Gaffin's exegesis of Romans 1:3-4, location?

[RamistThomist]

This summer I was listening to a WTS ItunesU episode where Prof Gaffin gave a different exegesis of Romans 1 than usually found in the textbooks, suggesting that it shouldn't be read in a neat and tidy two natures proof text. Does anyone know if he has made this in print?

 

[Grafted In]

Jacob,

You will find what you are looking for in Gaffin's book Resurrection and Redemption. It is a very good book!

 

[py3ak]

This isn't Gaffin, but D. Patrick Ramsey posted an exposition of Romans 1:1-7 on his blog today: he does not take vv.3,4 to refer to the humanity and divinity of Christ, but to his humiliation and exaltation.
The Gospel According to Romans 1:1-7 | Patrick’s Pensees

 

[MarieP]

Jacob,

You will find what you are looking for in Gaffin's book Resurrection and Redemption. It is a very good book!

That's one of the books on my "to read soon" shelf! Hope to read it in the coming weeks!

 

[RamistThomist]

This isn't Gaffin, but D. Patrick Ramsey posted an exposition of Romans 1:1-7 on his blog today: he does not take vv.3,4 to refer to the humanity and divinity of Christ, but to his humiliation and exaltation.
The Gospel According to Romans 1:1-7 | Patrick’s Pensees

Thanks. That's sort of Gaffin's interpretation, if I recall correctly.

 

[MW]

I don't see anything amiss with the eschatological perspective unless it becomes detached from the older Christological perspective. What is humiliation if the divine did not humble Himself to become man? and what is exaltation if the man was not exalted to the dignity of the divine? In order for the humiliation-exaltation to function properly it must be based on the divinity assuming humanity and the humanity's union with divinity.

 

[Alan D. Strange]

I just saw this thread. Thanks, Jeff S., for the good recommendation (in #2, above). I second it. Resurrection and Redemption is a great volume.

And Gaffin does, though some seem to miss it, keep together the Christological (theological) and eschatological (redemptive-historical) perspectives quite nicely, which is, as Matthew notes, imperative.

Peace,
Alan