CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
2.2 Background
2.2.3 Why Romans?
As an example of a tangible benefit of the approach of a BTOC, the case of the use of an over- realised eschatology is posited. Canham (2005:384), in addressing the conflict of Romans 16:18 writes,
Though scholars disagree over whether the language of 16:18 is more descriptive of Judaizing legalism or a Gentile-oriented antinomianism, Paul’s wording supports the latter identification. In this light, it is probably significant that Paul follows his commands in 16:17-19 with a futuristic reminder in 16:20 that “the God of peace will soon crush Satan under your feet” (16:20).157
In the researcher’s personal correspondence with him, Canham draws the application that when someone is struggling with the conflict of legalism, teach on the first coming of Christ. When someone struggles with the conflict of antinomianism, teach on the second coming of Christ.158 Where does this conclusion come from? It comes from exploring the text to see how God uses His authors’ experience with conflict to respond properly to conflict. That is where a productive understanding of conflict can be found and is the heartbeat of this study on developing a BTOC through looking at the conflict principles in Romans 12-16.159 Therefore, the next question to consider is why the study of Romans was selected for this research.
Paul’s letter to the Romans is another masterpiece of deep theological thinking addressing the issue of how the Church can be one people for God. It is a theological explanation of how both Jew and Gentile are included in God’s salvation. Romans appears designed to answer three main questions pertaining to this issue – 1) How can Gentiles be included in God’s plan of salvation? (Romans 1-2; 3:9-8:39) 2) Does God still have a special relationship with the Jews? (3:1-8, chapters 9-11) 3) What does the redefined people of God look like, Jew and Gentile? (chapters 12-15) Accordingly, the key verse for Romans is Romans 1:16-17.
And Greenwood (2006:34) specifically cites the usefulness of Romans 12: “In Paul’s letter to the Romans, chapter 12, he captures eloquently both the essence of the life of faith, as expressed by individuals living together in community, and the eternal invitation into the grace of conflict transformation”. So, both unity and transformation are seen as possible outcomes specifically from the teaching of this book and section.
In addition to those aspects, Sun (2015:2) argues “that Romans is a work of biblical theology done cross-culturally”. That cross-cultural notion is similar to Redekop’s (2014:51) idea that “we can see that Romans 12–15 is essentially a set of teachings of blessing – instructions on how diverse groups can live together in mutual respect doing the sorts of things that are mutually empowering in a complex relational system with many factors at play”.161 So together, these suggest that Romans is well suited to the task of addressing conflict in the context of unity and in a way that is pertinent to all believers, in all cultures, and in all time.
2.2.3.2 How it communicates
As mentioned previously,162 Paul’s letters to Corinth contain far more material on conflict;
however, they are more specific in the issues that they are addressing. In the case of Romans, a much more principled format is chosen. Sobanaraj (2010:31) declares that “as Paul sets out to solve the Roman crises, he lays down paradigms that are axiomatic in resolving conflicts that the Christian churches face at various levels”. And, as Marble and Willemin (2018) explain, Paul, as a guardian of the Gospel, is concerned with the proclamation of the truth in a way that fortifies its message and does not compromise it. And so, they write that “in the world of church conflict, perhaps no greater conflicts exist than whether our churches are properly handling and teaching the truths of Christ” (2018:loc. 4669). Romans 12-16 is about living out the Gospel message (Rom
161 His work is an analysis of the thinking of John E. Toews’ work on Romans, whose work will also be considered in Chapter 3.
162 See 1.4.2.3.
1-11) in a transformational way that reinforces the message. As an example of this kind of instruction, Love (2014:15) writes:
If I had to choose only one verse in the entire Bible to summarize what Jesus expects of peacemakers, it would be Romans 12:18. It’s concise and comprehensive – perfect for peacemaking dummies like me: ‘If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone.’ Notice how realistic Paul was about waging peace. The condition ‘if it is possible’ acknowledges that it is not always possible to make peace.
Scripture is realistic about conflict and discord.
Therefore, as Gorman (2004:loc. 4363) puts it: “Romans demonstrates, no less than any other Pauline letter, that Paul’s theology always had a pastoral function; he had a formational agenda”.163 This truth impacts believers, for as Scobie (2003:loc. 5862) demonstrates:
Despite the formidable foes at both a human and spiritual level, believers can engage in this conflict knowing that ultimately they will be “more than conquerors,” and convinced “that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor rulers (archai), nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers (dynameis), nor height, nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Rom 8:37-39).
There is a confidence to live as victors in the midst of any conflict.
Therefore, while Romans is not the only NT passage on conflict that can be explored, it is a pertinent one that presents principles to apply to victorious living in all areas of the Christian life.
In addition, it is hoped that this conflict exploration of Romans 12-16 will provide greater insight into the meaning and application of this great passage.164 Martens (2015:loc. 7372) states that
“the anchoring of a biblical theology in a particular text block may bring to light legitimate nuances that have otherwise been ignored or minimized”, so it is the goal for the study of conflict to benefit from this great work.165
With the answers to those three questions as a background to contemporary conflict understanding in theological circles, this exploration now turns to potential BTOCs. This is not an
163 An interesting observation of Gorman is pertinent to the overall study at this point. He writes: “In fact, some interpreters do not see conflict management as central to Paul’s agenda, while others even doubt the existence of the conflict itself” (2004:loc. 4366).
164 Redekop’s (2010:253) case study of Toew’s view of Romans draws a similar conclusion in response to the Gentile/Jewish conflict in Romans.
165 In comparison to the answers to why conflict? and why BT?, this section was much shorter. Again, for this researcher, it demonstrates the exigence for this exploration, as some recognise the integral role of Romans in the study of conflict, but few have undertaken this challenge.
easy task and is somewhat subjective as no BTOC has been found. But there are some insightful models and thinking that can either provide material to build the foundation for a BTOC, or they can give instructive insights for a BTOC. First, however, is a discussion of the methodology for evaluating the BTOCs, followed by an update to Meyers’ definition of conflict.