Evocations of the Calf?

Romans 1:18–2:11 and the Substructure of Psalm 106(105)

Alec J. Lucas

• Publisher: De Gruyter
• Year: 2014
• eBook ISBN: 9783110384642
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Theology & Religion
• Subtopic: Biblical Commentary

This study proposes that both constitutively and rhetorically (through ironic, inferential, and indirect application), Ps 106(105) serves as the substructure for Paul's argumentation in Rom 1: 18–2: 11. Constitutively, Rom 1: 18–32 hinges on the triadic interplay between "they (ex)changed" and "God gave them over, " an interplay that creates a sin–retribution sequence with an a-ba-ba-b pattern. Both elements of this pattern derive from Ps 106(105): 20, 41a respectively. Rhetorically, Paul ironically applies the psalmic language of idolatrous "(ex)change" and God's subsequent "giving-over" to Gentiles. Aiding this ironic application is that Paul has cast his argument in the mold of Hellenistic Jewish polemic against Gentile idolatry and immorality, similar to Wis 13–15. In Rom 2: 1–4, however, Paul inferentially incorporates a hypocritical Jewish interlocutor into the preceding sequence through the charge of doing the "same, " a charge that recalls Israel's sins recounted in Ps 106(105). This incorporation then gives way to an indirect application of Ps 106(105): 23, by means of an allusion to Deut 9–10 in Rom 2: 5–11. Secondarily, this study suggests that Paul's argumentation exploits an intra-Jewish debate in which evocations of the golden calf figured prominently.

Chapter 1:

Introduction

1.1 Project

1.1.1 Constructing Towers and Texts

In Luke 14:28 – 30 Jesus compares the one who follows him to a person who calculates the cost of building a tower, before beginning, in order to ensure that he or she can bring the project to completion. Although Jesus does not elaborate upon the various costs involved in this hypothetical construction project, one may speculate that they include the price of raw materials, such as building stones and structural supports, as well as pay for skilled laborers. Indeed, cutting corners on either might allow one to complete the tower, thus avoiding the problem upon which Jesus does focus—mockery for failing to finish due to insufficient funds—only to find that the tower might soon topple, thus exposing oneself to a different sort of mockery altogether.

The construction of any substantial piece of persuasive writing, whether an academic monograph or even apostolic discourse, is analogous to a building project. One must lay the right foundation, provide the proper structural support, or substructure, as well as smooth out any rough edges for the piece of writing to stand or for the argument to succeed. Conversely, those who undertake analysis of written works must be attentive to such components of the rhetorical architecture if the argument is to be understood and assessed adequately. Complicating matters for those of us who work with ancient texts is that, due to cultural distance and the ravages of time, we often lack the expertise to appreciate all of the architectural subtleties bequeathed to us. As a result, we sometimes quibble over the function of this or that wing of the text. At the extreme, we may even prematurely declare a particular structure unsound, when, in historical reality, it was able to bear far more weight than we realize.

1.1.2 Romans 1:18 – 32 and 2:1 – 11:Ethnic Inhabitants on Either Side of Bridge

This study represents an attempt to engage in a kind of architectural analysis of Rom 1:18 – 2:11, a small but significant section of Paul’s magnum opus written to Roman Christians from Corinth around 57– 58 CE.¹ Notwithstanding occasional and even recent protests to the contrary, there is considerable scholarly consensus about the role of Rom 1:18 – 2:11 in Paul’s larger argument: it is part of his overall indictment of Jews and Gentiles for sin (Rom 3:9) in support of the thesis that “no flesh will be justified from works of the Law before God; for through the Law comes knowledge of sin” (Rom 3:20).² Paul’s indictment, in turn, paves the way for the proclamation of justification by faith, a doctrine announced in Rom 1:16 – 17 and articulated in 3:21 ff. Yet, even if the eventual role of Rom 1:18 – 2:11 is clear, the transition between 1:18 – 32 and 2:1– 11, best conceived architecturally not as a tower but as a bridge, has caused considerable debate. Everyone agrees that some kind of a bridge exists here. The debate, so to speak, concerns the ethnic inhabitants on either side who are the targets of Paul’s polemics.

One extreme identifies the ethnic targets on both sides of the bridge with Gentiles. This view, an ancient one, is represented by Greek codices that supply the following titles (τίτλοι) for chapter divisions (κεϕάλαια) at 1:18 and 2:12 respectively: “concerning judgment against Gentiles for not keeping the things of nature” (

) and “concerning judgment against Israel for not keeping the things of the Law” (

).³ According to this perspective, Paul’s tone and style may change in Rom 2:1 ff. but his addressees do not. In the words of Leander E. Keck, a contemporary proponent of this view, “Where 1:18 – 32 described the Gentiles, at 2:1 Paul begins confronting them, diatribe style, with the inescapable consequences of God’s righteous judgment on deeds …”⁴

The other extreme identifies the ethnic targets especially with Jews, regarding the indictment of Gentiles as more or less assumed. This position is advocated by Jouette M. Bassler.⁵ She contends that a division of Paul’s argument into an initial sortie against Gentiles in Rom 1:18 – 32, followed by an attack against Jews in 2:1 ff. ignores, among other things, the “unambiguous allusions to Jer 2:11 and especially Ps 106:20 (LXX 105:20)” in Rom 1:23, “texts which speak of Israel’s apostasy and idolatry at the golden calf incident (Exodus 32).”⁶ In light of such allusions, Bassler further contends that although in Rom 1:18 – 32 Paul “employs an argument traditionally directed against the Gentiles, he clearly signals that it was also, if not primarily, appropriate to the Jews.”⁷

The majority of contemporary scholars fall in between these extremes. Some, like Robert Jewett, regard Rom 1:18 – 2:11 as directed, at various points throughout, to both Jews and Gentiles.⁸ Others, such as C. K. Barrett, consider Paul’s thought, beginning in Rom 2:1–11, and including vv. 12–16, as applicable to both Jews and Gentiles.⁹ There is thus a partial turn at Rom 2:1, which becomes complete at v. 17 with the introduction of a Jewish interlocutor. Most, however, make the very division to which Bassler objects: Rom 1:18 – 32 is regarded, primarily, as an excoriation of Gentile idolatry and immorality while Rom 2:1 ff. is regarded as an indictment of a representative Jewish interlocutor whose identity does not become explicit until v. 17.¹⁰ Joseph A. Fitzmyer advocates this position.¹¹ While he recognizes the allusions to Ps 106(105):20 and Jer 2:11 in Rom 1:23, Fitzmyer argues that such allusions do not mean that Paul “envisages Jewish humanity as well in vv 18 – 32.”¹² Rather, Paul “is simply extrapolating from such incidents in the history of the chosen people and applying the ideas to the pagan world.”¹³ To substantiate his view that Rom 1:18 – 32 is especially directed toward Gentiles, Fitzmyer points to ...

Table of contents

• Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die neutestamentliche Wissenschaft
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Acknowledgments
• Dedication
• Preface
• Table of Contents
• List of Tables
• List of Abbreviations
• Chapter 1: Introduction
• Chapter 2: Psalm 106(105)
• Chapter 3: Romans 1:18 – 2:11
• Chapter 4: Sketching a Larger Context
• Chapter 5: Conclusion
• Bibliography
• Index of Authors
• Index of Subjects
• Index of Ancient Sources