by Simon Yap
One of the most common modern interpretations of Romans goes like this:
Romans 1 is supposedly about non-Jewish Gentiles.
Romans 2 is supposedly about Jews.
Romans 3 then concludes “all have sinned,” meaning every human being who ever lived.
Therefore Romans 5 teaches that Adam’s sin infected the entire human race.
That chain of reasoning is repeated endlessly in churches, sermons, and theology books. But it becomes much harder to sustain once Romans is read within its Second Temple Jewish context rather than through later Latin theological systems.
Paul was not writing a modern systematic theology textbook about every human being on earth. He was addressing the fractured covenant story of Israel — especially the long-standing division between the northern kingdom and Judah.
New Testament scholar N. T. Wright repeatedly argues that Paul’s letters are fundamentally rooted in Israel’s covenant narrative, exile, and restoration hopes rather than abstract universal philosophy.^1 Likewise, James D. G. Dunn notes that Romans must be understood through Jewish covenant categories, especially the question of who belongs to the people of God.^2
Romans 1 is not describing modern Europeans, Asians, or Africans in general. Paul is drawing heavily from Israel’s own Scriptures and covenant failures.
Look carefully at Romans 1:23–25:
“They exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things.”
That language strongly echoes Israel’s golden calf traditions.
Psalm 106:19–20 says:
“They made a calf in Horeb and worshiped a metal image. They exchanged the glory of God for the image of an ox that eats grass.”
Notice the parallel phrase:
“exchanged the glory.”
Paul is echoing Israel’s Scriptures, not inventing a doctrine of universal anthropology.
Romans 1:26–27 speaks of dishonorable passions and corruption. Yet throughout the Hebrew Bible, Israel’s apostasy is repeatedly portrayed through imagery of prostitution, adultery, and sexual unfaithfulness.
Hosea 4:12 says:
“A spirit of whoredom has led them astray.”
Ezekiel 23 portrays Samaria and Jerusalem as corrupt sisters engaging in spiritual prostitution. Walter Brueggemann notes that prophetic literature regularly used sexualized imagery to describe Israel’s covenant violations.^3
Romans 1:28 further says they were “given over to a debased mind.”
Again, this language mirrors Old Testament covenant judgment language directed at Israel:
Psalm 81:12:
“So I gave them over to their stubborn hearts.”
The phraseology is covenantal and judicial.
Even more importantly, Paul frequently refers not merely to “Gentiles” in the abstract modern sense, but to “Greeks.”
Romans 1:16:
“To the Jew first and also to the Greek.”
Why Greeks?
Because large portions of dispersed Israelites had been Hellenized throughout the diaspora after the Assyrian conquest of the northern kingdom. Scholars such as Shaye J. D. Cohen and John J. Collins discuss the extensive Hellenization of diaspora Jewish populations during the Second Temple period.^4
This background helps explain passages like John 7:35:
“Does he intend to go to the Dispersion among the Greeks and teach the Greeks?”
Notice the connection:
the Dispersion among the Greeks.
Joel 3:6 similarly states:
“You sold the people of Judah and Jerusalem to the Greeks.”
The biblical world was full of scattered Israelites living among Greek-speaking populations.
Romans therefore makes much more sense when read against the backdrop of Israel’s divided history:
Judah and dispersed Israel,
southern kingdom and northern kingdom,
circumcision and assimilated diaspora.
Romans 2 then turns toward “the Jew.” But historically, “Jew” often referred specifically to those associated with Judah and the southern kingdom after the exile.
The Hebrew Bible itself constantly distinguishes:
Israel and Judah,
Ephraim and Jerusalem,
Samaria and Zion.
Paul’s argument flows directly out of that fractured covenant landscape.
Therefore when Romans 3:22–23 says:
“For there is no distinction: for all have sinned…”
the “all” does not automatically mean every human being who ever lived.
Within Paul’s argument, it refers to both covenant groups under discussion:
Judeans and dispersed Israelites alike stand guilty within Israel’s covenant story.
This is precisely why Romans 9–11 immediately focuses on Israel, patriarchs, tribes, covenants, and restoration hopes rather than on universal human biology.
Even Romans 10 is routinely removed from context.
Christians often quote Romans 10:9 as though Paul were addressing all humanity universally:
“If you confess with your mouth…”
But Romans 10:1 begins:
“Brothers, my heart’s desire and prayer to God for them is that they may be saved.”
Who is “them”?
Israel.
The chapter concerns Israel’s covenant standing.
Modern theology often extracts these passages from their historical audience and transforms them into universal doctrines about inherited metaphysical guilt.
Much of this development was shaped by Augustine of Hippo, whose doctrine of original sin deeply influenced Western Christianity. Historian Elaine Pagels notes that Augustine’s interpretation of Paul became foundational for later Western ideas of inherited guilt and human depravity.^5
The result is a doctrine many people absorb from childhood:
“You were born guilty.”
“You inherited Adam’s sin.”
“You are condemned before acting.”
But Paul’s covenantal framework does not necessarily require that reading.
Romans 5:13 itself says:
“Sin indeed was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not counted where there is no law.”
Romans 4:15 likewise says:
“Where there is no law there is no transgression.”
Those statements sit awkwardly beside the later doctrine that every infant is born legally guilty because of Adam.
This does not mean human beings never do wrong.
People lie, exploit, abuse, betray, and violate laws. Human societies rightly regulate harmful conduct through ethics, laws, and civil obligations.
But covenantal “sin” in Paul’s framework is closely tied to Torah, covenant membership, and Israel’s historical obligations before God.
Once Romans is re-read within its Jewish covenantal context, the letter looks far less like a universal theory of inherited guilt and far more like an argument about Israel’s divided story, covenant failure, and hoped-for restoration.
⸻
Citations
1. Paul and the Faithfulness of God (Fortress Press, 2013).
2. Romans 1–8 (Word Biblical Commentary, 1988).
3. Theology of the Old Testament (Fortress Press, 1997).
4. From the Maccabees to the Mishnah; Between Athens and Jerusalem.
5. Adam, Eve, and the Serpent (Vintage Books, 1988).
