^{page 364 note 1} Dahl, N. A., ‘The Particularity of the Pauline Epistles as a Problem in the Ancient Church’, Neotestamentica et Patristica (Leiden, 1962) 261–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

^{page 365 note 1} This danger applies as well to Meeks, W., The First Urban ChristiansGoogle Scholar, because – although he clarifies the social determinants of Paul's gospel – the precise relation between the social utility of Paul's symbols and the truth of the gospel remains unclear; cf. also N. Petersen's attempt to integrate Paul's several symbolic worlds. (Petersen, N., Rediscovering Paul. Philemon and the Sociology of Paul's Narrative World [Philadelphia, 1985].)Google Scholar

^{page 365 note 2} Deissmann, G. A., Paul: A Study in Social and Religious History (London, 1926).Google Scholar

^{page 365 note 3} Sanders, E. P., Paul, , The Law and the Jewish People (Philadelphia, 1983).Google Scholar

^{page 365 note 4} Räisänen, H., Paul and the Law (Helsinki, 1983).Google Scholar

^{page 366 note 1} Dodd, C. H., The Meaning of Paul for Today (New York, 1920).Google Scholar

^{page 366 note 2} Cerfaux, L., L'Itinéraire Spirituel de Saint Paul (Paris, 1966).Google Scholar

^{page 366 note 3} Buck, C. H. and Taylor, G., Saint Paul. A Study of the Development of His Thought (New York, 1969).Google Scholar

^{page 366 note 4} Bruce, F. F., Paul, Apostle of the Heart Set Free (Exeter, 1977).Google Scholar

^{page 366 note 5} Lüdemann, G., Paulus, der Heidenapostel. I: Studien zur Chronologie (Göttingen, 1980).Google Scholar

^{page 366 note 6} Schnelle, U., ‘Der erste Thessalonicherbrief und die Entstehung der paulinischen Anthropologie’, NTS 32 (1986) 207–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

^{page 366 note 7} Wiefel, W., ‘Die Hauptrichtung des Wandels im eschatologischen Denken des Paulus’, Th.Z. 30 (1974) 65–81.Google Scholar

^{page 366 note 8} Hübner, H., Das Gesetz bei Paulus. Ein Beitrag zum Werden der paulinischen Theologie (Göttingen, 1978).Google Scholar

^{page 366 note 9} Drane, J. W., Paul, Libertine or Legalist? A Study in the Theology of the Major Pauline Epistles (London, 1975).Google Scholar

^{page 367 note 1} Furnish, V. P., ‘Development in Paul's Thought’, JAAR 38 (1970) 289–303.Google Scholar

^{page 367 note 2} Lowe, J., ‘An Examination of Attempts to Detect Developments in St. Paul's Theology’, JTS 42 (1941) 129–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

^{page 367 note 3} Conzelmann, H./Lindemann, A., Grundriss der Theologie des Neuen Testaments (Tübingen, 1987) 176–7.Google Scholar

^{page 367 note 4} Theissen, G. has a different focus in mind (Psychologische Aspekte paulinischer Theologie [Göttingen, 1983]).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

^{page 369 note 1} Schweitzer, A., The Mysticism of Paul the Apostle (New York, 1931).Google Scholar

^{page 369 note 2} Lüdemann, H., Die Anthropologie des Apostels Paulus und ihre Stellung innerhalb seiner Heilslehre (Kiel, 1872).Google Scholar

^{page 369 note 3} Boers, H., ‘Proposal SBL Meeting’ (Atlanta, 1986) 2.Google Scholar

^{page 370 note 1} Hübner, H., ‘Methodologie und Theologie. Zu neuen methodischen Ansätzen in der Paulusforschung’, KuD 33 (1987) 150–75.Google Scholar

^{page 371 note 1} Cf. Donfned, K. P., ed., The Romans-Debate (Minneapolis, 1977).Google Scholar

^{page 372 note 1} O'Neill, J., The Epistle to the Romans (London, 1975).Google Scholar

^{page 372 note 2} Schmithals, W., Der Römerbrief als historisches Problem (Gütersloh, 1975).Google Scholar

^{page 372 note 3} Keck, L. E., ‘The Post-Pauline Interpretation of Jesus’ Death in Rom. 5,6–7’ in Theologie Crucis – Signum Crucis (Dinkler-Festschrift, Tübingen, 1979) 237–48.Google Scholar

^{page 372 note 4} Lütgert, W., Gesetz und Geist. Eine Untersuchung zur Vorgeschichte des Galaterbriefes (Gütersloh, 1919).Google Scholar

^{page 375 note 1} Cf. in this context Rom 4. 17: ‘in the presence of the God, in whom he (Abraham) believed, who gives life to the dead and calls into existence the things that do not exist’.

^{page 376 note 1} Time and space forbid me to show the relation of chs. 12–15 (the most contingent chapters of Rom!) to the coherent flow of the argument.

^{page 376 note 2} The twin motifs of apocalyptic glory (ch. 15) and church-unity constitute also the coherent motifs of 1 Cor, albeit under quite different contingent circumstances.

^{page 377 note 1} Notwithstanding my emphasis on the contingent situation of the Roman church, it is clear that, because of Paul's own contingency (the experiences of his missionary career), Paul's letter not only applies to Rome, but also transcends the Roman contingency. For his argument has ecumenical validity and has, besides Rome, Spain and Jerusalem in mind. In this respect Bornkamm's characterization of Rom as ‘Paul's last will and testament’ is valid. (Cf. Bornkamm, G., ‘The Letter to the Romans as Paul's Last Will and Testament’, Australian Biblical Review 11 [1963] 2–14.)Google Scholar