The Cosmic Power of Sin in Paul's Letter to the Romans

Abstract

Paul's letter to the Romans depicts Sin as one of the anti-God powers whose final defeat the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ guarantees. The framework of cosmic battle is essential for reading and interpreting this letter in the life of the church.

The Divine-Human Relationship in Romans 1–8 in the Light of Interdependence Theory

“…Andrew Das, Solving the Romans Debate (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2007), 52; Richard N. Longenecker, Introducing Romans: Critical Issues in Paul's Most Famous Letter (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2011), 92-93; idem, The Epistle to the Romans (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2016), 10. Therefore, it appears necessary for Paul to give a detailed description about the divine-issue of the divine-human relationship can be expressed variously throughout his letters, given the importance recognised by scholars of Romans in Paul's theology, even called a 'template', 2 what we observe in Romans 1-8 can provide grounds to discuss this issues further on. As will be shown, various stages of the divine-human relationship constitute the flow of Romans 1-8, for instance, the broken state (1.18-3.20), the restorative moments (3.21-26; 5.1-11), and a high-degree of intimacy (8.12-39), along with the depiction of an antithetical type of relationship (5.12-8.11).…”

“…John Barclay's categorisation of different perspectives on divine and human agency summarises what is at issue among scholars. The three categories are as follows: 1) the 'competitive relationship' model in which 'the more that one is to be effective, the less can be attributed to the other' while both agencies remain separated-thus 'divine sovereignty and human freedom' would be treated as 'mutually exclusive' from this viewpoint; 4 2) the 'kinship' model in which 'the agency of one is shared with the other, rather than standing in competition'-thus, in this shared agency, what can make human agency 'most effective' is what is 'shared with God'; 5 3) the 'non-contrastive transcendence' model, which sees the transcendence of divine agency as not necessarily conflicting with human agency, while distinguishing one from the other-thus 'created human agencies are founded in, and constituted by, the divine creative agency, while remaining distinctive from God'. 6 Two questions are embedded in such categorisation.…”

“…interpersonal structure], describing structure using variables such as dependence, covariation of interests, and information certainty'. 2 What IT means by the term 'interdependence' is 'the manner in which two individuals influence each other's outcomes in the course of their interaction'. 3 Originally developed by Harold H. Kelley and John W. Thibaut, 4 IT was grounded in Kurt Lewin's emphasis on interdependence as the essence of group formation.…”

Paul’s Eschatological Anthropology: The Esō Anthrōpos and The Intermediate State

“…The aeons are distinguished from one another by the dominant hypostatic power that operates on those subsisting within the respective aeons and is thus the carrier of anthropological value. 18 Paul's symbolic universe contains only two such powers -Sin and the Holy Spirit. JMG Barclay comments, 'when Paul pauses, midway through Romans 5, to redraw the map of the cosmos, he sees two, and only two, power structures at work within the cosmos (Rom.…”

“…8:11, 'he who raised Christ from the dead will give life to your mortal bodies [thnēta sōmata],' that is, the bodies believers currently possess, which partially pass over to the esō anthrōpos. For God does not abandon any part of creation -there will be a reconciliation and renewal of ta panta ('all things,' Col. 1: [15][16][17][18][19][20]. The present is in continuity with the future.…”