Romans. Craig S. Keener
Читать онлайн книгу.
Alex. Alexander Romance
Pyth. Sent. Pythogorean Sentences
Quintilian
Inst. Institutes of Oratory
Rhet. Alex. Rhetorica ad Alexandrum
Rhet. Her. Rhetorica ad Herennium
Sallust
Bell. Cat. War with Cataline
Rep. Letters to Caesar on the State
Seneca the Elder
Controv. Controversiae
Suas. Suasoriae
Seneca the Younger
Ben. On Benefits
Dial. Dialogues
Ep. Lucil. Epistles to Lucilius
Med. Medea
Nat. Natural Questions
Sextus Empiricus
Pyr. Outlines of Pyrrhonism
Sophocles
Phil. Philoctetes
Suetonius
Aug. Divus Augustus
Claud. Divus Cladius
Dom. Domitian
Jul. Divus Julius
Tib. Tiberius
Tacitus
Ann. Annals
Hist. Histories
Terence
Andr. Andria
Theon
Progymn. Progymnasmata
Virgil
Aen. Aeneid
Vit. Aes. Life of Aesop
Xenophon
Anab. Anabasis
Apol. Apologia Socratis
Cyn. Cynegeticus
Cyr. Cyropaedia
Hell. Hellinica
Mem. Memorabilia
Inscriptions, Papyri, and Other
ANET2 Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old
Testament, edited by J. B. Pritchard (2nd ed.;
Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1955)
CIJ Corpus inscriptionum judaicarum
CPJ Corpus papyrorum judaicarum, edited by V.
Tcherikover (3 vols.; Cambridge: Magnes Press,
Hebrew University, 1957–64)
P. Giess. Griechische Papyri im Museum des oberhessischen
Geschichtsvereins zu Giessen, edited by E. Kornemann,
O. Eger, and P. M. Meyer (Leipzig-Berlin, 1910–12)
PGM Papyri graecae magicae: Die griechischen
Zauberpapyri, edited by K. Preisendanz (Berlin: B.G.
Teubner, 1928)
P. Lond. Greek Papyri in the British Museum, edited by F. S.
Kenyon and H. I. Bell (London, 1903–17)
P. Oxy. The Oxyrhynchus Papyri, edited by B. P. Grenfell and
A. S. Hunt (17 vols.; 1896–1927)
Introduction
Because Romans is the first Pauline letter in our NT canon, I begin with an introduction that may shed some light on the letters in general, although it is designed with Romans particularly in mind.
Reading Letters
In the past, some scholars made much of the difference between “letters” and “epistles,” placing Paul’s in the former category to show their proximity to most surviving ancient letters (from Egyptian papyri) rather than literary letters. While Paul did not belong to the elite circles of leisured letter writers like Cicero or Pliny, he did not simply compose his major letters, like Romans, off the top of his head. Given the time necessary to take normal dictation in antiquity (shorthand being unavailable), Paul may have taken over eleven hours to dictate this letter to Tertius, its scribe (Rom 16:22).1 Since such a major undertaking probably involved more than one draft (and Paul could draw on his preaching experience), the final draft may have taken less than this estimate, but the total time invested in the letter was probably greater. Given the cost of papyrus and of the labor required (though Tertius, a believer, might have donated his services), one scholar estimates the cost of Romans at 20.68 denarii, which he calculates as roughly $2275 in recent US currency.2 In other words, Paul did not simply offer this project as an afterthought; Romans is a carefully premeditated work.
As we shall note below, Romans is no ordinary letter; it is a sophisticated argument. The average ancient papyrus letter was 87 words; the orator Cicero was more long-winded, averaging 295 words (with as many as 2530 words); and the philosopher Seneca averaged 995 words (with as many as 4134). The extant letters attributed to Paul average 2495 words, while Romans, his longest, has 7114 words.3 Because ancient urban argumentation typically involved rhetoric, we shall explore possible connections with rhetoric below.
One characteristic of letters that is surely relevant here is that authors expected the specified audience of their letters to understand them. Whether authors always communicated adequately or readers always understood adequately is another question, but most authors at least tried to communicate so as to be clearly understood. Paul thus writes to his audience in Greek. (Greek was the first language of many non-Italians in Rome, including the majority of Jews and of Christian ministers who had come from the east; only in the second century is it clear that many lower-class, Latin-speaking Romans joined the church.) Paul also apparently writes with what he assumes will be shared cultural assumptions regarding language and concepts that he uses without detailed explanation. Informing ourselves about these shared cultural assumptions will help us understand his language; this objective is one of the primary purposes of this commentary (like many others). Better understanding the local situation in Rome does not mean that Paul would expect the principles he articulates there to be applicable there only; he does, after all, apply many of the same principles to other situations in other congregations. But noting these situations will help us better understand his argument and better identify the principles he is applying.
Paul and Rhetoric
Scholars today often read Paul’s letters in light of ancient rhetoric, a mostly positive development. Although some scholars have carried rhetorical analysis too far, as we shall observe, the development is mostly positive because ancient rhetoric offers a much more concrete basis for analyzing Paul’s arguments than modern guesses would.
Two forms of advanced education existed in the Greco-Roman world: philosophy and rhetoric. The former concerned itself especially with truth and reality, and the latter with communication and persuasion. Despite traditional, stereotypical hostility between the two disciplines, most educated people recognized the value in and made use of both. Nevertheless, rhetoric was the dominant discipline, being considered more practical for public life (politics, speeches in the courts, and so forth). Although only a small minority of people had advanced training of any kind, rhetoric pervaded society and shaped the way urban people thought and argued. Not only could passersby listen to speakers practicing in the marketplace, but oratory dominated civic assemblies and was even the subject of some public competitions.
Because such oratorical training became even more dominant in the second century, church fathers often read Paul in light of rhetoric,