Romans 1:4 off list

From: John M. Sweigart (jsweiger@cswnet.com)
Date: Sat Dec 12 1998 - 08:43:13 EST


Good morning Carl:
Three observations off list since I do not want to start up a
theological thread. I agree with your analysis of the balancing of the
members of the introduction. It may even be chiastic in structure.
Secondly, the idea of the king and/or whole nation of Israel being an
adopted son vis a vis the Suzerain/Vassal concept is a very helpful area
of study that has helped me a great deal in formulating relationship
between Old Covenant and New Covenant matters. Many shy away from the
material because they think it some ways impugns Christ's eternal
Sonship formulated in the early church's creedal battles. The verse
under consideration I'm sure could be such a battleground.

Thirdly, it has always fascinated me that the term Son of God was
included in the Roman letter since the Emperor could be elected to the
position Son of God after his death. I shake and tremble at the thought
that my position in heaven could be determined by politicians!

John Sweigart



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:40:10 EDT