tanya

Thank you very much.

ApostateAbe

Yeah, it was me who argued that, and I quoted Romans 3:25-26. I will quote it again.

whom God put forward as a sacrifice of atonement by his blood, effective through faith. He did this to show his righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over the sins previously committed; it was to prove at the present time that he himself is righteous and that he justifies the one who has faith in Jesus.

Paul explicitly believed that the crucifixion of Jesus was God's plan for sacrificial atonement. So, when I claim that Paul did not hold anything against the Romans for the death of Jesus, it isn't reading the gospels into Paul. It isn't reading our modern guesses about Paul into Paul. It is reading Paul into Paul.

Steven Carr

'For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and you will be commended. 4 For the one in authority is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God’s servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer.'

Good point.

How could authorities who execute Jesus without being responsible morally for the death possibly be any more of a terror than say , a wild lion wandering the streets killing people, as said lion can't be held morally responsible for the deaths?

And the authorities do not bear the sword for no reason. Apart from when they blunder around , killing Sons of God through sheer blindness.

Steven Carr

So as far as Paul was concerned, somebody had to kill Jesus, and hey, it may as well be the Romans.

Why then is Ehrman convinced that Paul hated the killers of Jesus and wrote 1 Thessalonians 2 about how God's wrath was falling upon them?

ApostateAbe

I don't know, but my guess would be that you don't have quite the right idea about what Ehrman thinks. One way or the other, it would be better to argue directly from the evidence.

Steven Carr

There's an evasive response if ever there was one.

Feel free to answer the question of why Ehrman thinks Paul wrote that the wrath of God was falling on the people who killed Jesus, when you claim Paul did not hold anything against the Romans.

ApostateAbe

OK, the answer is: I don't know, but my guess would be that you don't have quite the right idea about what Ehrman thinks.

Diogenes the Cynic

Ehrman doesn't say that. He doesn't even say the last line can't be interpolated, but that if it is, then only the last line is interpolated, and even that lacks textual (manuscriptural) evidence.

The Jews are also a subset of "all human ungodliness," so are not excluded by that phrase.

Paul also knows he's speaking to a largely Roman audience, so it's no surprise to see him gloss the blame against the Romans in such a way as to identify them indirectly as instruments of God acting in ignorance.

Politicians use that kind of allusary weaseling all the time.

Steven Carr

This is just desperate rewriting of Ehrman's words, and does not need a response.

GakuseiDon

Yes, that's it, basically. For Paul to blame any individual ruler for the killing of Jesus implies that Paul thinks that, if that person had been a better ruler, Jesus wouldn't have been crucified. IOW Jesus' death was just a matter of bad timing, like as if it were possible that a camel could have stepped on Jesus while he was preaching, and that would have finished things.

But Paul couldn't have thought like that. This was part of God's plan, not against individual rulers but against the ungodly. Things were coming to an end, and Israel itself was at fault for rejecting Jesus, not just any individual leader:

Rom 9:30 What shall we say then? That Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness of faith;
31 but Israel, pursuing the law of righteousness, has not attained to the law of righteousness.
32 Why? Because they did not seek it by faith, but as it were, by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumbling stone.
33 As it is written:
​
​​“Behold, I lay in Zion a stumbling stone and rock of offense,
​​And whoever believes on Him will not be put to shame.”

We see the same theme in 1 Peter 2:

4 Coming to Him as to a living stone, rejected indeed by men, but chosen by God and precious,
5 you also, as living stones, are being built up a spiritual house, a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.
6 Therefore it is also contained in the Scripture,
​​​“Behold, I lay in Zion
​​A chief cornerstone, elect, precious,
​​And he who believes on Him will by no means be put to shame.”
​7 Therefore, to you who believe, He is precious; but to those who are disobedient, ​​“The stone which the builders rejected ​​Has become the chief cornerstone,”
8 and ​​“A stone of stumbling ​​And a rock of offense.”
​They stumble, being disobedient to the word, to which they also were appointed.
...

13 Therefore submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord’s sake, whether to the king as supreme,
14 or to governors, as to those who are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers and for the praise of those who do good.
15 For this is the will of God, that by doing good you may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men—
16 as free, yet not using liberty as a cloak for vice, but as bondservants of God.
17 Honor all people. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honor the king.
18 Servants, be submissive to your masters with all fear, not only to the good and gentle, but also to the harsh.
19 For this is commendable, if because of conscience toward God one endures grief, suffering wrongfully.
20 For what credit is it if, when you are beaten for your faults, you take it patiently? But when you do good and suffer, if you take it patiently, this is commendable before God.
21 For to this you were called, because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that you should follow His steps:
​
22 ​​“Who committed no sin,
​​Nor was deceit found in His mouth”;
​
23 who, when He was reviled, did not revile in return; when He suffered, He did not threaten, but committed Himself to Him who judges righteously;
24 who Himself bore our sins in His own body on the tree, that we, having died to sins, might live for righteousness—by whose stripes you were healed.

So you have the whole thing laid out:
1. The Jews rejected Jesus
2. Obey the rulers, even if they punish you for doing good
3. We have that example in Christ