Last Friday I tweeted this thought (with some typos). I think Romans is best understood if interpreted in a series of loops:

5:12-21 interprets 1:18-31

6:1-8:1 interprets 2:1-3:31

8:2-11:36 interprets 4:1-5:11 (with a small connection between 5:1-12 and 8:18-39)

12:1-16:27 interprets 6:1-8:1 (maybe 1:18-31 and 5:12-21 as well)

What do you think of reading Romans with these looping arguments in mind? Does passage 2 explain passage 1? Can you see key words and concepts, thematic connections, and the unfolding process?

Advertisements