notes

Special note

This page was automatically converted from a module that was shared prior to the release of Published Pages.

notes 1452680590066 Special note This page was automatically converted from a module that was shared prior to the release of Published Pages.

Notes

2013-12-13 22:03:27

2014-02-06 17:25:43

Overview: "As in the case of Moses (Exod. 32–34) Israel’s future hinged on the covenantal promises of God." (Schreiner, p 491) Paul now attempts to argue that God's promise has not fallen because many ethnic Jews have not believed. The structure is as follows: 9:6a is the theme of 9:6-11:32, the proposition that God's promise has not fallen. 9:6b-13 is Paul's first answer: "Not all Israel is Israel." 10:1-21 is Paul's second answer: "Israel has not pursued righteousness by faith." 11:1-32 is Paul's third answer: "Israel will yet be saved." Rom 9:6 Ὁ λόγος τοῦ θεοῦ - "refers to the promises of God, specifically the promise that Israel will be saved (cf. Rom. 11:26–29). Despite the unbelief of a majority of ethnic Israel, God’s promise of salvation to Israel has not faltered." (Schreiner p 491) ἐκπέπτωκεν - " The verb used here is ἐκπίπτειν , which is used for flowers falling (James 1:11; 1 Pet. 1:24), chains falling from one’s hands (Acts 12:7), and the falling of a boat (Acts 27:32). In nautical contexts the term bears the meaning “drift off course, run aground” (see BAGD 243–44)." (Schreiner p 491 (footnote)) Rom 9:6b οὐχ οἷον ὅτι "The construction οὐχ οἷον ὅτι is an amalgamation, according to BAGD (562) of οὐχ οἷον (“by no means”) and οὐχ ὅτι (“not as if”), yielding the sense “It is by no means as if,” or “It is not so that” (BDF §480.5), or “It is by no means the case that.”" (Schreiner, p 503) ἐκπέπτωκεν - BDAG - become inadequate for some function, fail, weaken "Verse 6b demonstrates that the salvation of individuals is at issue, for all Israelites by definition enjoyed the benefits or liabilities of theocratic Israel (cf. Piper 1993: 66). Moo (1996: 569) is probably correct in saying that most Jews believed that they were saved by virtue of being born as Jews, and thus Paul counters the typical Jewish view in his day." (Schreiner p 493) οὐ γὰρ πάντες οἱ ἐξ Ἰσραὴλ οὗτοι Ἰσραήλ There is debate over who is referred to in the second usage of Israel. Some would say Gentiles are included, but Schreiner argues here that it is probably ethnic Jews who have believed in Jesus. The reason is that the problem Paul is confronting is whether the promises made to ethnic Israel will stand. (Schreiner p 494) ἐξ Ἰσραὴλ οὗτοι Ἰσραήλ "For the last occurrence of Ἰσραήλ , some scribes, particularly Western witnesses (e.g., D, F, G, 614, 629, 1881 c ), inserted Ἰσραηλῖται . Although the variant is secondary, it may reflect an early attempt to interpret Ἰσραηλῖται in 9:4 as referring to spiritual Israel. More likely it removes the confusion of using Ἰσραήλ in two senses in the same verse." (Schreiner p 503) Rom 9:7 9:7a ὅτι - could be causal or introduce an object clause. See Schreiner discussion p 494. OT Reference: Ἐν Ἰσαὰκ κληθήσεταί σοι σπέρμα. Paul is quoting directly from the Hebrew bible (Gen 21:12) בְיִצְחָ֔ק יִקָּרֵ֥א לְךָ֖ זָֽרַע׃ He gives a word for word translation of the text here. The LXX has exactly the same Greek: ἐν Ισαακ κληθήσεταί σοι σπέρμα Schreiner: "The wording is an exact rendition of Gen. 21:12 LXX. In Genesis “calling” ( καλεῖν , kalein ) means “named” or “identified” (Cranfield 1979: 474). But in this context in Romans it also bears its usual Pauline meaning, an effective call that creates what is desired (cf. Rom. 4:17; 8:28, 29; 9:12, 24, 25, 26; cf. Müller 1964: 28; Michel 1966: 232; Wilckens 1980: 192; Dunn 1988b: 540–41)." The dative σοι is a semiticism. It is a wooden translation from the Hebrew לְךָ֖. Schreiner p 498: "Another controversy exists over whether the salvation promised here relates to individuals or groups. Many opt for the latter and exclude the former, because Paul’s focus in these chapters is surely on the salvation promised to corporate Israel. I have argued at some length elsewhere that such a dichotomy is logically and exegetically flawed, for groups are always composed of individuals, and one cannot have the former without including the latter. At this juncture I should note that the selection of a remnant out of Israel implies the selection of some individuals out of a larger group. Moreover, the unity of Rom. 9–11 indicates that individual election cannot be eliminated. In chapter 10 believing in Jesus is an individual decision, even though large groups of Gentiles are doing so. The individual and corporate dimensions cannot be sundered from one another in chapter 10, and the same principle applies to chapter 9 (cf. Müller 1964: 76–77). Those who insist that corporate election alone is intended in chapters 9 and 11 are inconsistent when they revert to individual decisions of faith in chapter 10. The three chapters must be interpreted together, yielding the conclusion that both corporate and individual election are involved. " Rom 9:8 λογίζεται - BDAG 1b - as a result of a calculation evaluate, estimate, look upon as, consider είς σπέρμα - This replaces the predicate nominative here. The reason for this is due to the semitic influence of the OT quote. (Hebrew ל) Mt 19:5 demonstrates that these are semantically equivalent to a predicate nominative construction. (Wall. 47) ὅτι οὐ (variant) "The insertion of ὅτι before οὐ roughly conforms verse 8 to the beginning of verses 6–7, but the external evidence tells against it." (Schreiner p 504) Rom 9:9 OT Refernce: Κατὰ τὸν καιρὸν τοῦτον ἐλεύσομαι καὶ ἔσται τῇ Σάρρᾳ υἱός. This seems to be a combination of Gen 18:10 - וַיֹּ֗אמֶר שׁ֣וֹב אָשׁ֤וּב אֵלֶ֨יךָ֙ כָּעֵ֣ת חַיָּ֔ה וְהִנֵּה־בֵ֖ן לְשָׂרָ֣ה אִשְׁתֶּ֑ךָ and Gen 18:14 - הֲיִפָּלֵ֥א מֵיְהוָ֖ה דָּבָ֑ר לַמּוֹעֵ֞ד אָשׁ֥וּב אֵלֶ֛יךָ כָּעֵ֥ת חַיָּ֖ה וּלְשָׂרָ֥ה בֵֽן׃ כָּעֵ֥ת חַיָּ֖ה From Beckman: The phrase occurs 4 times in the Bible: Gen 18:10, 14; 2 Kings 4:16, 17. In all cases it refers to a promise to a childless woman that she would bear a son. There is nothing explicitly about a year, but given 9 months of pregnancy, a year seems reasonable, so this is likely idiomatic for something like "about this time in the life cycle' = "about this time of year next year." Support for this comes in the phrase כָּעֵת מָחָר 'about this time tomorrow', where the word after כָּעֵת indicates the repeatable unit of time that the event will occur at the next cycle of (this is awkward to write, but I think you know what I mean). Grammatically, i'd be inclined to take it as a construct chain and the adjective as substantival = like a time of life = at this time of life (next year), except that it can't be construct because the preposition has the article. (assuming that the masoretes vocalized it correctly). But we can get the same meaning with 'living' as an attributive adjective. It is FS because time is FS (actually 'time' can be either fs or ms; it's an inconsistent word). Rom 9:10-12 Paul could have moved from the promise made to Abraham to the promise made to Rebekah, but he interjected v. 10-11 in order to clarify why he was shifting to Rebekah and her twin sons. Rom 9:11 πρόθεσις τοῦ θεοῦ - Subjective genitive (Wall. 144) φαῦλον "Scribes replaced φαῦλον , which occurs only two other places in Paul (2 Cor. 5:10; Titus 2:8), with the more common κακόν ( P 46 , D, F, G, Ψ , and Byzantine witnesses), which occurs 26 times in the Pauline corpus. The reading in NA 27 is original." (Schreiner p 504) ἐκλογὴν - Paul uses ἐκλογή in Rom. 11:5, 7, 28; 1 Thess. 1:4; cf. also Acts 9:15; 2 Pet. 1:10. Rom 9:12 OT Reference: Ὁ μείζων δουλεύσει τῷ ἐλάσσονι This is taken from Gen 25:23 וְרַ֖ב יַעֲבֹ֥ד צָעִֽיר LXX: ὁ μείζων δουλεύσει τῷ ἐλάσσονι. Paul's usage is word-for-word from the MT of Gen 25:23. Schreiner p 498: "The preeminence of Jacob over Esau is surprising since it reverses the custom of primogeniture. But it illustrates well Paul’s conception that not all the ethnic descendants of Abraham are heirs to the promise. A winnowing process has been in effect from the inception of Israel’s history, and thus the exclusion of some ethnic Israelites from the promise does not constitute an annulment of God’s promise." οὐκ ἐξ ἔργων "Incidentally, ἔργα here should be understood in the broadest sense, for it is defined in verse 11 as “the doing of anything good or evil” ( πραξάντων τι ἀγαθὸν ἢ φαῦλον ). Contra Dunn (1988b: 543), who narrows it to “works of law.”" (Schreiner, p 499) μείζων... ἐλάσσονι - Comparative adjectives functioning as substantivals. Rom 9:13 καθὼς The variant καθάπερ is less common than καθώς and thus could be preferred as the harder reading, but insubstantial external support renders this improbable. OT Reference: Τὸν Ἰακὼβ ἠγάπησα, τὸν δὲ Ἠσαῦ ἐμίσησα. This is taken from Mal 1:2-3 נְאֻם־יְהוָ֔ה וָאֹהַ֖ב אֶֽת־יַעֲקֹֽב׃ וְאֶת־עֵשָׂ֖ו שָׂנֵ֑אתִי Lit: Thus says Yahweh, "I have loved Jacob, BUT Esau I have hated." The dysjunctive waw in the second clause is a clear adversative. Contrastive Matching - There is a reversal of terms between the first line and the second. LXX: λέγει κύριος, καὶ ἠγάπησα τὸν Ιακωβ , 3 τὸν δὲ Ησαυ ἐμίσησα The LXX retains the contrastive matching of the Hebrew. Paul removes the contrastive matching but otherwise retains the meaning word-for-word.

11386972207966 1386972207862 Notes 2013-12-13 22:03:27 2014-02-06 17:25:43 Overview: "As in the case of Moses (Exod. 32–34) Israel’s future hinged on the covenantal promises of God." (Schreiner, p 491) Paul now attempts to argue that God's promise has not fallen because many ethnic Jews have not believed. The structure is as follows: 9:6a is the theme of 9:6-11:32, the proposition that God's promise has not fallen. 9:6b-13 is Paul's first answer: "Not all Israel is Israel." 10:1-21 is Paul's second answer: "Israel has not pursued righteousness by faith." 11:1-32 is Paul's third answer: "Israel will yet be saved." Rom 9:6 Ὁ λόγος τοῦ θεοῦ - "refers to the promises of God, specifically the promise that Israel will be saved (cf. Rom. 11:26–29). Despite the unbelief of a majority of ethnic Israel, God’s promise of salvation to Israel has not faltered." (Schreiner p 491) ἐκπέπτωκεν - " The verb used here is ἐκπίπτειν , which is used for flowers falling (James 1:11; 1 Pet. 1:24), chains falling from one’s hands (Acts 12:7), and the falling of a boat (Acts 27:32). In nautical contexts the term bears the meaning “drift off course, run aground” (see BAGD 243–44)." (Schreiner p 491 (footnote)) Rom 9:6b οὐχ οἷον ὅτι "The construction οὐχ οἷον ὅτι is an amalgamation, according to BAGD (562) of οὐχ οἷον (“by no means”) and οὐχ ὅτι (“not as if”), yielding the sense “It is by no means as if,” or “It is not so that” (BDF §480.5), or “It is by no means the case that.”" (Schreiner, p 503) ἐκπέπτωκεν - BDAG - become inadequate for some function, fail, weaken "Verse 6b demonstrates that the salvation of individuals is at issue, for all Israelites by definition enjoyed the benefits or liabilities of theocratic Israel (cf. Piper 1993: 66). Moo (1996: 569) is probably correct in saying that most Jews believed that they were saved by virtue of being born as Jews, and thus Paul counters the typical Jewish view in his day." (Schreiner p 493) οὐ γὰρ πάντες οἱ ἐξ Ἰσραὴλ οὗτοι Ἰσραήλ There is debate over who is referred to in the second usage of Israel. Some would say Gentiles are included, but Schreiner argues here that it is probably ethnic Jews who have believed in Jesus. The reason is that the problem Paul is confronting is whether the promises made to ethnic Israel will stand. (Schreiner p 494) ἐξ Ἰσραὴλ οὗτοι Ἰσραήλ "For the last occurrence of Ἰσραήλ , some scribes, particularly Western witnesses (e.g., D, F, G, 614, 629, 1881 c ), inserted Ἰσραηλῖται . Although the variant is secondary, it may reflect an early attempt to interpret Ἰσραηλῖται in 9:4 as referring to spiritual Israel. More likely it removes the confusion of using Ἰσραήλ in two senses in the same verse." (Schreiner p 503) Rom 9:7 9:7a ὅτι - could be causal or introduce an object clause. See Schreiner discussion p 494. OT Reference: Ἐν Ἰσαὰκ κληθήσεταί σοι σπέρμα. Paul is quoting directly from the Hebrew bible (Gen 21:12) בְיִצְחָ֔ק יִקָּרֵ֥א לְךָ֖ זָֽרַע׃ He gives a word for word translation of the text here. The LXX has exactly the same Greek: ἐν Ισαακ κληθήσεταί σοι σπέρμα Schreiner: "The wording is an exact rendition of Gen. 21:12 LXX. In Genesis “calling” ( καλεῖν , kalein ) means “named” or “identified” (Cranfield 1979: 474). But in this context in Romans it also bears its usual Pauline meaning, an effective call that creates what is desired (cf. Rom. 4:17; 8:28, 29; 9:12, 24, 25, 26; cf. Müller 1964: 28; Michel 1966: 232; Wilckens 1980: 192; Dunn 1988b: 540–41)." The dative σοι is a semiticism. It is a wooden translation from the Hebrew לְךָ֖. Schreiner p 498: "Another controversy exists over whether the salvation promised here relates to individuals or groups. Many opt for the latter and exclude the former, because Paul’s focus in these chapters is surely on the salvation promised to corporate Israel. I have argued at some length elsewhere that such a dichotomy is logically and exegetically flawed, for groups are always composed of individuals, and one cannot have the former without including the latter. At this juncture I should note that the selection of a remnant out of Israel implies the selection of some individuals out of a larger group. Moreover, the unity of Rom. 9–11 indicates that individual election cannot be eliminated. In chapter 10 believing in Jesus is an individual decision, even though large groups of Gentiles are doing so. The individual and corporate dimensions cannot be sundered from one another in chapter 10, and the same principle applies to chapter 9 (cf. Müller 1964: 76–77). Those who insist that corporate election alone is intended in chapters 9 and 11 are inconsistent when they revert to individual decisions of faith in chapter 10. The three chapters must be interpreted together, yielding the conclusion that both corporate and individual election are involved. " Rom 9:8 λογίζεται - BDAG 1b - as a result of a calculation evaluate, estimate, look upon as, consider είς σπέρμα - This replaces the predicate nominative here. The reason for this is due to the semitic influence of the OT quote. (Hebrew ל) Mt 19:5 demonstrates that these are semantically equivalent to a predicate nominative construction. (Wall. 47) ὅτι οὐ (variant) "The insertion of ὅτι before οὐ roughly conforms verse 8 to the beginning of verses 6–7, but the external evidence tells against it." (Schreiner p 504) Rom 9:9 OT Refernce: Κατὰ τὸν καιρὸν τοῦτον ἐλεύσομαι καὶ ἔσται τῇ Σάρρᾳ υἱός. This seems to be a combination of Gen 18:10 - וַיֹּ֗אמֶר שׁ֣וֹב אָשׁ֤וּב אֵלֶ֨יךָ֙ כָּעֵ֣ת חַיָּ֔ה וְהִנֵּה־בֵ֖ן לְשָׂרָ֣ה אִשְׁתֶּ֑ךָ and Gen 18:14 - הֲיִפָּלֵ֥א מֵיְהוָ֖ה דָּבָ֑ר לַמּוֹעֵ֞ד אָשׁ֥וּב אֵלֶ֛יךָ כָּעֵ֥ת חַיָּ֖ה וּלְשָׂרָ֥ה בֵֽן׃ כָּעֵ֥ת חַיָּ֖ה From Beckman: The phrase occurs 4 times in the Bible: Gen 18:10, 14; 2 Kings 4:16, 17. In all cases it refers to a promise to a childless woman that she would bear a son. There is nothing explicitly about a year, but given 9 months of pregnancy, a year seems reasonable, so this is likely idiomatic for something like "about this time in the life cycle' = "about this time of year next year." Support for this comes in the phrase כָּעֵת מָחָר 'about this time tomorrow', where the word after כָּעֵת indicates the repeatable unit of time that the event will occur at the next cycle of (this is awkward to write, but I think you know what I mean). Grammatically, i'd be inclined to take it as a construct chain and the adjective as substantival = like a time of life = at this time of life (next year), except that it can't be construct because the preposition has the article. (assuming that the masoretes vocalized it correctly). But we can get the same meaning with 'living' as an attributive adjective. It is FS because time is FS (actually 'time' can be either fs or ms; it's an inconsistent word). Rom 9:10-12 Paul could have moved from the promise made to Abraham to the promise made to Rebekah, but he interjected v. 10-11 in order to clarify why he was shifting to Rebekah and her twin sons. Rom 9:11 πρόθεσις τοῦ θεοῦ - Subjective genitive (Wall. 144) φαῦλον "Scribes replaced φαῦλον , which occurs only two other places in Paul (2 Cor. 5:10; Titus 2:8), with the more common κακόν ( P 46 , D, F, G, Ψ , and Byzantine witnesses), which occurs 26 times in the Pauline corpus. The reading in NA 27 is original." (Schreiner p 504) ἐκλογὴν - Paul uses ἐκλογή in Rom. 11:5, 7, 28; 1 Thess. 1:4; cf. also Acts 9:15; 2 Pet. 1:10. Rom 9:12 OT Reference: Ὁ μείζων δουλεύσει τῷ ἐλάσσονι This is taken from Gen 25:23 וְרַ֖ב יַעֲבֹ֥ד צָעִֽיר LXX: ὁ μείζων δουλεύσει τῷ ἐλάσσονι. Paul's usage is word-for-word from the MT of Gen 25:23. Schreiner p 498: "The preeminence of Jacob over Esau is surprising since it reverses the custom of primogeniture. But it illustrates well Paul’s conception that not all the ethnic descendants of Abraham are heirs to the promise. A winnowing process has been in effect from the inception of Israel’s history, and thus the exclusion of some ethnic Israelites from the promise does not constitute an annulment of God’s promise." οὐκ ἐξ ἔργων "Incidentally, ἔργα here should be understood in the broadest sense, for it is defined in verse 11 as “the doing of anything good or evil” ( πραξάντων τι ἀγαθὸν ἢ φαῦλον ). Contra Dunn (1988b: 543), who narrows it to “works of law.”" (Schreiner, p 499) μείζων... ἐλάσσονι - Comparative adjectives functioning as substantivals. Rom 9:13 καθὼς The variant καθάπερ is less common than καθώς and thus could be preferred as the harder reading, but insubstantial external support renders this improbable. OT Reference: Τὸν Ἰακὼβ ἠγάπησα, τὸν δὲ Ἠσαῦ ἐμίσησα. This is taken from Mal 1:2-3 נְאֻם־יְהוָ֔ה וָאֹהַ֖ב אֶֽת־יַעֲקֹֽב׃ וְאֶת־עֵשָׂ֖ו שָׂנֵ֑אתִי Lit: Thus says Yahweh, "I have loved Jacob, BUT Esau I have hated." The dysjunctive waw in the second clause is a clear adversative. Contrastive Matching - There is a reversal of terms between the first line and the second. LXX: λέγει κύριος, καὶ ἠγάπησα τὸν Ιακωβ , 3 τὸν δὲ Ησαυ ἐμίσησα The LXX retains the contrastive matching of the Hebrew. Paul removes the contrastive matching but otherwise retains the meaning word-for-word. notes