving the action), but the preposition has no accusative partner in this sentence. I think the author of my Greek-English parsing book may have split one very long sentence into two. So now I'm just straight up confused.

Okay, I think I found it. I think the dia is connected to the He (referring to God) in the next English sentence or it is implied (because of context) and connected to the word, God, that is in the genitive. The genitive case is the case where to put it simply, you can add the word "of" in front.

Moving forward, "This was to demonstrate HIS righteousness because God in His perseverance (this is one of the words my lexicon gave as an option for this particular word (avoxn). They said most of the NT definitions were forbearance, but to be honest, I feel this particular word has little relevance or connection in modern day English.) passed over (or let remain un-punished) previous sins."

3:26

"It was also for the purpose of  the demonstration of His righteousness at the present (right now) time, so that (this means with the result of (ie end result)) HE might be just and the Justifier of the person (I have a couple options here, so I'll list them:) 1. who has or 2. out of the  or 3.or part of the group that has  faith in Jesus."

"Where then is boasting? It has been excluded. By means of what kind of law? A law of works? No, but by means of the law of faith."

3:28-29

"For we emotionally and logically hold to or conclude that a person is justified  by faith apart from works of the law. Is God only the God of the Jews? Is He not also the God of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles too."

3:30

"Because God is one ..." This statement is key to the Paul's whole thought. Basically, He is outright saying, "God is the God of you (i.e. the Jews) and of Gentiles. He is one and the same God." He was in a way reminding them of their history (The Lord is our God, the Lord is one). (Random insert, I read a historical fiction book this past summer on Hezekiah. In it, she quoted this statement as, "Yahweh is the Lord, Yahweh alone." I have not researched this subject at all and don't know if this is a better or worse interpretation). 

The main point of my whole paragraph is to say, Paul was blatantly teaching that the Gentiles are now part of God's chosen people. The Jews had to make room for them in their home.

"Because God is one, HE will justify (this is an action that Will Happen in the future) the
circumcised ..." (i.e. probably referring to the Jews. The Jews often got into disputes and fights at this point in time over the issue of circumcision. They believed it was a necessity for salvation. However, Paul and the apostles were desperately trying to teach them that it's all about our faith in Jesus. If we're using circumcision as a necessity for salvation than we also have to obey every letter of the whole entire law.

If anyone thought that might work, Paul soundly demolished that thought. Throughout the past two depressing chapters, he aptly showed us how much we suck in that area. The world is full of people who know good, but do evil instead. We follow our cravings and ignore the conscience God has given us. And in the times when we want to do good, we do evil instead. In the words of Paul, `Who can save us from this body of death?  ... Thanks be to JESUS CHRIST."

It is Jesus who comes forward for us, who stands up for us. He walks into the arena to face the punishment for our selfish, demented actions. And knowing the punishment would cost Him His life and would separate Him from the One He loved most (His Dad), He still walked forward. That is such a deep love, I can't fully fathom it. How could someone love the real me, who is utterly death-like (i.e. disdainful, self-focused, full of hared, bitterness, jealousy, loneliness and fear), so much that He would risk and lose everything close to His heart to give me a CHANCE (not a guarantee) of being with Him.  The only words that come to mind are,"Praise be to Jesus who loved me."

"Because God is one, HE will justify the circumcised on the basis of (this is my own thought here, I think the phrase "on the basis of" (i.e. ek) could have been translated, "by means of (i.e. how they're justified)" their faith. It sounds really weird, but in order to match the next half of the sentence that may be a better translation.) their faith and the uncircumcised by means of (or "on the basis of" perhaps?) of the same faith."

Yikes, that would been like a slap in the face to the religious Jews. They were following the law and had been doing all these things for God for years. Now, just like that, Paul is elevating the Gentiles onto the same level as them not because of what they did, but because of what Jesus did for them. Talk about demolishing your worldview.

3:31

Do we completely rid ourselves of the law (or make the law useless) by means of faith? What are you stupid? No way! On the contrary, we uphold/stand firmly behind the law.

4:1
What then shall we (though not proper grammatically, most of us would say, "What then can we") say that Abraham our ancestor/forefather discovered about this?

4:2
For if Abraham was set free/vindicated/justified because of what he did, than he has something to boast about, but not around God.

TO DO 4:3-5

4:6
-(Will write more later) - forgiveness-abandon, let go of the deed done against AND total acceptance of the deed'er'  and state of the verb forgive - gnomic present, stative active and regular indicative 

No comments:

Post a Comment