Tag: Jewish Identity
-
Journal Article: Paul’s Jewish Prophetic Critique of Jews in Romans
The open access (free to download) peer-reviewed academic article examines Paul’s critique of Jews in Romans, focusing on Romans 1–3. It adopts an approach of reading Paul within Judaism while differing from some interpreters representative of this approach by arguing that Paul is critiquing his fellow Jews and that his critique is relevant to his…
-
Junia, Missionary Partnership, and Honor: The Discourse Function of Romans 16:7
This academic article, published in the Bulletin for Biblical Research, explores Paul’s greetings in Romans 16 in light of the gospel message he lays out in the rest of Romans and the purposes of Romans. I’ve also produced a video aimed at a less technical audience which is designed to draw out key points from…
-
I think we need to mention the war
I was glad to be one of thousands attending a peaceful rally against antisemitism in Sydney’s Domain organised by “Never Again is Now”
-
Journal Article: Israel and the Apostolic Mission in Ephesians and Colossians
Ephesians and Colossians, like Acts, envisage the apostolic mission of Christ as a Jew-gentile dynamic. An open access academic journal article summarizing and updating the argument in my book on Ephesians and Colossians.
-
Paul did not say he had abandoned “Judaism”
A new journal article examines in detail the meaning of the words often translated as “Judaism” and “Judaize” in Galatians
-
“Paul within Judaism” and Romans 2:17–29
My article on Romans 2:17–29 supports one key feature of the “Paul within Judaism” perspective, but undermines another common feature.
-
The mistranslation “call yourself a Jew”: A myth-busting story (Romans 2:17)
This is a story about a scholarly myth and how I had the chance to bust it. I’m talking here about a small but significant 20th century biblical translation: “call yourself” instead of “are called” in Romans 2:17.
-
The named Jew and the name of God: A new reading of Romans 2:17–29
I’ve just had an article published in the journal Novum Testamentum. In it, I provide a detailed defense of my new reading of Romans 2:17–29. This passage is not primarily about Jewish salvation – rather it’s primarily about Jewish teaching and God’s glory.
-
Captivated by Scripture: A personal reflection on D. W. B. Robinson’s legacy for biblical studies
What made Donald W. B. Robinson such an inspiring and influential teacher for generations of students? His commitment to being captivated by Scripture. This is a paper given by Lionel Windsor at the legacy day and launch of Donald Robinson Selected Works Volume 3: Biblical and Liturgical Studies & Volume 4: Historical Studies and Series…
-
Rejoicing in the blessing of others (Ephesians 1:11–12)
Although the Bible is always relevant to us, not every sentence is directly about us. When we realise this, we can rejoice in God’s blessings even more.
-
Why does Paul call himself an “Israelite” in Romans 11:1?
In my book, I argue that in Romans 11:1, Paul is claiming Israel’s future is guaranteed because Israel’s divine vocation is in fact being fulfilled by an Israelite (i.e. himself).
-
“How beautiful are the feet of those who evangelise” – it’s about Paul’s Gentile mission after all (Romans 10:14-18)
I used to think that Romans 10:14-18 was about the (mostly failed) Christian mission to Jews. I was wrong. After closely reading this text, I now think it’s about Paul’s mission to Gentiles.
-
Speech not works (Romans 10:8-10)
In my book, I argue that the mention of the “mouth” alongside the “heart” is a key to Paul’s argument about the nature of salvation.
-
The “End of the Law” (Romans 10:4)
In my book, I argue that the phrase “Christ is the end (τέλος) of the Law” in Romans 10:4 is illuminated by Romans 3:21, which states that the purpose of the Law is to testify to the gospel.
-
Human speech–a neglected element of Romans 10
In my book, I argue that the concept of human speech is a vitally important–though very frequently neglected–component of Paul’s argument in Romans chapter 10.
-
Paul is not offering himself as a substitute in Romans 9:3
In my book, I argue that Paul in Romans 9:3 is acting as a representative for Israel, not offering himself as a substitute.
-
Paul’s vocation: The framework for Romans 9–11
In my book, I argue that Paul’s apostolic mission plays a decisive role in his argument about Israel in Romans 9-11.
-
“Praise from people” in Romans 2:29 is describing an ideal synagogue teacher
In my book, I argue that the idea of receiving “praise” from human beings in Romans 2:29 is a reference to an ideal synagogue law-teacher.
-
Romans 2:29 is not saying that all Christians are “spiritually circumcised”
In my book, I argue that Romans 2:28-29 should be understood as the conclusion of a coherent argument, set in the mainstream Jewish synagogue, which seeks to make a definite statement about Jewish (rather than simply Christian) identity.
-
Who is the uncircumcised Law-keeper in Romans 2:26-27?
In my book, I argue that the uncircumcised Law-keeper in Romans 2:26-27 should be understood as a Gentile synagogue adherent.
-
What does it mean to “rob temples” in Romans 2:22?
In my book, I argue that the term commonly translated as “robbing temples” is not referring to the robbery of pagan temples, but to the misappropriation of funds intended for the Jerusalem temple.
-
The identity of Paul’s interlocutor in Romans 2:17-29
In my book, I argue that Paul in Romans 2:17-29 is addressing a Jewish synagogue teacher
-
“Are we worse off?” or “Are we better off?”? (Romans 3:9)
In my book, I argue that “Are we [Jews] worse off?” is a plausible translation of the question προεχόμεθα; in Romans 3:9, given the context in which it appears.
-
Jewish identity and the Law of Moses (Romans 2:17-20)
In my book, I argue that Romans 2:17-20 is a compact description of the close relationship between Jewish identity and the synagogue-based communal engagement with the Law of Moses.
-
The structure of Romans 2:17-29
In my book, I argue that the Romans 2:17-29 consists of three sections. This cuts across the traditional division of the passage into two sections.