In Christ" in Romans
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Marquette University e-Publications@Marquette Dissertations, Theses, and Professional Dissertations (1934 -) Projects Primeval History According to Paul: "In Adam" and "In Christ" in Romans Timothy A. Gabrielson Marquette University Follow this and additional works at: https://epublications.marquette.edu/dissertations_mu Part of the Biblical Studies Commons, and the Christianity Commons Recommended Citation Gabrielson, Timothy A., "Primeval History According to Paul: "In Adam" and "In Christ" in Romans" (2016). Dissertations (1934 -). 619. https://epublications.marquette.edu/dissertations_mu/619 PRIMEVAL HISTORY ACCORDING TO PAUL: “IN ADAM” AND “IN CHRIST” IN ROMANS by Timothy A. Gabrielson, B.S., B.S., M.A. A Dissertation submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School, Marquette University, in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Milwaukee, Wisconsin May 2016 ABSTRACT PRIMEVAL HISTORY ACCORDING TO PAUL: “IN ADAM” AND “IN CHRIST” IN ROMANS Timothy A. Gabrielson, B.S., B.S., M.A. Marquette University, 2016 Paul’s comparison of Adam and Christ in Rom 5:12–21 is among the most influential doctrines in the Bible and Christian theology. Often it has been used to summarize God’s purposes in creation and redemption, from humanity’s “fall” in Adam to its restoration in Christ. In the past several decades, however, it has increasingly been seen as provisional and functional because the Jewish writings used to support it have now been dated after the apostle’s lifetime. This study retrieves the traditional position, but does so by appeal to different corpora of Jewish texts, those that are prior or contemporary to Paul. After considering the most prominent interpretations of Rom 5 over the past century, and the increasing questions surrounding it, I argue that it is hard to explain Paul’s interest in the comparison and the rhetoric of Romans without the presence of underlying Adamic traditions. Turning to Greco-Roman Jewish thought about primeval history, I organize the traditions into a fivefold taxonomy: Adam as (1) the head of humanity, a (2) paradigmatic pattern and (3) moral warning, as well as a (4) bearer of disaster and (5) glorious figure. Of these, the first, fourth, and fifth are relevant for Rom 5. To combine these three, I propose a construct called “participatory domains” wherein a single figure, a heavenly or earthly patron, rules over a people and their destinies are intertwined. I then apply this construct to Romans, particularly the Adam-Christ typology, to demonstrate that it solves longstanding riddles within the text and provides a cohesive account of the letter as a whole. Insofar as the proposal is satisfactory, it holds a number of consequences for Christian theology and Pauline studies. i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Timothy A. Gabrielson, B.S., B.S., M.A. “Pay to all what is due them,” Paul exhorts the Roman Christians, “. respect to whom respect is due, honor to whom honor is due” (Rom 13:7). I owe a debt of gratitude to many, and I hope in some small way to repay them with a word of thanks. Julian Hills was the first member of Marquette’s faculty whom I met in person, and little did I know at the time how much he would influence my growth as a scholar. He is intellectually generous, respecting all views so long as they are well reasoned, and he demonstrates concern for the personal lives of his students. His attention to details, even the littlest ones, has forced me to reason and to write with precision. This project is immeasurably better because of him. Michael Cover agreed to co-direct my dissertation having only recently met me, and I learned much from him in the relatively short period of time we had to work together. His questions and suggestions drove me back to the text and forced me to reconsider my argument at several points. His competencies in fields I do not know well also steered me away from a number of mistakes. Much appreciation is due both my directors. Joshua Burns and Michel Barnes have taught me a great deal about ancient Judaism and early Christianity, and I have a far better perspective on my own particular field of research for having learned from them. Joshua Burns’s advice and suggestions when I applied for jobs was invaluable, and I am grateful to Michel Barnes for filling the vacated spot on my board at the last minute. In general, I thank the faculty of Marquette for making my time here intellectually challenging, professionally beneficial, and personally fulfilling. In addition to those already named, I would also like to thank Deirdre Dempsey, Rev. William Kurz, D. Stephen Long, and Andrei Orlov for what they have contributed to my education. I count myself very fortunate to be among a strong group of emerging scholars. When applying to Ph.D. programs I did not think very much about the other graduate students I would be joining, but the collegial atmosphere of the Marquette community has been one of the happiest surprises of my time in ii Milwaukee. Thanks are owed my monthly writing group: Nathan Thiel, Samantha Miller, and Nathan Lunsford. They have read considerable amounts of the following, and their input at an early stage of composition did much to help me articulate ideas that were as yet inchoate. In less formal ways, I have also discussed my developing ideas with Nick Elder and Tyler Stewart, and I appreciate those conversations. There are many other friends who could be named, but space fails me. My family nurtured in me a love for Christ and a love for education, and in many ways this dissertation is my effort to pursue those two at once. City Reformed Church of Milwaukee has been a wonderful and caring community since we began attending it a couple of years ago. Thank you all. My greatest debt of gratitude is owed to my wife, Amy. Even before we were married she followed me halfway across the country so that I could pursue my goal of doctoral studies, and she will be joining me again on a new adventure in a new state soon. Her willingness to relocate for me — to change careers and find new friends, become acquainted with a new area and culture — is a grace that I do not deserve. She has supported me in every way through the process: emotionally, intellectually, and financially. Particularly in the last few months, she has kindly put up with a busy and often distracted husband. I could not have written this monograph without her, and it is to her that I dedicate it. I love you. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...................................................................................... i LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ................................................................................ viii INTRODUCTION — A FERTILE STORY: THE DIVERSE READINGS OF GENESIS 1–3 ........................................................................................................................ 1 The Diverse Readings of Genesis 1–3 ........................................................... 1 The Project: Intent, Limits, Methodology, and Criteria ................................. 8 CHAPTER 1 — ANSWERING THE SPHINX: THE RIDDLES OF ROMANS 5:12–21 ............................................................................................................................18 Adam’s Ambivalent Legacy .........................................................................18 Proposed Solutions, in Brief Review ............................................................23 Official Teachings ...........................................................................23 Corporate Personality ......................................................................25 Adam as Everyman ..........................................................................28 Adam as Gnostic Urmensch .............................................................30 Adam as Jewish Redeemer ...............................................................33 Adam as Bearer of Destiny ...............................................................35 Adam as Ruling an Epoch ................................................................37 Dual Causality .................................................................................38 Adam as Federal Head .....................................................................40 Corporate Solidarity ........................................................................41 Social Sin ........................................................................................43 Adam’s Indeterminate Effect ............................................................44 Adam as Afterthought .....................................................................46 An Apology for Revisiting Romans 5 ..........................................................48 The Riddles of Romans 5 ............................................................................61 Overview .........................................................................................62 iv Riddle 1: Fit in Romans ...................................................................66 Riddle 2: Means of Transfer .............................................................69 Riddle 3: Adam as “Type” ................................................................76 Conclusion: A Riddled Passage ...................................................................88 CHAPTER 2 — HIDDEN IN PLAIN SIGHT: ADAMIC TRADITIONS IN THE GRECO-ROMAN ERA ..........................................................................................91 Introduction to Adamic Traditions