Romans

 

Here's another interesting landmark in my journey through the Bible. The first of the letters from Paul, where we see the majority of the Christian beliefs stated. This letter to the believers in Rome is pretty popular to most Christians, showing a few contrasts between Paul's theology and that of the gospels, and there are a few items that appear to conflict with things I hear from the Christian community today. I find that interesting!

Rom 1:3 - ...the gospel concerning his Son, who was descended from David according to the flesh...
Here's the first hint that something's wrong here. Paul says Jesus was a blood relation to King David, when the two gospels that say anything about the subject - Matthew and Luke - both say that Jesus was created in Mary's womb, without any physical aid from Joseph, the link to David.

Rom 1:18-21 - For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and wickedness of those who by their wickedness suppress the truth. For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. Ever since the creation of the world his eternal power and divine nature, invisible though they are, have been understood and seen through the things he has made. So they are without excuse; for though they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their senseless minds were darkened.
Here's a favorite passage for Christians, in talking with me. It's called "natural theology." That means that you can tell God created the universe just be looking at it. However, in looking at the whole of our natural world, you can come up with all sorts of weird conclusions about a hypothetical creator, considering how randomly it acts. In 1 Corinthians, Paul returns to this theme, saying that nature proves that males should wear their hair short and females should wear it long.

Rom 1:28-31 - And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind and to things that should not be done. They were filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, covetousness, malice. Full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, craftiness, they are gossips, slanderers, God-haters, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, rebellious toward parents, foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless.
A quick poll of non-Christians should show that this incredible blanket statement is not only wrong, but so far from reality that it borders on fantasy.

Rom 2:5-9 - Or do you despise the riches of his kindness and forbearance and patience? Do you not realize that God's kindness is meant to lead you to repentance? But by your hard and impenitent heart you are storing up wrath for yourself on the day of wrath, when God's righteous judgment will be revealed. For he will repay according to each one's deeds: to those who by patiently doing good seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life; while for those who are self-seeking and who obey not the truth but wickedness, there will be wrath and fury. There will be anguish and distress for everyone who does evil, the Jew first and also the Greek...
Here's some good fodder for the standard "hell fire and brimstone" sermon. It appears here, though, that Paul thinks God is into revenge and rewarding people for their actions. It's a confusing statement - doing "good" must be accompanied with the desire to make God look good. Any other state of mind, and you're defined in Paul's book as evil and self-serving, even if you do "good" actions. This leads, according to Paul, to hell.

Rom 3:21-26 - But now, apart from law, the righteousness of God has been disclosed, and is attested by the law and the prophets, the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe. For there is no distinction, since all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God; they are now justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as a sacrifice of atonement by his blood, effective through faith. He did this to show his righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over the sins previously committed; it was to prove at the present time that he himself is righteous and that he justifies the one who has faith in Jesus.
Here's another favorite in the Christian mind, the "all have sinned" passage. I think it needs quite a bit of analysis. It appears that the whole story of Jesus was done to prove how great God is, and to show just what the word"righteous" means. I'm also puzzled at the comment on passing over (apparently) all prior sins. How this could be used to "prove" anything in any meaningful manner is beyond me.

Rom 3:28-31 - For we hold that a person is justified by faith apart from works prescribed by the law. Or is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles also? Yes, of Gentiles also, since God is one; and he will justify the circumcised on the ground of faith and the uncircumcised through that same faith. Do we then overthrow the law by this faith? By no means! On the contrary, we uphold the law.
Paul attempted in many instances in his letters to at least appear to be a reasonable, logical person. In my opinion, there were many instances where he failed miserably. The idea here that the Jewish laws should be followed just after saying that the laws are useless in the scheme of the religion is a good example. First, the Jewish laws were just that - laws to govern life in the Jewish community. According to the Torah, they were not supposed to have any reference to outsiders, except in how members of the community related to them. In trying to establish a relationship between this new religion and Judaism, Paul tried to bring the laws into the mix, but he had no logical basis for this, other than his bald assertion here.

Rom 4:3-8 - For what does the scripture say? "Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness." Now to one who works, wages are not reckoned as a gift but as something due. But to one who without works trusts him who justifies the ungodly, such faith is reckoned as righteousness. So also David speaks of the blessedness of those to whom God reckons righteousness apart from works: "Blessed are those whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered; blessed is the one against whom the Lord will not reckon sin."
Paul apparently was unable to recognize one of the truly big holes in the presentation of the Christian religion here. If Abraham was counted as a righteous person simply because of his faith, and his sins were ignored on that account, what could possibly have been the use of Jesus dying on the cross? He doesn't seem to have added anything to the basic equation.

Rom 5:3-5 - And not only that, but we also boast in our sufferings, knowing that suffering produces endurance, and endurance produces character, and character produces hope, and hope does not disappoint us, because God's love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit that has been given to us.
The idea that suffering is a good thing, something to be proud of, is pretty disagreeable to me. Paul links it, though a long, very questionable chain of events, to hope. Hope can be a very powerful thing, either for good or harm, in the hands of a leader. Paul tries to link the suffering of believers to a hope that can only be realized after death. This is, to my mind, a very harmful, terrible thing to do to the people who followed him.

Rom 5:12,13 - Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death came through sin, and so death spread to all because all have sinned- sin was indeed in the world before the law, but sin is not reckoned when there is no law.
I think it would have been interesting to ask Paul exactly what he thought death was, if not a reckoning relating to sin. This is a big problem in dealing with Paul's writings. He used ad hoc definitions on many of the more interesting statements he made in his letters. As here, one has to wonder what good, in the long run, God could have been thinking in setting up laws just for the Jews if no one else's sin would be reckoned?

Rom 5:18-21 - Therefore just as one man's trespass led to condemnation for all, so one man's act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all. For just as by the one man's disobedience the many were made sinners, so by the one man's obedience the many will be made righteous. But law came in, with the result that the trespass multiplied; but where sin increased, grace abounded all the more, so that, just as sin exercised dominion in death, so grace might also exercise dominion through justification leading to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
Paul thinks that the concept of condemning all people on account of one person's action is a natural, sensible concept - one that leads logically to the idea that one person's death could solve the problem of the universal condemnation. I think it's odd that Paul would think that Adam's action would lead to universal damnation, but that Jesus' action wouldn't universally reverse the effect. However, such appears to be the case!

Rom 6:1-3 - What then are we to say? Should we continue in sin in order that grace may abound? By no means! How can we who died to sin go on living in it? Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death?
Here's another logical problem for Paul to try and solve. He was aware that telling people that their ungodly actions would be freely forgiven could lead to believers becoming self-centered monsters. He attempts to fight against that danger by telling believers that their conversion freed them of their "slavery" to sin. Here, he also introduces an interpretation of the meaning of the baptism ritual to highlight his point. However, he makes no real progress in telling believers why they should be concerned about doing anything defined as "wrong" by God.

Rom 6:14-18 - For sin will have no dominion over you, since you are not under law but under grace. What then? Should we sin because we are not under law but under grace? By no means! Do you not know that if you present yourselves to anyone as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin, which leads to death, or of obedience, which leads to righteousness? But thanks be to God that you, having once been slaves of sin, have become obedient from the heart to the form of teaching to which you were entrusted, and that you, having been set free from sin, have become slaves of righteousness.
Paul apparently was quite fond of the concept of slavery, thinking that a person could not be a free agent in his decisions, but rather that they are all slaves to one sort of power or another. It looks like Paul would have had a hard time dealing with the idea of free will!

Rom 7:2,3 - Thus a married woman is bound by the law to her husband as long as he lives; but if her husband dies, she is discharged from the law concerning the husband. Accordingly, she will be called an adulteress if she lives with another man while her husband is alive. But if her husband dies, she is free from that law, and if she marries another man, she is not an adulteress.
Paul was rather fond of passing judgment on people whose lives he knew nothing about. He was also keen on the repression of sex. There's no real reason for a person to be under pressure to remain celibate after divorce. However, as Jesus said, Pharisees were rather fond of making people live under unbearable burdens. Paul, the ex-Pharisee, shows how true to his old profession he could be!

Rom 7:5-7 - 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. What then should we say? That the law is sin? By no means! Yet, if it had not been for the law, I would not have known sin. I would not have known what it is to covet if the law had not said, "You shall not covet."
Paul tries to rationalize the problem of living a "lawless" life, but obeying that law nonetheless. For some reason, he seems to think, also, that people wouldn't dream of doing sinful things if they hadn't been told which actions are sinful. Somehow, I think that's not a very realistic thought.

Rom 7:14-18 - For we know that the law is spiritual; but I am of the flesh, sold into slavery under sin. I do not understand my own actions. For I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I hate. Now if I do what I do not want, I agree that the law is good. But in fact it is no longer I that do it, but sin that dwells within me. For I know that nothing good dwells within me, that is, in my flesh. I can will what is right, but I cannot do it.
This sounds like a personal problem to me. Paul was apparently well into the hobby of self-loathing. The problem was that he didn't just want to hate himself alone, but decided his misery would be far more fun if shared and imposed on the world!

Rom 8:1,2 - There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set you free from the law of sin and of death.
Here we get to the heart of the matter. If you are a Christian, you have no need to fear being judged by God, and you can live life with no action being off limits, except those that this "law of the Spirit" defines. What is the law of the Spirit? From what I recall, Christians expect that the Holy Spirit, which they believe lives in their bodies (or minds - whatever), is always there to give orders as to what is acceptable to God. There is no longer a codified, absolute moral guide - Christians are defined as being authorized to do whatever they "feel" is right.

Rom 8:5-8 - For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit set their minds on the things of the Spirit. To set the mind on the flesh is death, but to set the mind on the Spirit is life and peace. For this reason the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God; it does not submit to God's law-indeed it cannot, and those who are in the flesh cannot please God.
Paul engages in a false dichotomy - thinking that if you don't live "just for God," you must be living "just for flesh," and this means to satisfy the desires of the flesh. However, there are plenty of counterexamples to place against this idea.

Rom 8:12-14 - So then, brothers and sisters, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live according to the flesh- for if you live according to the flesh, you will die; but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live. For all who are led by the Spirit of God are children of God.
Here's another call to self-denial by Paul. He is preaching, as Jesus did, that if you live a life of self-denial, you'll have a reward from God of eternal happiness. Of course, there's no real evidence that could support this claim - no one has returned from the dead to let us know what happens.

Rom 8:26 - Likewise the Spirit helps us in our weakness; for we do not know how to pray as we ought, but that very Spirit intercedes with sighs too deep for words.
This makes it look as though Paul knew nothing about Jesus' life. At least, he was unaware of the account in the gospels where Jesus told his followers how to pray. In a similar manner, Paul's writings show his complete lack of information of all of Jesus' life up to the time of his crucifixion. I would have thought that a person like Paul, who was in constant, personal contact with God would have had a little more information than he apparently had.

Rom 8:28,29 - We know that all things work together for good for those who love God, who are called according to his purpose. For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn within a large family.
We start off with a rather dubious statement - that everything eventually works out "good" for believers. I have a hard time seeing how anyone can believe this one, when we see the people in any church being subject to all sorts of bad events, many people dying after long-term illnesses, suffering through all sorts of hardships. But then, we get into the real fun part of the passage - the part that says people are predestined by God to be saved! Which logically produces the corollary that others are predestined by God to not be saved, an obviously evil thing, from what I can see.

Rom 8:33,34 - Who will bring any charge against God's elect? It is God who justifies. Who is to condemn? It is Christ Jesus, who died, yes, who was raised, who is at the right hand of God, who indeed intercedes for us.
Paul has reached the dangerous conclusion to his thoughts about having a blanket forgiveness from God. If God is on his side, who could possibly tell him he's wrong about anything? This sort of attitude will inevitably lead to all sorts of harm and abuse.

Rom 9:2-5 - I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart. For I could wish that I myself were accursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my own people, my kindred according to the flesh. They are Israelites, and to them belong the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises; to them belong the patriarchs, and from them, according to the flesh, comes the Messiah, who is over all, God blessed forever. Amen.
From this, one would think that Paul was unaware of the circumstances of Jesus' birth, especially the supernatural aspects of it as recorded in the gospels. This makes me wonder if maybe the stories of such miracles grew into usage after Paul's time.

Rom 9:13-16 - As it is written, "I have loved Jacob, but I have hated Esau." What then are we to say? Is there injustice on God's part? By no means! For he says to Moses, "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion." So it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God who shows mercy.
I find this passage quite amusing. Paul asserts that there is no injustice on God's part in this religion, then he goes on to quote a passage that shows that God is subjective in his decisions, not using any objective means for making decisions - the very essence of injustice!

Rom 9:18-24 - So then he has mercy on whomever he chooses, and he hardens the heart of whomever he chooses. You will say to me then, "Why then does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?" But who indeed are you, a human being, to argue with God? Will what is molded say to the one who molds it, "Why have you made me like this?" Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one object for special use and another for ordinary use? What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience the objects of wrath that are made for destruction; and what if he has done so in order to make known the riches of his glory for the objects of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory- including us whom he has called, not from the Jews only but also from the Gentiles?
I find it most illuminating to see this statement from Paul. He tries to grapple with the logical problem of the omnipotence of God - the idea that nothing could possibly stand in the way of an omnipotent being's true desires - which leads to the concept of the problem of evil. This, then, is Paul's version of a theodicy - an explanation for evil in a universe ruled by omnipotent goodness. His basic response? "It's none of your business!" Humans, instead of being universally loved children, now become inanimate objects to be moved or destroyed as God sees fit. If a person is made by God simply to show how strong he is by destroying said person, that's God's business, not the person's! Paul's lack of compassion is most shocking.

Rom 10:8-10 - But what does it say? "The word is near you, on your lips and in your heart" (that is, the word of faith that we proclaim); 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.
Here, we have it straight from Paul, the very simple method for getting into heaven. All you need to do is have an honest belief that Jesus was raised from the dead, and you're in! Nothing else is required - no good actions, no loving of other people - maybe Paul thinks those things come as an effect of having the required belief!

Rom 11:5,6 - So too at the present time there is a remnant, chosen by grace. But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works, otherwise grace would no longer be grace.
This simply reinforces the earlier statement made above. In Christianity, a person's actions have no bearing on the person's worth or ultimate fate. When one says that no action is good enough to get one into heaven, it must logically follow that no action is bad enough to keep one out, once you're in.

Rom 11:13,14 - Now I am speaking to you Gentiles. Inasmuch then as I am an apostle to the Gentiles, I glorify my ministry in order to make my own people jealous, and thus save some of them.
Isn't that just so sweet of Paul - he thinks he can help some Jews become Christians by making them jealous! How many other negative emotions, I wonder, did he try to use in his desire to spread this religion?

Rom 11:26-29 - And so all Israel will be saved; as it is written, "Out of Zion will come the Deliverer; he will banish ungodliness from Jacob." "And this is my covenant with them, when I take away their sins." As regards the gospel they are enemies of God for your sake; but as regards election they are beloved, for the sake of their ancestors; for the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable.
Well, this puts a neat little twist on things! If you're a Jew, you don't need to bother with Christianity - you're "grandfathered in." Which sort of brings up the question - if the Jews were going to be going to heaven anyway, and their faith wasn't really an issue, why did Jesus have to come, anyway?

Rom 12:14 - Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse them.
Here's one of the rare times Paul echoes anything Jesus said in the gospels. It is also one of the least-followed of the moral imperatives followed by Christians today - or in any day that I've ever heard of.

Rom 13:1-4 - Let every person be subject to the governing authorities; for there is no authority except from God, and those authorities that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists authority resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Do you wish to have no fear of the authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive its approval; for it is God's servant for your good. But if you do what is wrong, you should be afraid, for the authority does not bear the sword in vain! It is the servant of God to execute wrath on the wrongdoer.
I know a fair number of Christians who disagree with this order from Paul. Including Peter and John, who in Acts recognized that human authorities could conflict with what they thought was God's desires. Paul, however seems to be unable to imagine such a situation.

Rom 13:14 - Instead, put on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make no provision for the flesh, to gratify its desires.
One has to wonder how far Paul thought this advice should be carried out. If you made no plan to gratify your flesh's desire for - say- water, you'd last only a few days.

Rom 15:1,2 - We who are strong ought to put up with the failings of the weak, and not to please ourselves. Each of us must please our neighbor for the good purpose of building up the neighbor.
Later, in 1 Corinthians, Paul made much of his attitude of "being all thing to all people." That's a tiring and confusing way to go through life. I agree with Paul that those who are strong should tolerate any "weaker" neighbors, but somehow, I don't think that "pleasing" them would be the best way to help them become stronger - in whatever sense you care to use the concept.

Rom 16:1,2 - I commend to you our sister Phoebe, a deacon of the church at Cenchreae, so that you may welcome her in the Lord as is fitting for the saints, and help her in whatever she may require from you, for she has been a benefactor of many and of myself as well.
I find it odd that Paul should commend and support a female deacon of a Christian church. After all, in other letters, Paul becomes quite the misogynist, saying that women should be silent and pretty while in church (but not too pretty), and that he'd never allow any woman to have any authority over a man.

Rom 16:17,18 - I urge you, brothers and sisters, to keep an eye on those who cause dissensions and offenses, in opposition to the teaching that you have learned; avoid them. For such people do not serve our Lord Christ, but their own appetites, and by smooth talk and flattery they deceive the hearts of the simple-minded.
Paul's first letter (and many subsequent ones!) contain this theme - the desire to lock the church into an orthodox pattern of thought, not allowing anyone to discuss any beliefs different from Paul's thoughts. Anyone who questions Paul's teaching is defined as one to be ignored and shunned. This is very similar to the way false prophets who wanted to change the Jewish religion were to be ignored, according to Deuteronomy.