"Sin and Soteriology in Romans," Martinus de Boer

Nijay is Twitter-shaming me to finish blogging through the book. But you don't understand. Five more books have come in the mail!!!

1. I have never met Martinus de Boer but was reminded that his monograph Defeat of Death has been sitting on my shelf for over twenty years. I bought it back when I had ideas. I really like this chapter of the book Sin and Its Remedy in Paul, edited by Nijay Gupta and John Goodrich. It's another snack length chapter of 19 pages. It goes well with a mid-afternoon apple (or half-banana if you don't finish it the first afternoon).

While reading, I thought a couple times of Krister Stendahl's seminal piece, "Paul and the Introspective Conscience of the West." It was one of those rare, "YES! Of course!" moments in my thought history. [1] So Sin is a power that Paul does not consider intrinsic to a human being. It is "not to be identified with the human self" (17). Yes! Similarly, repentance is not a major category of Paul's thought as it has come down to us (21n.27). Yes!

I also thought of Stendahl when de Boer spoke of weak flesh as a morally neutral description (28). Paul is not a Gnostic. He does not believe flesh is evil. It's just putty in Sin's hands.

2. I liked so much in this chapter that I did a side-search to see if de Boer was Methodist. Sin is a power... for sure. But "Sin does not exist apart from sinning." Yes! Down with Simon Gathercole (sorry Simon). 

Interesting synthesis on the primal sin: "Adam functions both as a corporate personality whose trespass determines all subsequent human destiny... and as the paradigmatic human being whose sinful deed sets the pattern for his descendants" who repeat his sin (24).

Interesting thoughts on a distinction between "trespass" and "transgression." As I understand him, de Boer links "transgression" to violation of a known Mosaic law. But there are "trespasses" or "fallings away" from Adam to Moses that lead to death. Interesting explanation for the puzzling Romans 5:13-14.

I liked this sentence: newness of life is "a participation in Christ's resurrection life, not just in the future but also now, and is characterized by righteousness" (30).

3. I put a few question marks in the margin. Is the essence of death separation from God? (20) Is sin the failure to acknowledge God? (23). Do humans in principle still have the ability not to sin? (27) 

[1] Don't you love it when someone either puts your thoughts so crisply or opens up a new vista such that your reaction is, "How could I not have seen this before??? It's so obvious! Wittgenstein had this effect on me once upon a time. Stendahl as well.