Abstract
This reading of Romans 1.19–20 suggests that, viewed within the argumentative progression of the letter from 1.18–3.20, these verses are properly understood as a subversion of the premises of natural revelation, rather than an endorsement of them. The traditional account of Paul's argument, in which 1.19–20 announces a theology of natural knowledge of God, is contradicted both by Paul's wider theological commitments and by his attitude to the privileges of Judaism. An alternative construal of the argument considers it as an ad hominem strategy, in which the opening verses serve to recapitulate at the beginning of the argument the presuppositions that Paul seeks ultimately to overthrow.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
