Romans Overview

(Part of

Author: Mike Whitney

Created: Mar 30 2007

Note that I am not writing this article so as to guide new students of Romans. Such point should be stated since the approach here doesn't follow an exegetic format, though the concepts came only from the Book of Romans. The effort at hand concerns the desire to help some older students see an alternate explanation of the context of Romans. This article does not match the typical commentary on Romans.


Some people may read this in search of some logical flow to Romans. To those willing to examine this article, there may be a bit of discomfort in the reconsideration of ideas but should be studied to see if ideas make sense. An awareness of Paul's real purpose should help the context of Romans to be understood better. Consequently there would be produced better outlines though there may not be any radical shifts in doctrine.

The investigation into the purpose of Romans started in attempt to understand the context of Rom 10. Remember that chapter ten contains the words that many preachers have used in invitations to people unto salvation saying If you believe in your confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord and believe in your heart was raised from the dead you shall be saved (Rom 10:10). Yet Paul was not really writing to tell anyone how to become a Christian. Actually, as an experiment, try reading Rom 10 verses 1 to 13 and read so that verses 8 to 10 are treated in context of the broader passage. This is really a difficult task due to the tradition of focusing upon these words, plus verses 8 to 10 really do grab one's attention. Hint: the passage is about the failure for Jews to respond to the gospel.

Anyhow, the difficulty in figuring out the context of chapter ten led to the path to understand the whole context of Romans.

Purpose of Romans: An attempt to lead people to see the purpose

This analysis addresses the purpose for writing as presented in the first 11 chapters. The rest of the chapters of Romans are additional teachings and thoughts approached more in a business-like manner.

Students of the Bible need to come to a corrected understanding of Romans in order to understand the flow and meaning of Romans. Although many doctrines can be discovered without seeing this flow, elusive verses will come into light.

In the Book of Romans, Paul's motive can be ascertained. His approach can be discovered. This is a bit like anthropology or forensics where someone reconstructs the events and emotions by evaluating the evidence.

The effort here will be to trigger the paradigm shift needed to discover or affirm the purpose Paul had in writing the letter. Once this purpose and approach has been identified, no outline or purpose previously heard or read will seem sufficient. (Note that the other commentaries still may have useful observations on the verses in general, except for some verses that never were given any sense before.)

Two of the main purposes, regarding problems of racial tension and plans to reach Spaini, were essentially revealed in an article by Russell Walters, III, in 1988ii. It seemed like much study of Romans was made in the 80s and such gains are slow to make it to the commentaries. Though this shouldn't seem so odd after considering that Paul's epistles weren't read much until after the Reformation.

Yet even with the paradigm shift, the change of interpretation may not be drastic. There may even be hardly a few doctrines that will change. One must go down the untrodden path to see what may have been missed.

Nor should it be expected that everyone will see Romans in the clarified perspective. Since the intent of Romans remained a mystery for so long, many witnesses testify to the cryptic approach Paul used in writing this letter. This cryptic nature and the subsequent revealing doesn't indicate some sort of Gnostic revelation but only indicates the unusual circumstances and hopes of Paul's letter.

Paul's Purposes

The typical interpretation seems to say that Paul wrote just a bunch of doctrinal statements while at the same time the letter is treated as if he wrote to sinners at Rome. But Paul does not seem to be writing evangelism tracts. Instead Paul writes to correct problems among those in the Ecclesia. The normal goal of writers of books in the Bible was to correct problems among the people of God. Paul also was correcting problems through his letter to the Romans.

The specific goal of Paul is to address certain problems in the Roman Church such as:

  1. To address division between Jews and Gentiles in the Roman Church.

    a. Supported by Walter Russell's article.iii

    b. Suggested also by Paul's attempt to equalize Jew with Gentile:

    i. Rom 1:16 Jew first and Greek

    ii. Rom 2:9 Jew first and gentile

    iii. Rom 3:23 For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God.

    iv. Rom 4:10 shows that the same faith applies to Jew and Gentile since the promise of

    Abraham came before Circumcision. Rom 4:12 is better in equating those of
    circumcision with those of uncircumcision

    v. Rom 10:12 No difference between Jew and Greek

  2. To address the pride of the Romans showing the ideas in item 1, equalizing Jews with Gentile. Pride kept them separate vs 2:1 that turns their (the Gentile readers) excitement into sorrow

What Paul is not doing...

  1. Paul is not writing a letter to correct Jews roaming around the country. It is uncertain whether he is actually writing to Jews among the assembly of believers.

  2. He is not writing to judge Gentiles who are not believers

  3. So 2:1-12 does not seek to pronounce a judgment on Jews who don't assemble as believers. Nor could Paul be speaking a judgment against true believers because believers pass from judgment into eternal life. John 5:24

The purpose expressed above is not widely known and will require evidence and discussion. Proof of this purpose will now be presented.

Background and Argument for Purpose of Paul's Letter

The main focus to show Paul's purpose hinges on the discussion of Rom 2:1

Observations Surrounding Romans 2:1

Romans 2:1-2 (KJV)1 Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things. 2 But we are sure that the judgment of God is according to truth against them which commit such things.

The key starting point in this discussion (for it is expected that the student has previously become familiar with the flow and presentation of Romans) is with Rom 2:1. The verse becomes important because a significant change of mood occurs.

Psychological Occurrence

The reader here may encounter the same experience that the Romans had. In reading Rom 1:18-32 the reader today may be pulled into an emotional state. The emotions include an excited feeling for the power of the message and a judgmental attitude for the righteous condemnations being made.

Indeed the presentation has been used as a positive sermon to share in Sunday services. The ideas are properly shared as compact presentation of the destruction of sin when operating upon the inhabitants of a city or country.

The reason this can be seen as a positive sermon is that the message is written to condemn "others" rather than the readers. The use of "they" and "them" disassociate the readers from the condemnation being discussed. Readers will usually have some group of people in mind while reading the sermon of chapter 1.

The passage would merely be a good sermon were it not for the drastic change in Rom 2:1. The whole force of argument changes. There's a shift in mood that occurs with the shift in pronoun from "them" to "you."

Previous Failures in Understanding

Now some say that Rom 1:18-32 represents just a good message on righteousness and judgment. Such interpretation would match the mood that Paul intended to create, so there should be no embarrassment to those who have only read Paul's letter with this traditional interpretation.

The Matthew Henry commentary interestingly mentions that Rom 1:18-32 applies to the Gentiles. It is rather a curious action to simply assign the passage to the Gentiles, but there are reasons given and one of these reasons will be noted next. But was Henry using the same logic here or was it a mere assumption?

Other commentaries have shown a similarity of this writing to those of Jews who judged the Gentiles. This idea has substance. Indeed Paul could utilize the available cultural phenomena in his writing.

Here's material from Tercel on showing a similar passage in an extract from Wisdom of Sirach 13-14 (NRSV) [Wisdom of Sirach is one of the books classified as Apocrypha] :

"For all people who were ignorant of God were foolish by nature; and they were unable from the good things that are seen to know the one who exists, nor did they recognize the artisan while paying heed to his works. For from the greatness and beauty of created things comes a corresponding perception of their Creator. But miserable, with their hopes set on dead things, are those who give the name "gods" to the works of human hands, gold and silver fashioned with skill, and likenesses of animals, or a useless stone, the work of an ancient hand.

"For equally hateful to God are the ungodly and their ungodliness; for what was done will be punished together with the one who did it. For the idea of making idols was the beginning of fornication, and the invention of them was the corruption of life. Then it was not enough for them to err about the knowledge of God, but though living in great strife due to ignorance, they call such great evils peace. For whether they kill children in their initiations, or celebrate secret mysteries, or hold frenzied revels with strange customs, they no longer keep either their lives or their marriages pure, but they either treacherously kill one another, or grieve one another by adultery, and all is a raging riot of blood and murder, theft and deceit, corruption, faithlessness, tumult, perjury, confusion over what is good, forgetfulness of favors, defiling of souls, sexual perversion, disorder in marriages, adultery, and debauchery.

The first divergence from such commentaries would be to note that vs. 18-32 were not explicitly spoken (by the written context) against the Gentiles.

The Wisdom of Sirach passage is similar to Rom 1:18-32. And it is easy to then jump to the idea that Paul is judging the Gentiles or speaking of a judgment against the Gentiles. Yet the flow of the chapter does not provide a transition from Paul's friendly greeting into a judgment. [Note that the Tercel nicknamed user offers a decent explanation that would have had merit except that the context he provides doesn't carry through all the chapters. Also, Tercel's view, as much as was presented, lacks explanation for Paul's friendly greeting. Furthermore, there would have to be a shift in audience focus by moving from Chapter 1 speech to the Gentiles into Chapter 2 speech against the Jews. The shift may have an apparent basis in the change of mood but does not have support to show that the Jews were addressed in Rom 2:1.]

Paul mentions the Roman believer's faith in Rom 1:8. Then Paul seeks to impart a spiritual gift in vs. 11. (If vs. 15 were to say that Paul was writing to non-believers, such idea would be a ridiculous shift from the previous verses and it would be preposterous to think that Paul was just writing a letter to some unsaved group here.) The mood is positive.

Going on to vs 16-17 Paul speaks of the power of the Gospel. And no idea of judgment or condemnation is being spoken of the Gentile believers. Then vs. 18-32 present the 'sermon'. Nothing in the sermon shows a focus on the Gentiles nor does the sermon implicate the Jews explicitly. Nor does the natural reading seem to lead one into introspective contemplation.

And though, in light of the Sirach quote above, some argument could be made that this is speaking a judgment against the Gentiles, it seems that the Roman believers likewise could have taken the Jewish words and aimed them back at the Jews to judge or ridicule the Jews.

Therefore, in contrast to the suggestion that this implicates the Romans, the context actually seems to stimulate their self righteous zeal. Paul just kept moving from one positive thought of scripture to another positive thought (positive in the sense of the reader reading this as being the judge and not the condemned ones). Interestingly the same self-righteous zeal can be observed when Bible teachers teach on this passage today.

The twist of Rom 2:1

So Rom 2:1 either represents a twist by changing the topic from judging Gentiles to judging Jews or represents a twist by judging the Gentiles after making them think as judges of morality.

Whichever twist is observed, the observant readers have seen the shift in mood.

The change of mood hence requires a careful investigation into the purpose of the abruptness shown in Rom 2:1.

Romans 2:1-2 (KJV) Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things. 2 But we are sure that the judgment of God is according to truth against them which commit such things.

First note that the audience for 2:1 is the same as that for chapter 1. This can be observed by the use of 'therefore' and 'whosoever thou art.' It is then seen that the readers or audience were judging others. Indeed many verses in Romans would be understood differently if people figured out to whom the pronouns applied.

From the verse, one can ascertain that the audience still consists of the Roman believers.

And, again, the 'therefore' connects 2:1 with the 'sermon' just given. The Greek is also shown to mean 'for which cause' in which case the wording becomes, "for which cause you are inexcusable you who judge."

In the flow of the chapter 1, Paul would be saying that the Romans are aware of God's judgment of the unrighteous for which case the Romans too are inexcusable for their judgments.

[Now the guilt of the Roman believers may be referring mostly to the pre-Christian time of their individual lives, but the guilt may also apply to their current status in many ways. For example, the letter goes on to address the current problem of pride and boasting among the believers in Rome (which boasting is mentioned in Rom 1:30 and then reflected upon the believers in Rom 3:9,27).]

Explanation of Rom 2:1

The reason for the contrast from chapter 1 to chapter 2 apparently comes by the purposeful and artful attempt of Paul to get the attention of the readers. The excitement in 1:18-32 was intentional for the purpose of attracting the audience to the letter. Then 2:1 was to pour water on the fire and get the Roman believers to wake up to the issues Paul is addressing.

Paul's approach imitates the technique used by the prophet Nathan upon King David in the Bathsheba affair. (2Sam 12:1-9)

The audience may be the Gentile believers only or for both Gentile and Jew. No narrowing or selection of the ethnicities had been made yet. The broad discussion would suggest the letter is for Gentiles only.

Paul, therefore, has been shown to be talking to Gentile( and probably Jewish) believers and now was admonishing the believers for their judgmental attitudes. The context then has to be examined in light of the judgmental attitude being held by the believers.

Effects of Rom 2:1 on understanding of the context...

Now consider, as a shortcut to understanding the context and how it was determined. Paul was writing a letter to a group he never visited. So Paul was rebuking people who never met him. The letter then involved subtleties to entice the Roman audience to read something that they very likely would resist if not written carefully.

The first 11 chapters are part of this specially prepared argument. Then chapter 1 is the enticement. Rom 2:1 is the trap. Paul probably wrote the epistle in this fashion due to a possible failure to change the Galatians by writing to them.

The development that shows Paul's approach

The approach Paul took were so carefully planned that people have missed Paul's technique. Many preparations and arguments must be done in writing in order to help people see the purpose. Then, once people see the purpose and technique, the commentaries on Romans will seem incomplete where the subtlety of Paul's argument is not discussed.

So, though the approach of this writing seems backward and contrived at the beginning. Hindsight will vindicate the approach.

These are some highlights from the text of Romans...

Each of the following statements should be seen as being the view of the Roman believers that Paul was now putting into a question. So if Paul asks "But are the Jews disadvantaged?" we can understand that the Roman believers had the view that it was a handicap or problem being a Jew.

Issues held among the Romans were apparently inverted into questions by Paul in order to make an argument toward reconciliation.

The issues shown in Romans 3 are typical of a rivalry between a big brother and little brother. Such rivalry is seen between Jacob(Israel) and Esau and also is seen in LUke 15:11-31. Luke 15 shows the young son getting the fattened calf and the older brother getting jealous, which is not predicative of Romans 3 but is just similar.

The rivalry is increased where animosity exists. If the little brother succeeds instead of the big brother, the big brother (the temple Jewish sects) gets jealous and picks on the little brother. Then the little brother finds things to speak against the bigger brother (i.e., the Law of Moses in this situation).

Not much really needs to be said about the dynamics of sibling rivalry since it is documented in scripture and across probably every culture. And this rivalry appears within the text of the letter to the Romans.

The question in Rom 3:1 shouldn't arise unless there is a probability that the readers would think there is no advantage to being a Jew. Such thought could simply arise out of the ideas of the previous chapter or could be biases and issues existing beforehand. (Some studies have shown this existing trouble between Jews and Greeks. The Wisdom of Sirach shows a likely mood that propogated this trouble.)

But they would likely arise in situation of tension between Greek and Jew. So more strength is given to the idea that Paul is addressing an actual problem.

By referring to the adjoining copy of Romans 1 to 15 with colorized text. Colorized text, the progression will become apparent. The colored text is loosely applied to terms and discussions associated with Jews. Even "Christ Jesus" and "Apostle" are highlighted to show the Jewishness implied. But it would take deeper consideration to see if Paul was highlighting any Jewishness in these terms. And "Adam" isn't highlighted cause he is more of just the common heritage of mankind, yet potentially the word "Adam" could be treated as Jewish since it comes through their scriptures, but all the scriptural ideas are Jewish then.

Verify or consider the following observations to see whether these truly point to Paul's manner and method:

  1. statements in the beginning are more hostile to Jews

  2. statements in the end then become very merciful and focused upon Jews

  3. some chapters focus less on the Jews. This is cause Paul addresses other issues about the Roman believers.

  4. Verses show likely hostility by Jews against the Gentiles

    a) There were accusations made. see Rom 3:7-8. Most likely the Jews were slandering Paul and the Roman Gentile believers.

    b) So Gentiles made accusations back saying the Jews are evil cause they are holding to the law and Gentiles said that God rejected His people

    c) The judgmental statements in Rom 2 that seems to cater to the mood of the Gentile believers. Paul is putting words in their mouths that they would actually say or would feel comfortable saying. There are accusations in Rom 2:27-29 yet the readers of the letter don't seem to be Jews

    d) Rom 8 hints at some persecution. This persecution could be from governments, Gentiles or Jews. The emphasis on Jews in the letter suggests that the issue is with the Jews.

    vs 18 "the sufferings of this present time"

    vs 28 "all things work together for good"

    vs 31 "if God is with us who can be against us?"

    vs 33 "who can bring a charge against God's elect?"

    vs 36 "For your sake we are killed all day long. We were accounted as sheep for the slaughter."

    Romans 8 then is really the chapter to show the prosecution that was occurring.

    e) Rom 5:3 mentions tribulation. Paul gives them a framework to stay strong throughout the time of tribulation

  5. Earliest chapters talk about "Jews" while chapter 11 is replete with additional Jewish designations. Paul finally admits to many aspects of his Jewish heritage. This shows an anticipation by Paul that benevolent mention of "Jews" would be repugnant to the Gentile believers unless Paul worked on their hearts gradually.

  6. Paul is doing kind of a cultural exchange. He is writing to make his Jewishness more acceptable. But this isn't for the glorification of Jews but actually may be for the purpose of helping reach out to Jews simply by the reduction of hostility of the Gentile believers.

  7. Chapter 12 shows a regrouping and change of mood, especially after the "Amen" at the end of chapter 11. Paul seemed to have finished his subtle argument and now wants to simply mention concerns.

The Potential Scenario for the writing of Romans

Paul's letter to the Romans can be considered as a letter written subsequent to Galatians and hence may reflect tactical changes in his approach. The letter to the Galatians possibly was a failure due to the direct approach Paul took in writing to them

Did the letter to the Galatians succeed?

This thought is made with the intent of coming from Paul's perspective. Did he convince the direct readers to change?

There probably was not the proper conversion of the Galatian's hearts to Paul's expectation. The Galatians probably failed to respond even from the first signs after Paul wrote the letter.

Therefore Paul wrote more carefully to the Romans, so carefully that the Romans's may not have known they were being rebuked. The letter was so subtle that readers over the millennia haven't realized the rebuke.

Overview of Romans

The overview analysis of Romans should be presented after the analysis in order to summarize the analysis.

Paul really wrote an amazing letter both in the doctrine and in the presentation.

The transitions draw the reader into new issues without an awareness that a new issue is being addressed. At the same time, the new issues usually represent an additional argument for the previous problem Paul is trying to fix.

The Progression of Paul's Psychological Approach

A) Flattery or speaking the selective truth. Rom 1:1-15

B) Speaking on Common Ground. Praise for the gospel. Rom 1:16-17

C) A great sermon for the attraction of the Gentile Roman believers Rom 1:18-32

D) The rebuke to the Roman believers Rom 2:1-8 (The audience is believers)

E) Equalization of Jew and Greek Rom 2:9-16

F) A rebuke of Jews Rom 2:17-29

G) Answers to the issues raised by (or inferred as issues among) the non-Jewish believers. Rom 3:1-20

It is interesting that Paul says in vs.20 that works of the Law no flesh will be justified.

This is one of the accusations against the Jews, i.e. that they were in the law and not justified.

A Second View of Paul's Psychological Approach

Additional details are provided in this section to show the flow and approach of Paul. These notes should be updated to clarify the important issues. Disregard this section if not helpful.

Ch 1) Jews are hardly mentioned

1:1-7 shows indirect mention of Jews by mentioning in a cursory fashion about prophets, apostles who were from among Jews,and of king David, yet the focus is on gentiles.

Then verses 1:8-15 focuses on Gentiles and Barbarians

1:16-17 mentions salvation to the Jews first

1:18-32 speaks a judgmental sermon against an unspecified "them"

Ch 2) [Paul is harsh against Jews]

2:1-16 A rebuke is made against the main readers/hearers of the letter

2:17-27 a rebuke is made specifically against Jews

28-29 Still rebukes Jews who are not of the circumcision of the heart

[vs 28 shows that the letter isn't written to Jews but to Gentile Roman believers.]

Ch 3) Complaints or issues regarding Jews are addressed

[Paul brings up a question in 3:1 that at first glance could be negative or positive. He goes with positive]

3:1 Romans felt there was a disadvantage to being Jewish

3:3-4 The Roman believers denigrated the Jews for their unfaithfulness

3:5-8 The romans are saying the Jews really are the evil ones when they call the believers evil.

vs 7-8 show "their" accusations. vs 9 then says "are we better than them"?

which shows the "their" and "them" of both statements are the same.

3:9-18 The Romans were saying the Gentiles/Greeks were better than the Jews

3:19-23 Paul equalizes Jew to Gentile.

3:24-26 goes on to emphasize the importance of "faith", even as an equalizer between Jew and Greek

3:27-30 The Romans probably saw the Jews as boasters.

A couple ideas arise on this issue.

1)Paul may be, for sake of his argument technique, be pointing fingers at the boasting of Jews in the law, when actually trying to point to the boasting of the Romans

2) Or Paul is speaking directly against the Roman's boasting.

Though 3:27-30 seems to be direct to the Gentiles since the issue of faith arises.

[vs 29 is saying that if faith operated as part of the law, it would only apply to Jews, since the law was only given to them ]

vs 31 shows that the Gentiles thought the Jews were worse off cause of the obligation of the law. The Gentile Romans saw the law, properly, as a burden; this was in contrast to the Galatians who were attracted to the letter of the law. (gal 4-5). The Gentiles were boasting that the law was nullified and was inferior. So Paul gives some substance and weight to the law.

Ch 4)

Paul now goes into a positive discussion of Abraham. Abraham is an ancient figure who does not draw such ridicule as the current Jews were drawing by their own condemnations of the Gentile believers. So Paul is trying to talk about a specific Jewish man about whom the Romans would be willing to recognize or accept.

Ch 9)

Paul now feels he has brought the Roman readers to acceptance of the Jews. So Paul expresses sympathy for the Jews. Paul sought to lead the Romans to a level of sympathy.

See? in verse 3 Paul said he wished himself accursed if it would help his fellow Jew.

vs 1-3 shows his heart for his fellow Jew

vs 4-5 shows that they are the natural recipient of benefits, and people to whom the promises were given. Paul is talking positively about Jews now.

vs 6-13 but the promises were given actually to a subset of the Israelites

So Paul is:

  1. Justifying the Jews as being no more evil than Gentiles 9:1-13

  2. saying God is faithful.

Paul is balancing out the idea of few Jews being saved by showing that God is always righteous, lest the Romans think God is rejecting His people.

[ vs 14 seems that Paul, this time, is anticipating a question rather than inverting the Roman's standpoint into a question. So, my analysis of Rom 3:1 was to say that the Roman's view was inverted into a question.]

Ch 10)

Now Paul is speaking positively of the Jews. And he is showing how God has been reaching to the Jews.

One of the approaches is through jealousy (10:19). [Verse 10:18 "didn't they all hear" shows that the discussion is still about the Jews. This reaffirms the topic of Israel getting saved in 10:1-2]

vs 21 emphasizes God's persevering mercy (and is not doing the quote so much to emphasize the disobedience, i think)

Ch 11)

vs 1 shows Paul affirming all sorts of Jewish heritage. This is very significant in light of the accusatory tone started in chapter 2.


Note that the title "Christ" has been put in red since "Christ" is a Jewish term and should have even been a subtle part of Paul's argument to accept the Jews.


Paul brings up the issue of the Roman's boasting. 3:27-31

A couple ideas arise on this issue.

1)Paul may be, for sake of his argument technique, be pointing fingers at the boasting of Jews in the law, when actually trying to point to the boasting of the Romans

  1. Or Paul is speaking directly against the Roman's boasting.


Unless otherwise noted, bible quotes are from the KJV as provided in the software --not --which is just a useless site.

Displaced Notes may be deleted

3:1 Roman position: Jews were disadvantaged for falling away from faith

3:3 Roman position: Jews disbelief nullified God's work to bring them to faith

3:5 --unsure but vs 5-6 is showing God is righteous

{This may be saying that the Romans or Jewish believers were justifying their sin by saying that God is now obligated to forgive them and hence that that forgiveness is righteous, cause of the promise.}

3:7-8 It seems that Jews were saying acknowledging that more people were

giving glory to God in this preaching of the resurrection, but they were saying it was through lies

about the cross

3:9 Romans saying they are better than Jews

3:10-18 Paul equalizes by quoting a bunch of Psalm verses which he uses also to transition to the law. These Psalms testify against the Jews, but Paul uses it also against the Gentiles.

3:19-20 speak on the law. This is to get an important point in (about no flesh being justified by the law)and to give a contrast to righteousness.

Footnotes and Bibliography are shown below.

Version 1.1 Sep 24 2007 minor revisions

Common Law Copyright 2007 by Michael Whitney. All rights reserved.

i)The idea of evangelizing Spain will not receive much attention because Romans chapters 1 through 11 don't speak much on this. The main goal is to show the flow of Paul's presentation.

ii)Russell, Walter B., III. "An alternative suggestion for the purpose of Romans." Bibliotheca Sacra, 145 (April, 1988), 174-184.

iii) ibid.

website: 13