PL EN


Journal
2012 | 2(59) | 195-216
Article title

Niespójność Pawłowego wywodu w Rz 2,1-29? Odpowiedź na tezę Eda Parisha Sandersa

Authors
Title variants
EN
Lack of Coherence in Paul’s Exposition in Rom 2:1-29? A Critical Assessment of Ed Parish Sanders’s Hypothesis
Languages of publication
PL
Abstracts
EN
In reply to Ed P. Sanders’s thesis we state that Romans 2 does not show inconsistencies within itself, neither with the immediate context, nor with other places in the Epistle. We prove it mainly by analyzing formal subjects in the text. Inconsistencies in Romans 2 were the main reason leading Sanders to the conclusion that chapter 2 derives from the homiletical material of Diaspora Judaism (a synagogue sermon). We don’t rule out this possibility altogether but we point out that his arguments supporting the hypothesis are not sufficient and require additional proofs.
Contributors
  • JP II Catholic University of Lublin, Al. Racławickie 14, 20-950 Lublin, Poland
References
  • N. Aletti, God’s Justice in Romans. Keys for Interpreting the Epistle to the Romans (SubBib 37; Rome 2010)
  • J.-N. Aletti, Israël et la loi dans la Lettre aux Romains (LD 173; Paris 1998)
  • J.-N. Aletti, “Rm 1, 18-3, 20: Incohérence ou coherence de l’argumentation paulinienne?” Bib 69 (1988)
  • J.-N. Aletti, “Romains 2. Sa coherence et sa function”, Bib 77 (1996)
  • J. Bassler, “Divine Impartiality in Paul’s Letter to the Romans”, NT 26 (1984)
  • J. Bassler, Divine Impartiality: Paul and a Theological Axiom (SBLDS 59; Chico 1982)
  • F. F. Bruce, The Epistle to the Galatians. A Commentary on the Greek Text (NIGTC; Exeter-Grand Rapids, MI, 1982)
  • D. A. Campbell, “A Rhetorical Suggestion concerning Romans 2”, w: Society of Biblical Literature Seminar Papers (Atlanta 1995)
  • G. Carras, Romans 2, 1-29: A Dialogue on Jewish Ideals, Bib 73 (1992)
  • C. E. B. Cranfield, The Epistle to the Romans, vol. 1 (ICC; Edinburgh 1975)
  • J. D. G. Dunn, Romans 1-8 (WBC 38A; Dallas 1988)
  • J. D. G. Dunn, Romans 9-16 (WBC 38B; Dallas 1988)
  • J. D. G. Dunn, The New Perspective on Paul. Collected Essays (WUNT 185; Tübingen 2005)
  • J. A. Fitzmyer, Romans. A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (AB 33; New York 1993)
  • D. B. Garlington, „‘Hierosylein’ and the Idolatry of Israel Romans 2,22”, NTS 36 [1990]
  • A. J. Greimas, Les Actants, les Acteurs et les Figures (Paris 1973)
  • D. R. Hall, „Romans 3:1-8 Reconsidered”, NTS 29 (1983)
  • R. Jewetta, Romans [Hermeneia; Minneapolis 2007]
  • E. Käsemann, An die Römer [HNT 8; Tübingen 1974]
  • S. Légasse, L’Épître de Paul aux Romains (LD Commentaires 10; Paris 2002)
  • D. Moo, The Epistle to the Romans (Grand Rapids, MI – Cambridge, U.K. 1996)
  • L. Morris, The Epistle to the Romans (Grand Rapids, MI – Leicester, U.K. 1988)
  • J. Murray, The Epistle to the Romans (NICNT; Grand Rapids (MI) 1965)
  • H. Räisänen, Paul and the Law (WUNT 29; Tübingen 1983)
  • Rakocy, Faryzeusze. Historia – Ewangelie (Lublin 2002)
  • W. Rakocy, „‘Nomos’ i ‘ho nomos’ w Listach Pawłowych”, BibAn 1 [2011]
  • H. Schlier, Der Römerbrief (HTKNT 6; Freiburg i. B. 1977)
  • T. R. Schreiner, “Paul and Perfect Obedience to the Law: An Evaluation of the View of E. P. Sanders”, WTJ 47 (1984)
  • P. Spitaler, Universale Sünde von Juden und Heiden? Eine Untersuchung zu Römer 1.18-3.20, Wűrzburg 2006
  • S. K. Stowers, A Rereading of Romans: Justice, Jews and Gentiles [New Haven 1994]
  • S. K. Stowers, „Paul’s Dialogue with a Fellow Jew in Romans 3:1-9”, CBQ 46 [1984]
  • S. K. Stowers, The Diatribe and Paul’s Letter to the Romans (SBLDS 57; Chico 1981)
  • R. M. Thorsteinsson, Paul’s Interlocutor in Romans 2: Function and Identity in the Context of Ancient Epistolography (ConBNT 40; Stockholm 2003)
  • U. Wilckens, Der Brief an die Römer, vol. 1 (EKKNT 6; Zurich 1978)
Document Type
Publication order reference
Identifiers
YADDA identifier
bwmeta1.element.cejsh-d8e2903d-0603-4e57-a2c9-8321de22a65c
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.