William Campbell’s Romans– The Dialogue Part Four

Last updated on: May 25, 2023 at 1:40 am by Ben Witherington

William Campbell’s Romans– The Dialogue Part Four 2023-05-17T12:54:18-04:00 Ben Witherington

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Q. In a helpful summary towards the close of your book on p. 395 you say this “This identity, to include the people of Israel both prior to and after the Christ-event, must be a superordinate identity not under Christ but under the God of Israel. As each together [ i.e. Israel on the one hand and Gentile Christ followers on the other}, but differently, glorify the God of Israel, his glory will be more fully expressed…..”

Now the problem with this from my point of view is this is not Paul’s view in any of his letters, not even in Romans though I think the best case for this view can be made using Romans. My view would be that ‘being in Christ’ whether Jew or Gentile is the superordinate identity, and it will ultimately be fully manifested when Christ returns and ‘turns away the impiety of Jacob in the same manner as happened with Gentiles, namely by the mercy and grace of God through faith in Christ.” This is precisely what Paul envisions eschatologically not only in Rom. 11, but also in Phil. 2 when he says that God has given Christ the name which is above every name (namely the name by which God is called in the LXX—Kurios) such that every knee will bow, not just the Gentiles and every tongue confess whether in heaven on earth or under the earth that Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father. This breath-taking vision is where Paul sees things heading. It is this superordinate identity that Paul is promoting when he talks about ‘being in Christ’ (a phrase used over 50 times in the capital Paulines) and it is this superordinate identity that comports with Gal. 3.28 when he says in Christ there is neither Jew nor Gentile but all are one. How would you respond to this view of the superordinate identity Paul envisions?

A. I would like to focus here on the question whether being in Christ is itself a superordinate identity. First of all, it is important to keep in mind that Paul in addressing non-Jews in Christ in Romans is clarifying specifically for them what this means. I do not deny that being in Christ has relevance for both Jews and non-Jews in Romans. However, for non-Jews being in Christ is the only way according to Paul to belong fully to the one God. This means that being in Christ is a sub-group identity under a wider umbrella – the superordinate identity as people belonging to God, that is as also God’s people. Jews, that is, the people Israel, whether in Christ or not are and remain God’s beloved, that is, they are and remain God’s people, to whom now also those from the nations are added as an associate people. If ‘in Christ’ were the superordinate identity, this would exclude those Jews who are not convinced of the arrival of messianic time (the majority of the people Israel), rendering them equivalent to gentiles. Paul nowhere indicates anything like this. It is clear to Paul that the majority of his own people are not convinced of his message about Christ, but he still sees them as called and beloved, that is, within the ongoing purpose of God, which now includes both those Jews and gentiles who are in Christ, along with the Jewish people. A superordinate identity must overarch all those sub-group identities concerned, in this case Jews, whether in Christ or not, and gentiles in Christ. Jews, and Jewish and gentile Christ followers shared their belonging to the one God, in distinction from the majority societies which worshipped numerous deities. This is why belonging to God is the superordinate category, with ‘in Christ’ being one of the sub-categories, which Jews and gentiles share in their difference. I called this superordinate identity a doxological identity, because it is open to what is to come in God’s purpose and does not close the door for the future of the people Israel.

The virtue of the concept of superordinate identity is that it cannot displace that which it overarches otherwise it threatens the very unity it is intended to promote, and produces a reaction that intensifies the primary identity (as Jew or gentile)in a negative fashion. It is now recognized also that `though a superordinate or common identity contributes to the reduction or overcoming of intergroup tensions, this cannot happen at the expense or relativizing of the respective subgroup identities. The primary identifications, e.g. as Jews and gentiles, need to be recognized, valued and retained as part of the superordinate aspect. Thus ongoing diversity and difference are at the center of superordinate identity.

So if ‘in Christ’ identity is valued as a sub-group identity in the sense mentioned above, it must be also recognized as no threat to the continuance of being of a particular identity, the two can co-exist in mutual enhancement and correction. It is a false dichotomy to view being in Christ as being anti-ethnic, or as constituting a threat to existing identity whatever that may be. ‘In Christ’ identity in my perspective can operate meaningfully only as a way of enhancing whilst not threatening existing social identities. Thus being ‘in Christ’ cannot be regarded as a new ethnic group of one and the same identity, but a diverse group of people of differing identities united in a common belonging to Christ.

I note that you do speak of being in Christ , whether Jew or gentile, as a superordinate identity which will ultimately be manifested “when Christ returns”( and which must also have some inclusion of Jews in whatever capacity and numbers). As noted, I prefer to call belonging to God a doxological identity`. This terminology takes account of the future aspect of identity as indicating not only where we have come from, but more importantly for Christian faith, where we are heading. Doxological comes from the GK word doxa meaning glory, and all those serving God ‘in Christ’ are by definition headed for glory, and so living out and expressing a doxological identity. But such doxological identity is also ’not yet’. Already we are trusting in Christ and following him via the cross to glory, but we are still sinful people living in an as yet unredeemed creation. So I cannot agree to view “in Christ identity” as a self-standing superordinate identity as if it were an already fully actualized identity. The overarching or superordinate identity also in this scenario is belonging to God. If in your view ‘in Christ’ identity will only be fully manifested when Christ returns, then to be ‘in Christ’ is not as yet a fully realized identity. But my most significant point of disagreement is that I do not envisage a removal or cessation of ethnic identity to be typical of the age to come. If Christians perceive to be like Christ as our envisaged future identity, this does not mean we will all become identical in ethnic terms. It cannot be, otherwise we ought all to become Jewish, just as Jesus was born a Jew. To become like Christ means to be like him in holiness and character, but not necessarily like him in ethnic terms. If this were so, ethnicity would disappear, but so would the universal claim of the gospel as being for, or applying to, everyone.

I realize that as a result of what I have written above that a presupposition of my argument is that Romans 10.12 should be translated as ‘for there is no discrimination (with God) of Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, generous to all who call on him’ rather than ‘for there is not distinction between Jew and Greek’ (NRSV). Note that the main difference between these translations is that in the one the Greek term diastole is translated as distinction whereas I translate it as discrimination. The key point is not that God does not make any distinction between peoples, but that he does not discriminate against them in their abiding difference as Jew or Greek. The verb diastellein in the LXX is used about people or animals being separated sometimes for specific purposes.4 The focus is on distinguishing between people allocating them to particular categories rather than on the nature of the people themselves. What Paul is saying is that God does not put Jew and Greek in Christ into different categories as far as belonging to him is concerned. Though he distinguishes and differentiates between them, he does not discriminate against either. Thus to conclude, based on a translation of diastole as distinction rather than discrimination, that all are the same in Christ and ethnic categories are obliterated is not warranted (Commentary, 280-82).

4. For a detailed discussion see my book, The Nations in the Divine Economy: Paul’s Covenantal Hermeneutics and Participation in Christ, Lexington/Fortress Academic, Maryland 2018,129-52.

History and Religion

Education and Religion

Uncategorized

Is the super-ordinate identity being in God rather than being in Christ?

What does being in Christ mean?

Previous Post

May 24, 2023

William Campbell's Romans-- The Dialogue Part Three

Next Post

May 26, 2023 William Campbell's Romans-- The Dialogue Part Five

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Uncategorized

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz