Skip to content

What does it mean to “rob temples” in Romans 2:22?

In my book, I argue that the verb commonly translated as “rob temples” (the verb ἱεροσυλεῖν) is not referring to the robbery of pagan temples, but to the misappropriation of funds intended for the Jerusalem temple. This is understandable in light of a passage in Josephus (A.J. 18.81–84), which describes how a Jewish Law-teacher and his accomplices defrauded a Roman aristocratic woman of money intended for the Jerusalem temple.

This interpretation makes more sense of the verses in their context:

Paul and the Vocation of Israel: How Paul's Jewish Identity Informs his Apostolic Ministry, with Special Reference to Romans

At first glance, this list of charges against Jews [in Rom 2:21-22] appears to be arbitrary, exaggerated and unconvincing, especially if it is viewed as a blanket condemnation of the regular practices of the entire Jewish community. However, the charges are more comprehensible if we assume that Paul is seeking not to prove the universal sinfulness of Jews, nor to devalue the Law per se, but rather to demonstrate the failure of Jews—especially the Jewish teachers who acted as the exemplars of Jewish identity—in their divine vocation toward the Gentiles. (p. 164)

The conclusion of the argument is as follows:

Paul, therefore, is using ἱεροσυλεῖν in Rom 2:22 to imply that the misappropriation of funds for the holy temple in Jerusalem by Jews, such as that described by Josephus, is equivalent to desecration of the temple itself. This, of course, makes a mockery of the Jewish claim to “abhor idols,” since the abhorrence of idols and the upkeep of the worship in the Jerusalem temple were two sides of the same coin—negative and positive aspects, respectively, of Jewish worship (2 Kgs 23:19–25, 2 Chr 33:7–8; cf. 1 Macc 1:41–53). Paul’s charge is thus a prophetic indictment, equivalent to Jeremiah’s condemnation of his Israelite contemporaries. It places Paul’s Jewish interlocutor in the same moral position as the foolish Gentiles who worship idols and dishonour God himself (cf. Rom 1:21–23). In this way, the Law-teacher becomes a foil for Paul’s own prophetically informed apostolic ministry. In fact, Paul later claims that his own apostolic ministry will succeed at precisely the same point that his interlocutor’s preaching had failed: Paul himself fulfils this very task by bringing funds from the Gentiles to the “poor” in Jerusalem (Ἰερουσαλήμ, Rom 15:25–27). (p. 166)

Thus:

Paul’s pointed questions to his Jewish Lawteaching interlocutor are directly relevant to his entire engagement with the mainstream understanding of Jewish identity, for which a certain understanding of the normal operation of the Law of Moses is fundamental. Paul’s rhetorical questions demonstrate that the epistemological privilege which accrues to the mainstream Jewish community through their possession of the Law does not necessarily lead to an automatic ethical advantage (vv. 21–22). Paul, in other words, is demonstrating that Jews who have the Law are subject to the same anthropological realities as Gentiles who do not have the Law, by reminding his readers that even some of the most respected and knowledgeable Jewish Lawteachers have committed the most serious crimes.

The full details of the argument and further references may be found in chapter 5 of the book (pp. 164-168). The chapter is available from the publisher in electronic format:

Windsor, Lionel J. Paul and the Vocation of Israel: How Paul’s Jewish Identity Informs his Apostolic Ministry, with Special Reference to Romans. BZNW 205. Berlin / Boston: Walter de Gruyter, 2014.

 

Published inPaulRomans

Publications by Lionel Windsor:

  • Lift Your Eyes: Reflections on Ephesians

Recent blog posts

  • Ampelmann, BerlinTurn around and walk the other way (Ephesians 4:17–19)
    Darkness, futility, and desire: this is the way the world walks. Paul doesn’t write these things so that we can gloat or judge. He writes so we can repent, and live.
  • Photo by Kira auf der Heide on UnsplashPlaying your part (Ephesians 4:16)
    Paul’s vision for Christ’s body is unity in diversity. It’s not just flat uniformity, nor is it just diversity for the sake of diversity. It’s diversity for a common purpose.
  • Photo by Ben White on UnsplashThe truth in love: A key principle for church growth (Ephesians 4:14–15)
    Paul’s principle for the growth of Christ’s body isn’t about presentation or organisation. It’s more fundamental: “speaking the truth in love”.
  • Colosseum with cross-shaped cloudsChrist’s body: A brief history (Ephesians 4:11–13)
    Paul didn’t write Ephesians 4:11–13 to give us a detailed blueprint for how to organise our ministries. He wrote these verses to point us to God’s grace in Christ.
  • Cathedral CeilingChrist: Up there and down here (Ephesians 4:8–10)
    In these verses, Paul makes a big deal of Christ going up (to heaven) and down (to be with us by his Spirit). Why? to encourage believers as we face all the ups and downs of living for Christ.
  • Genesis 1:27 modified NIVMale and female: Equality and order in Genesis 1:27
    Genesis 1:27 is important in debates between egalitarians and complementarians. It clearly implies equality, yet also seems to suggest a certain order.
  • Gift among giftsGifted beyond measure (Ephesians 4:7)
    How should Christians think about our own individual ‘giftedness’? We need to see our own gifts in the light of God’s wonderful, superabundant grace.
  • Temple of Antoninus and Faustina, Roman ForumThe one and only God (Ephesians 4:4–6)
    In this part of Ephesians, the apostle Paul makes an unavoidably scandalous claim: The God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ is the one and only God.
  • Finding praise in the right place (Romans 2:28–29)
    There is a very strong temptation to measure your ministry by looking at how much people are praising you. This passage teaches us where to look for praise.
  • This unity (Ephesians 4:2–3)
    In the classic film Monty Python and the Holy Grail, the King of Swamp Castle issues an appeal for unity: “This is supposed to be a happy occasion. Let’s not bicker and argue about who killed who!” It’s become a classic line used to poke fun at people who are trying to bring peace and unity without showing any understanding of the reality of the situation or the depth of hurt that’s been caused. While we might never end up being quite as absurd as Monty Python, Christians can sometimes talk about unity a little like this. That is, we can treat unity as some ideal state where everybody just gets on, no matter how deep our differences are and no matter what hurt has been caused. And yet—unity really matters. Christians are called to unity. Christian unity is anchored in the truth of the gospel.

On this site

All content copyright Lionel Windsor