[Full title: On the Glory That Is Indefinitely Deferred: A Reading of Romans
8:18-25]
18 I consider that the
sufferings of this present time are not worth comparing with the glory about to
be revealed to us. 19 For the creation waits with eager longing for
the revealing of the children of God; 20 for the creation was
subjected to futility, not of its own will but by the will of the one who
subjected it, 21 in hope that the creation itself will be set free
from its bondage to decay and will obtain the freedom of the glory of the
children of God. 22 We know that the whole creation has been groaning
in labor pains until now; 23 and not only the creation, but we
ourselves, who have the first fruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly while we
wait for adoption, the redemption of our bodies. 24 For in hope we
were saved. Now hope that is seen is not hope. For who hopes for what is seen? 25
But if we hope for what we do not see, we wait for it with patience.
(NRSV)
I.
Introduction
Though James D. G. Dunn unequivocally refers to Rom 8:18ff
as the “climax” of the first eight chapters of Romans,[i]
the various attempts of scholars and biblical critics to arrive at an
interpretive consensus have been largely ill-fated and unsatisfying. Olle
Christofferson, in one of the few published monographs on this passage, lists
several significant reasons why this particular passage has remained
inscrutable: the unusual vocabulary, the stylistic incongruity and unclear
relationship to the argument of the rest of the letter, and the debated
religious background or source of the passage.[ii]
This essay does not attempt to solve definitively any of the problems of this
passage but rather will attempt to focus on dimensions of the text that I feel
other biblical scholars have missed of insufficiently examined.
Modern interpretations have tended toward recourse to the
theological rather than political dimensions of Paul’s thought.[iii]
My reading, however, more or less dispenses with a theological rendering of
Paul’s intention, though I recognize that Paul’s theology of the eschaton is
important, and focuses on the startling social, political, and ecological
implications of this passage in order to unlock some alternative meanings and
readings. My reading of this passage is based on three arguments. First, I
argue, against interpreters who see the passage as an unrelated digression,
that this passage is intimately connected to the rest of the epistle, and it is
integral to the understanding of the unfolding of Paul’s major argument
regarding the relationship between Jewish and non-Jewish Christians. Second, I
argue that Paul consciously or unconsciously evokes Jewish narratives and
motifs about creation and the natural world as a mode of counter-hegemonic
resistance to the Roman imperial order and as a covert, perhaps even
unintentional, challenge to sovereign power. Third, I argue that while on the
surface the passage appears to offer comfort and consolation, Paul also
exploits the destabilizing effects of his (realized) eschatology to
indefinitely defer the resolution of the tensions experienced by the churches
in Rome. The radical potential of this passage is built into its structure and
movement, which I will demonstrate over the course of my analysis and in a more
open concluding reflection that considers the meaning of the passage today in
the context of leftist politics. However, I will begin with a brief
investigation into the historical and literary contexts of Paul’s letter.
[i] James D. G. Dunn, “Spirit Speech: Reflections on
Romans 8:12-27,” in Romans and the People
of God: Essays in Honor of Gordon D. Fee on the Occasion of His 65th Birthday,
Sven K. Soderland and N. T. Wright (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1999),
90.
[ii] The Earnest
Expectation of the Creature: The Flood-Tradition as Matrix of Romans 8:18-27
(Stockholm: Almqvist and Wiksell, 1990), 14.
[iii] C. K. Barrett, for example, focuses on how the
passage offers consolation and encouragement. See A Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans (New York, Evanston, and
London: Harper and Row, 1957), 165. Ben Witherington III, in Paul’s Letter to the Romans: A
Socio-Rhetorical Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 2004), 221,
similarly argues, “What needs to be appreciated about 8.18-39 is that it
reveals one of the most masterful dimensions of Paul’s theology.”
