Paul’s Letter to the Romans is acknowledged as one of the most important letters from Paul that presents the apostle’s systematic explanation of relationships between the Jewish and Roman Christians. The letter was purposed to explain salvation through faith and bring peace to both house churches. While reading and understanding Romans requires a thorough study of the letter, one should also concern the historical and cultural background of the letter. The book Reading Romans in Context addresses the issue with the collection of essays that focus on comparing Paul’s Letter to the Romans with other Jewish writing from the period.
The book itself presents a collection of essays written by students of Durham University, collected and edited by Durham Ph.D. graduates Ben C. Blackwell, John K. Goodrich, and Jason Maston. Durham University is one of England’s oldest universities that originated as a church university, with a highly acknowledged Religious Studies department that holds high positions among world university rankings. Blackwell is an associate professor of Early Christianity who wrote many articles on Historical Theology and currently works at Houston Baptist University. Maston is a New Testament lecturer, and Goodrich is a Bible professor at Moody Bible Institute. Zondervan published the book with a collection of essays in July of 2015. Considering the editors’ similar backgrounds and approaches, one can identify that the collection essays can include potential biases or presuppositions commonly practiced at Durham University. However, in featuring twenty pieces from different authors, the editors minimized the opportunities for biases and predispositions.
The editors explain that their approach to Paul’s letters was influenced by John Barclay, historian of early Christianity, and Francis Watson, theology and New Testament scholar. Both Barclay and Watson hold the position of professor at Durham University. The editors’ thesis, stated in the book’s preface, suggests that reading Paul’s letter to the Romans alongside other nonscriptural texts from the same period can enhance and enrich the reader’s understanding (p.27). To illustrate the need to examine Paul’s letter to the Romans in connection with other nonscriptural texts, the authors draw an example of Christian radicalism that can only be defined in related literature (p.25). Moreover, according to Watson, perceiving Paul’s Letter to the Romans as an isolated piece diminishes its meaning (p.25). Therefore, the editors’ primary objective in this book was to illustrate the importance of viewing Paul’s letter to Romans in historical and cultural contexts through comparing the letters with other relevant texts. Even though the thesis cannot be developed through the book that features several different essays, the essays are structured in narrative progression depending on which part of Paul’s letter to the Romans they observe.
Furthermore, comparing the text of Paul’s Letter to the Romans with other pieces from the Second Temple literature works cannot define whether Paul was writing the letters concerning the existing literature. However, comparing the letters with other pieces helps to develop an understanding of issues addressed by Paul and how these issues were perceived by Jewish people. Furthermore, to illustrate the importance of relevant literature, the authors state that most Jewish literature from the Second Temple period survived because it was preserved in Christian communities (p.24). Moreover, Jewish literature was translated to other languages as Christian communities acknowledged it as a beneficial context to canonical literature reading (p.24).
The essays featured in Reading Romans in Context explore a wide range of themes that emphasizes similarities between Paul’s Letter to the Romans and relevant literature from the Second Temple era. For example, one of the essays written by J. R. Dodson pointed at the similarities in the personification of Grace, Death, and Sin in Paul’s Letter to the Romans and personification of Wisdom in Wisdom of Solomon (p.131-139). Dodson suggests that for believers choosing to serve Righteousness as their lord is similar to the challenge of embracing wisdom instead of death in the Wisdom of Solomon. The similarity emphasizes the aspect of holiness in faith and the significance of the ability to resist sins.
However, while the collection of essays provides a significant amount of context for Paul’s Letter to the Romans, sometimes comparing the texts has little to no relevance due to different approaches to the topic. For example, the same chapter that discusses the use of personification in Wisdom of Solomon and Paul’s Letter to the Romans makes two conclusions (p.131-139). One of the author’s conclusions focuses on how the pieces perceive the death of the Righteous one. The author determines contradiction between two pieces: in Romans, the crucifixion of Christ is perceived as freedom of those who were previously enslaved by Death and Sin. On the other hand, the Wisdom of Solomon defines the holy one’s execution as an act of sin made out of foolishness, and all participants of the execution will be doomed forever. Such striking differences between the two texts can potentially make the interpretation of the text as well as its purpose more complicated and obscure.
Next, another chapter of the book, which presents an essay by A. Linebaugh, also compared Paul’s Letter to the Romans with Wisdom of Solomon (p.57-68). The chapter examines how both pieces approach the apostolic announcement of God’s wrath. The chapter does sufficient work comparing the descriptions of divine justice in defining several stages of theological contact in both texts that have similarities. In particular, the author focuses a significant amount of his essay on determining the meaning of “God’s wrath against all people” and how it is related to the people of Israel (p.63). The author’s finds suggest that Romans applied the wrath of God to all people with no differences between Jews and Gentiles as they all have sinned. On the other hand, the Wisdom of Solomon utilizes an opposite approach and focuses on opposing Israel’s innocence and immorality of non-Jews (p.66). Therefore, the chapter provides sufficient context to Paul’s letter in emphasizing the immorality in all Adamic humanity, including Israel.
In conclusion, Reading Romans in Context presents a significant resource for additional context to Paul’s letter to the Romans. However, the essay collection content can be beneficial to understanding the initial letters and misleading, as some additional details can be confusing for an average reader. Therefore, while the essays intelligibly explain the differences and similarities of Paul’s letter and other literature pieces of the Second Temple era, its primary audience is scholars and overall people interested in the theme. The editors’ objective of conveying the idea that context can improve the understanding of Paul’s letter is fulfilled in the book; however, not all featured essays can be perceived as sufficient context. Compared to other works in the same field, Reading Romans in Context presents a valuable joint scientific work of people with similar views. The book can be beneficial for the purpose of expanding personal knowledge in the field of study.