Kevin B. McCruden, «Judgment and Life for the Lord: Occasion and Theology of Romans 14,1–15,13», Vol. 86 (2005) 229-244
This article explores Paul’s discussion
concerning the strong and the weak in Rom 14,1–15,13. My thesis is that Paul’s
comments in this section of the letter function neither completely as a response
to an actual problem in Rome, nor as entirely general paraenesis. Rather, Paul’s
comments function simultaneously on both a situational and non-situational level.
Considering that specific concerns over food were likely operative in the Roman
congregation, Paul employs non-specific language in this section in order to espouse
a larger theological vision of the essential unity of Jew and Gentile under God’s
salvation in Christ.
232 Kevin B. McCruden
more positive application of this universalizing theme occurs in those
passages where Paul argues for the unique significance of justification
by faith (Rom 4,1-12). By utilizing the figure of Abraham as a model
of faith, Paul argues that the reality of God’s righteousness
(dikaiosunh) benefits both the circumcised and the uncircumcised as
v
a consequence of their common response of faith. Just as apart from
the Gospel judgment and condemnation meet Jew and Greek alike, so
justification is open to both Jew and Gentile through the response of
faith. If one of Paul’s principal concerns in Romans, therefore, is to
clarify the relationship between Jew and Gentile within the
accomplishment of God’s salvific work in Christ, then an interpre-
tation of the occasion of Romans is needed that deals adequately with
Paul’s theological vision.
1. The Thematic Structure and Vocabulary of Romans 14,1–15,3
One of the salient rhetorical features of Romans is the frequency
with which Paul utilizes a diatribal style throughout the course of his
argument (19). Since the diatribal style employs a fictitious interlocutor,
Karris argues that Paul is not dealing with an actual historical situation
in Romans but with general paraenesis (20). Diverging from Karris’
observation for the time being, I want to concentrate, instead, on the
question of the function of the diatribal style in Paul’s argument. What
precisely is Paul attempting to accomplish by employing such a style
of argumentation? More specifically, what is the nature of the response
that Paul hopes to engender among his audience? To begin to answer
such questions one must remember that the principal function of the
diatribe lay in its instructional intention. By employing the diatribe, a
given author or speaker sought to enlighten or instruct a particular
student or audience (21).
Perhaps the best example of the instructional function of the
diatribal style appears in Rom 2,1-11 and 2,17-29, which respectively
depict a dialogical engagement with an imaginary interlocutor. The
overall structure as well as themes of this chapter bears a close
resemblance to the themes and structure of Romans 14, as I will
(19) S.K. STOWERS, The Diatribe and Paul’s Letter to the Romans (SBLDS
57; Chico, CA 1981) 7-78, 93-96.
(20) R.J. KARRIS, “Romans 14:1-15:13 and the Occasion of Romansâ€, Romans
Debate, 65-84, here 70, n.32.
(21) D.E. AUNE, The New Testament in its Literary Environment (Philadelphia
1986) 219.