What does Paul refer to by “the standard of teaching”?

Explanation:

We can understand what Paul means by standard of teaching by first noticing that in other letters he refers to handing down traditional Christian teachings. That is, there was a standard tradition of Christian teaching in the early church, and Paul refers to passing this tradition on to the churches he ministers. For example, he commends the Corinthians for maintaining the traditions he delivered to them (1 Corinthians 11:2). Likewise, in 1 Corinthians 15:3 he writes that he passed on what he also received, namely, the teaching that Jesus died for our sins and rose from the dead. Now, in Romans 6:16 Paul says that he thanks God that the Romans are obedient to the standard of teaching to which they handed over. Likewise, Paul has in mind that the Romans are committed to the traditional teachings of the early church.³

Counterargument:

While it is true that Paul refers to handing down teachings in other letters, it is important to notice that in Romans 6:17, Paul refers to a standard of teaching. That Paul characterizes the teaching as a τύπος (standard, type) is important because it implies that the Romans were handed not the teachings of the early church but a type of teaching of the early church. Given that Paul says these were handed over to a type of teaching, and not simply a teaching, of the early church, it is very difficult to conclude that Paul has in mind the Romans committing to the traditional teachings of the early church.⁴ For a type of teaching implies a teaching that is similar to, but not the same as.

Response to counterargument:

That Paul characterizes the teaching as a τύπος does not undercut the notion that he refers to the traditional teachings of the church. Rather, Paul could simply be highlighting that the Romans were handed over to a certain type of teaching. In particular, Paul could be saying that they committed to a traditional Christian teaching as opposed to Jewish teaching. Or he could be using the term τύπος in the sense of form or mold. If this is right, he would be saying that they were handed over to the traditional teaching of the church that molds people.⁵ In either case, characterizing the teaching as τύπος does not take away from the fact that the teachings are the early traditions of Christianity.

Explanation:

Paul writes that he is thankful that the Romans were handed over to a τύπον διδαχῆς (standard of teaching). The term διδαχή (teaching) is a fairly common term that denotes something like a body of teaching.⁶ For example, Paul warns the Romans in Romans 16:17 to watch out for those who cause division and create obstacles contrary to the διδαχή they have been taught. In this instance, διδαχή seems to indicate a body of teaching. Likewise, when Paul refers to being handed over to a τύπον διδαχῆς, he likely has in mind a certain body of teaching, that is, the traditions of Christianity.

Counterargument:

The problem with this argument is that while the term διδαχή (teaching) could refer to a body of teaching, it could also refer to a certain example or way of life. That is, the term has to do with being taught, but it does not specify what is being taught. Thus, it begs the question to assume that what is being taught is a body of knowledge. For it may be that what was taught to the Romans is a certain example or way of living, so when Paul thanks God that the Romans were handed over to a standard of teaching he means a way of living out their faith.

Response to counterargument:

While it is possible that Paul has in mind being handed over to a teaching in the sense of an example, it is unlikely. For by characterizing the teaching as a τύπος (type), Paul seems to indicate that the Romans were handed over to a particular type, pattern, or kind of teaching. Of course, a pattern of teaching implies a consistent body of teachings, such as the traditional teachings of Christianity.  

One weakness of this view is that it is somewhat idiosyncratic to say that the Romans were handed over to a body of doctrines. For we expect Paul to say that a body of doctrines was handed over to the Romans, not that the Romans were handed over to a body of doctrines.

Explanation:

When Paul writes that he thanks God that the Romans were handed over to a standard of teaching, it is important to notice that God is the one who is the agent of transformation. That is, God is the one who delivered the Romans to a standard of teaching. That explains why Paul characterizes the teaching as a τύπος. For the term τύπος has to do with being molded, shaped, and transformed. Now, given that God is the one who hands the Romans over to a standard of teaching, where τύπος has to do with being molded and transformed, we see that Paul is saying God handed the Romans over to transform them by a certain teaching.¹⁰ In particular, God transforms the Romans by handing them to a transformative teaching that allows them to obey the will of God from the heart.

Counterargument:

The problem with this argument is that Paul does not say that God handed the Romans over to a standard of teaching. Rather, he thanks God that they have become obedience from the heart to a standard of teaching to which they were handed over. Of course, it could be that the Romans were handed over to this standard of teaching in the sense that they accepted it as true. Or Paul could be saying that they were taught by missionaries who brought them the gospel, so that the missionaries are the ones who handed them over to a standard of teaching. Now, this argument depends on the notion that it is God who hands over the Romans to the standard of teaching, for it relies on the fact that since God is the one who does the handing over, we can conclude that standard of teaching has to do with being handed over to a transformative teaching that changes the heart. But since Paul never says that God is the one who handed over the Romans to the teaching, but only that they were handed over, we cannot conclude that standard of teaching means teaching that transforms the heart.

Response to counterargument:

Given that Paul has made clear that salvation through Christ is a gift of God’s grace (Romans 6:1), we have good reason to take it that when Paul says the Romans were handed over to a standard of teaching, he has in mind that it is God who hands them over. Of course, if God delivered them over to the stand of teaching, then God is the agent of transformation.¹¹ So we conclude that God has handed the Romans over to the standard of teaching in the sense that God transforms them to obey him from the heart.

Explanation:

We can detect what Paul means when he writes that the Romans were handed over to the standard of teaching by noticing his normal use of the term to deliver. For often when Paul uses the term to deliver he does so in the context of handing over to another authority or power.¹² We notice this usage from Paul in Romans 1:24 when he writes that God delivered them over to their dishonourable passions. Also, in 1 Corinthians 5:5 he tells the congregation in Corinth to deliver the sinful man to Satan. And in 2 Corinthians 4:3 he says that we who live are always being delivered over to death. Given that Paul normally has in mind delivering from a power or authority when using the term to deliver, we can detect what Paul means when he says that the Romans were delivered to a standard of teaching. For it is not sensible to say that the Romans were delivered over to the power and authority of a set of teachings, so he must have in mind that they were handed over to something like a transformed existence.¹³

Counterargument:

There are two problems with this argument. First, Paul also uses the term to deliver to denote delivering traditional teachings about the gospel (see interpretation 1, argument a). For example, in 1 Corinthians 11:2 he refers to maintaining the traditions he delivered. Further, in 1 Corinthians 15:3 he points out that he delivered to them, as in, taught them, what he also received, before announcing the basic beliefs that Jesus died for our sins and was raised. So Paul could use the term to deliver for delivering to an authority and delivering a set of teachings. Further, even if Paul does mean to deliver in the sense of handing over to a power or authority, as this argument contends, this does not overturn that Paul has a set of traditional teachings in mind. Rather, Paul could be saying that the Romans were handed over to the power and authority of a standard of teaching in the sense that the teachings are able to mold and transform. Thus, Paul could be saying he handed them over to the power of a traditional set of Christian teachings, with the implication that these teachings can mold and transform.

The weakness of this view is that Paul tends to distinguish being handed a set of doctrines from learning by an example. That is, he will state in his letters that his audience should learn from his example, which implies that he has behaviour in mind. But he will also state that his audience has been handed a set of teachings in the sense of doctrines, or truths, concerning the gospel. Given that Paul refers to teachings, rather than his example in Romans 6:17, he likely has in mind a set of doctrinal truths concerning the gospel.

Explanation:

When Paul says the Romans were handed over to a standard of teaching, he likely means that they were handed over to a particular way in which the Christian message was taught, which may differ from the way it was taught to the Jews. We can conclude this for two reasons. First, we know Paul says he contextualized the gospel to the Gentiles (Galatians 2:6–10). Second, the imagery of this section suggests that Paul is contextualizing the gospel to his Gentile audience. For Paul employs the imagery of slavery in this section, which suggests that one is a slave to either sin or obedience. This imagery of slavery would have struck a chord with a Gentile audience who understood that one could only be a slave to one master.¹⁴ Thus, that Paul says he contextualized the gospel to the Gentiles, along with the fact that he does so in this section, suggests that standard of teaching refers to a contextualized version of the gospel.

Counterargument:

There is a significant problem with this argument. Paul did not introduce the gospel to the Romans. Rather, Paul has heard about the Roman church and their faith in Christ so he writes this letter to further teach and encourage them. Of course, what Paul writes in Romans 6:17 is that he thanks God that the Romans were handed over to a standard of teaching, which implies that he is thankful that they were handed over to a standard of teaching even before he writes to them. In other words, they were handed over to a standard of teaching even before Paul has presented the gospel to them, which means that the standard of teaching is not Paul’s contextualized preaching to the Gentiles, but a standard of teaching that precedes Paul’s presentation. Thus, standard of teaching cannot refer to Paul’s contextualized version of the gospel.¹⁵

The weakness of this view is that even if Paul had preached a contextualized gospel to the Romans before this letter, it is highly unlikely that he would highlight that they were handed a contextualized gospel. That is, while Paul might contextualize the gospel, it is unlikely that he would thank God that they were specifically handed over to his contextualized version of the gospel, rather than simply the gospel.