Why does Paul point out that God raises the dead?

Explanation:

In the midst of explaining the faith of Abraham, Paul says that God gives life to the dead. In order to understand why Paul suddenly says that God gives life to the dead, we need to consider the immediate context. Then we notice that Paul explains in Romans 4:18 that Abraham’s body was as good as dead, and yet Abraham believed beyond all hope that God would fulfill his promise to give him many offspring. So Abraham’s faith is the model of faith for those who learn that God raised Jesus from the dead (Romans 4:24–25).

Counterargument:

When Romans 4:17 is read carefully, one notices that Paul has introduced a common Jewish doxology of praise and thanks to God. We know this because there was a Jewish prayer that was common in Paul’s day, which states that God is the one who gives life to the dead. In particular, the prayer states, Blessed be you, Lord, who gives life to the dead.² Likely the prayer was traditional and known to the Jews and Christians in Rome, and Paul includes it as a common statement of praise to God.

Response to counterargument:

While it might be that stating God is the one who gives life to the dead was a common Jewish prayer, this does not rule out Paul’s stating it here in order to highlight the faith of Abraham. For we know from the immediate context that Paul will say in Romans 4:18 that Abraham’s body was as good as dead, which obviously relates to the fact that Abraham believed beyond all hope in the one who could raise the dead. Thus, what this counterargument fails to recognize is that we ought to consider both the historical and literary context when we interpret a passage. And in fact, the immediate literary context helps us understand why Paul would choose the traditional Jewish doxology he does in fact choose to record in this section. He chooses it because it is a well-known prayer, and it affirms the faith of Abraham.

It is hard to see what the weakness of this view might be. While the statement that God gives life to the dead does come across in doxological fashion, Paul seems to clearly have in mind the fact that Abraham believed God’s promises, even when his body was as good as dead.

Explanation:

When Paul suddenly writes that God is the one who gives life to the dead, we can detect that he has in mind the fact that God spared Abraham from sacrificing Isaac. We can detect this because the author of Hebrews relates the sacrifice of Isaac to Abraham’s faith. There the author writes that Abraham’s faith was tested when he was commanded to sacrifice Isaac, through whom the Lord would fulfill his promise to make Abraham a great nation (Hebrews 11:17–18). Next the author writes that Abraham continued to believe God, reasoning that God could raise the dead. In other words, Abraham believed in the God who could raise the dead, in the sense that he believed God would raise Isaac from the dead when he was commanded to sacrifice him. ⁴

Counterargument:

While there is an implicit connection between Hebrews 11:19 and Romans 4:17, there is also a problem. The problem is that we are not sure who the author of Hebrews is, so we do not know if Paul was aware of Hebrews 11:19. Of course, what we learn from Hebrews 11:19 is not obvious: when God commanded Abraham to sacrifice Isaac, Abraham reasoned that God could raise that dead. It is not obvious that Abraham would have reasoned this way, so if Paul was not aware of Hebrews 11:19, there is no guarantee that Paul would have made this connection. On the other hand, Paul specifically writes in Romans 4:18 that Abraham’s body was as good as dead, and yet, he believes in God’s promises. In other words, he believed in the one who could raise the dead. So, given that Paul may not have been aware of Hebrews 11:19, and that Paul says Abraham believed God even when he was as good as dead, it is unlikely that he has in mind the fact that Abraham reasoned God would raise Isaac from the dead.⁵

The weakness of this view is that, while Paul’s statements are consistent with Hebrews 11:19, it overlooks the immediate context. Of course, we want an interpretation that is both logically consistent and informed by the immediate context.