Introduction
In the majority of his Old Testament citations, Paul adheres to the original sense of the passage.[1] However, in Rom 10:3-8 he appears to be quoting scripture without regard to the original context. Paul seems to deliberately change the words of Moses regarding the nearness of the Law and the requirement to “do it” [2] into the Gospel of faith in opposition to the Law. H. Hübner has treated the passage as a proverbial allusion rather than a quotation.[3][4] Scholars cannot conceive how Paul could possibly have considered such a radical transformation of Deuteronomy 30 to be ‘legitimate’:
In the O.T. the words are used by Moses of the Law: how can St. Paul use them of the Gospel as against the Law?[5]
Munck observes that Paul distinguishes “between the use of authoritative scriptural texts, and the use of scriptural texts in formulating thoughts of [his] own”.[6] Munck is simply reflecting the unease of earlier exegetes, such as Calvin, who noted, “…if it is alleged that this interpretation is too forced and subtle, we should understand that the object of the Apostle was not to explain this passage exactly, but only to apply it to his treatment of the subject in hand”. [7]
The following article will examine Pauline usage of the Deuteronomic passage within the wider context of the Isaianic argument that he is presenting in chapters 9-11 and will dispel the often heard charge that he is dishonestly handling scripture.
Sources for Paul’s Quotation
Various sources have been proposed as contributing to the transformative reading that Paul offers in Rom 10:5-8.[8] It is not the intention to discuss the merits of each of these proposals as they have already been extensively reviewed.[9] Moreover, we simply cannot exclude some of these proposals because Pauline use of scripture is so creative and polyvalent that multiple allusions and echoes from more than one source are not only possible, but very probable.[10] Our aim is to present a new contextual reading refracted through the twin lenses of Deuteronomy 30 and certain texts in Isaiah.
We concur with Guy Waters that, “the text employed in Rom 10:6-8 is ‘too close’ to that of Deuteronomy ‘for the agreement to be accidental’”.[11] Our proposal is that the apostle’s changes were deliberate and theologically justified by his understanding of Isaiah. A comparison of Romans 10 and Deuteronomy 30 placed alongside Isaiah makes the interrelationship clear. The comparison table below has been developed independently of scholarship, and the lack of notice in such scholarship of links with Isaiah may lie in the fact that the majority of scholarship adopts the classic tripartite division of the book, and has failed to contextualize the many Isaianic oracles within the reign of Hezekiah. Failure to understand the oracles initial setting has led to a failure in understanding how Paul applies various Isaianic texts it in Romans 10.
| Rom 10:3-8 | Isaiah | Deut 30:12-14 |
|---|---|---|
| …going about to establish their own righteousness for Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth. (10:3) | If ye will not believe ye shall not be established. (7: 9-10) | …if thou turn unto God with all thine heart, and all thy soul (30:10). |
| Say not in thine heart, who shall ascend into heaven? (10:6) |
Ask a sign of the Lord either in the depth or the height above (7: 9-10) For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God (14:13). |
Who shall go up for us to heaven… (30:12a) |
|
That is, to bring Christ down from above…
Or who shall descend into the deep (abyss)? That is, to bring up Christ again from the dead
But what saith it (=the righteousness which is of faith speaketh v.6) The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach; |
Drop down, ye heavens, from above, and let the skies pour down righteousness…
…let the earth open, and let them bring forth salvation (45:8).
I have not spoken in secret, in a dark place of the earth: I said not to Jacob, seek ye me in vain;
I the Lord speak righteousness, I declare things that are right (45:19). |
..and bring it unto us that we may hear and do it?
Neither is it beyond the sea (abyss), that thou shouldest say, who shall go over the sea for us, and bring it unto us, that we may hear and do it? (30:12b-13)
[The secret things belong to the Lord our God; but those things which are revealed belong to us and our children for ever… (29:29)] |
| That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. | I have sworn by myself, the word is gone out of my mouth in righteousness, and shalt not return, that unto me every knee should bow, every tongue shall swear. Surely, shall One say, in the Lord have I righteousness and strength: even to him shall men come… (45: 23-24). | And the Lord thy God will circumcise thine heart, and the heart of thy seed, to love the Lord thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, that thou mayest live (30:6). |
The Historical and Cultural Context
The wider context of the usage of Deut 30:12-14 in Romans 10 cannot be viewed in isolation from Paul’s extensive quotation of Isaiah in the remainder of the chapter[12] or indeed of the whole of Romans. This has not escaped the notice of J. R. Wagner, who comments,
We should not underestimate the close knowledge of the book of Isaiah possible for ancient readers-particularly those with “scholastic” interests- who regarded it as a sacred text. To what degree Paul’s use of Isaiah betrays such intimacy with the text is, of course, the point at issue in the present work; the preceding discussion, however, offers an important reference point for evaluating what evidence we do have concerning Paul’s reader-competence and interpretive strategies in their historical and cultural contexts.[13]
Although Wagner makes a brave attempt to place (as far as modern scholarship will allow) portions of the Isaiah oracle in “historical and cultural context”,[14] he inevitably generalises because the context is misunderstood.[15]
Hezekiah
Ahaz sought an alliance with the Assyrians (2 Kgs 16:17-18)—he had a copy made of the Assyrian altar and removed the altar of Yahweh to one side. He could not, however, remove the foundation of the altar, which formed part of the bedrock of Zion and this served as a constant reminder of his disloyalty (cf. Isa 28:16). The foundation literally became “a rock of offence”. Moreover, Ahaz refused the waters of Shiloh (Isa 8:5-8, later called Siloam), which was tantamount to a refusal of that which was “sent” (cf. John 9:7). In broader terms such a refusal typified the refusal of the eventual messianic Immanuel (Isa 7:11). The invisible, underground waters of Siloam were rejected (the hidden faith in the Davidic covenant) in favour of the mighty overflowing waters of the Euphrates (Assyrian power).
Hezekiah was the first significant “Immanuel” of the Isaiah oracle. In his early reign, he reached out to the northern tribes, reformed cultic worship (2 Chron 29:3) and re-established covenantal relationships. At around the mid-point of his reign he was afflicted with a mortal disease (Isa 38:1) which coincided with an Assyrian invasion in 701. He was raised from his sick bed on the third day (2 Kgs 20:8) and the Assyrian army was miraculously defeated (2Kgs 19:35-37). This deliverance was a type of the Passover (Isa 31:5, 33:19). As such Hezekiah became one of the greatest proto-types of the messiah. Corporately and corporally he represented the nation and suffered undeserved punishment as God’s suffering servant
Romans, Deuteronomy and Hezekiah
We can now offer a paraphrase of Rom 9-11 in the light of Hezekiah and at the same time situate Paul’s quotation of Deut 30:12-14.
1) Romans 9. Only a faithful remnant will be saved similar to the time of Hezekiah (Rom 9:27-28; Isa 10:22-23), when the faithful heeded his call to come to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover. Hezekiah nearly died childless, thus nullifying the Davidic covenant,[16] but God saved him and also a faithful remnant (Rom 9:29; Isa 1:9). Hezekiah became a “rock of offence” to all who refused faith in the covenant, just like the altar foundation that accused Ahaz and acted as a constant reminder of his disloyalty; in a similar fashion Christ was a “rock of offence” (Rom 9:33a; Isa 8:14; 28:16).
2) Romans 10. Ahaz/Israel had refused to believe the heavenly messianic sign regarding the covenant (Rom 10:3; Isa 7:11); instead the nation sought to exalt themselves (establish their own righteousness) like the proud Assyrian kings, who challenged God himself (ascended the heights) and were therefore thrust down into hell (Rom 10:6; Isa 14:3). However, the Lord God speaks righteousness and is faithful to his covenant (Rom 10:6, Isa 45:19); he has not acted secretly, but he openly raised and exalted his suffering servant (Hezekiah/Christ), thus establishing the covenant. The covenant was not accomplished through human effort – God had himself provided a messiah with heavenly origins (Hezekiah’s promised conception/virgin birth of Christ) and God had raised him (Hezekiah from a sick bed/Christ from death) – (Rom 10:7, Isa 45:8). But what does the covenant say (the righteousness which is of faith as explained in Deuteronomy)? It says that the word of God (his messiah) is near…even in your mouth and in your heart. (Rom 10:8).
Yahweh has vindicated his Suffering Servant and will cause all men to acknowledge him (Rom 10:9, Isa 45:23-24, cf. Rom 14:11b). Those who put their trust in the suffering servant (Hezekiah/Jesus) will be vindicated (Rom 10:11; Isa 28:16). Those who call on the name of the Lord will be saved (Rom 10:13; Joel 2:32).[17] The Good News (Gospel) of the enemy’s defeat and the recovery of our king (Hezekiah/Jesus) is heralded by messengers – God reigns in Zion (Rom 10:15; Isa 52:7). But who believed the message? It was only a faithful remnant (Rom 10:16, 21-22; Isa 53:1, 65:1-2).
3) Romans 11. The remainder of the nation continued to be blind and asleep (Rom 11:7-8 Isa 29:10). But the faithfulness of Hezekiah/Jesus had caused all enemies to be defeated and prisoners to be released. The Gentiles were also now incorporated into the covenant relationship (Rom 11:26-27a; Isa 59:20-21). Truly, God’s purpose is marvellous for no one could have anticipated the outcome of the rejection and ingathering of Israel (Rom 11:34; Isa 40:13).
Conclusion
Paul’s use of Deut 30:12-14 can only be fully understood against the background of Hezekiah’s times. Paul reads the covenant in Deuteronomy through the lens of Isaiah. Our next article will attempt to determine if the reading is uniquely Pauline or if other factors influenced his exegesis. The original context of Deut 30:12-14 will be also be re-examined and explanations offered for Paul’s omission, “to do it.”
[1] A survey of Old Testament citations in Paul demonstrates that although Paul’s quotations do not follow a simple pattern (often the text is not reproduced exactly or the citation varies from the LXX or the MT or from both), the variation does not necessarily always import exegetical significance. Sometimes his variations can be explained by Targumic influence or rabbinic interpretive practice, at other times by his rationale of corporate solidarity, historical correspondence or eschatological fulfilment. However, Paul’s use of the Deuteronomy passage in Romans 10 is unique in that it reflects neither the LXX, nor the MT tradition, nor is it a simple extrapolation of the original contextual argument.
[2] S. Westerholm has noted that Paul carefully avoids the language of “doing” when speaking of the Christian’s relationship with the Law. S. Westerholm, Israel’s Law and the Church’s Faith: Paul and his Recent Interpreters (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988), 201-205.
[3] H. Hübner, Law in Paul’s Thought (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1984), 85-91. J. D. G. Dunn offers Zahn, Denney, and Barrett, as examples of scholars who do not believe that it was Paul’s intention to quote Deut 30:12-14 in Rom 10:6-8 in his Romans 9-16 (WBC 38B; Waco: Word Publishing, 1988), 603. Ernst Käsemann has a more extensive list of scholars who view this text as “a rhetorically constructed paraphrase of the OT text”, Commentary on Romans (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980), 284. For a survey of opinion prior to 1900 see H. A. W. Meyer, A Critical and Exegetical Handbook to the Epistle to the Romans (New York: Funk & Wagnalls, 1884), 406.
[4] R. N. Longenecker summarises their position in Biblical Exegesis in the Apostolic Period, (Paternoster Press, New –edition –Biblical & Theological Classics Library: Carlisle, U.K., 1995) , 121-122
[5] W. Sanday and A. C. Headlam, The Epistle to the Romans (5th edition; Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1902), 288.
[6] J. Munck, Christ & Israel: An Interpretation of Romans 9-11, (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1967), 41.
[7] J. Calvin, The Epistles of Paul the Apostle to the Romans and to the Thessalonians (trans. Ross Mackenzie; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1970), 225.
[8] Rom 10:5/Lev.18:5, Rom 10:6-8/ Deut 8:17+Deut 9:4+Deut 30:12-14+Ps 107:26. The text of Deut 30:14 itself is applied to Wisdom in Bar 3.29f; it is quoted four times by Philo in Post. 84f.; Mut. 236f.; Virt. 183; and Praem. 80.
[9] For a comprehensive discussion of these texts see Guy Waters, The End of Deuteronomy in the Epistles of Paul (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2006), 161-197.
[10] Guy Waters states “Of the three proposals surveyed, we have observed intriguing readings that are parallel in some respects to that of the apostle. No single proposal, however, has adequately demonstrated, to the exclusion of other possibilities, a single Jewish tradition of reading Deut 30 to which Paul was indebted”, The End of Deuteronomy, 176.
[11] The End of Deuteronomy, 163.
[12] Isa 28:16 (10.11) Isa 52:7(10.15) Isa 53:1(10.16) Isa 65:1(10.20) Isa 65:2(10.21); also Joel 2:32 (10.13) is from the same Sitz im Leben.
[13] J. R. Wagner, Heralds of the Good News: Isaiah and Paul “in Concert” in the Letter to the Romans, (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 2002), 147-148.
[14] Wagner comments, “In Isaiah 8 and 28-29, trust in God entails staking one’s life on God’s righteousness – God’s wisdom, power, and faithfulness – to rescue his people from the international crisis threatening to engulf them. The antithesis of such trust is to rely for protection on foreign rulers and their gods, whether the kings of Damascus and Samaria (8:6) or Pharaoh (28:15; 30:1-7; 31:1c-3). Israel’s misplaced trust stems from their inability to perceive God’s plans vis-à-vis Israel and the nations-that God is using these nations as a tool to discipline and ultimately to deliver his people”, Heralds of the Good News, 153.
[15] It is beyond the remit of this article to discuss the composition of Isaiah. The crux interpretum is the Cyrus problem, on which see A. Perry and P. Wyns, “Did Isaiah Mention Cyrus?” CeJBI 1/4, (2007). For background on reading Isaiah’s oracles solely within an eighth century context see A. Perry, “Babylon in Isaiah 13-14” CeJBI 1/1, (2007); “Isaiah 24-27” CeJBI 1/2, (2007); and “Babylon and Assyria” CeJBI 1/2, (2007); H. A. Whittaker, Isaiah (Biblia: Cannock, 1988); and G. Booker and H. A. Whittaker, Hezekiah the Great: The Songs of Degrees, (Birmingham: CMPA, 1985).
[16] “Who shall declare his generation? (Isa. 53:8)…..he shall see of the travail of his soul (his children) and shall be satisfied…” (Isa.53:11).
[17] The Joel prophecy is from the same period and relates the same event – Assyrian invasion and deliverance during Hezekiah’s reign, followed by an outpouring of the Spirit.
The Origin of the Organic World – Part One