Is Romans 13:11 A Failed Prediction?

[readyforchange]

So I am wondering what the interpretation is for Romans 13:11, in particular the second part of the the verse. Here is the verse: Besides this, you know what time it is, how it is now the moment for you to wake from sleep. For salvation is nearer to us now than when we became believers (NRSV).

This verse is interesting in that Paul appears to give a specific timeframe for the return of Jesus. Strong’s Concordance provides the Greek word for salvation as soteria (G4991). One of the definitions for soteria in Strong’s is “future salvation, the sum of benefits and blessings which the Christians, redeemed from all earthly ills, will enjoy after the visible return of Christ from heaven in the consummated and eternal kingdom of God”. There are other verses that use salvation as a present state, such as in Luke 19:9 in the story of Jesus and Zacchaeus. But Romans 13:11 refers to a future salvation. And in the surrounding context of Romans 13:12-14, Paul instructs the reader to live honorably and not sin, to instead put on the Lord Jesus Christ.

If Paul is describing a future salvation with the return of Jesus, then this verse seems problematic. Paul sets a time for this future salvation as being nearer to now (the time that he composes this letter to Romans) than to the time “when we became believers”. If “when we became believers” refers to the post-resurrection appearances by Jesus after he was crucified, then this would be somewhere around 30 CE. The dating I usually see for when Paul would have composed Romans is somewhere around 60 CE. If using these dates, Paul seems to imply that Jesus would return in less than 30 years, or before 90 CE. Or is there something I am missing in how “salvation” is defined here? Anyone know what the apologetic interpretation is?

[Blood]

Soter was a common Greek word meaning "savior." It was applied to Zeus, Asclepius, and lots of others before The Christ Sotor. 

 

So I don't think that soteria means "future salvation," it probably just means "saving action from the savior."

 

In 13:14, the writer says you should clothe yourselves with Lord Jesus. I take that to mean "Lord Jesus" is a mystical being who exists in the heavens, and through initiation into Paul's traveling roadshow (just 5 denari, available on installments), you get to pretend that you're "wearing" the Lord Jesus. 

 

My feeling is that all of this nonsense was written in the second century and retrojected back into the recent past. So Paul, perhaps, is predicting that "the Lord Jesus" will save them when the Romans destroy Jerusalem. Such a view would also explain the "little apocalypse" in Mark when Lord Jesus says this generation will not pass until all these huge stones in the Temple come falling down. 

[readyforchange]

Soter was a common Greek word meaning "savior." It was applied to Zeus, Asclepius, and lots of others before The Christ Sotor. 

 

So I don't think that soteria means "future salvation," it probably just means "saving action from the savior."

 

In 13:14, the writer says you should clothe yourselves with Lord Jesus. I take that to mean "Lord Jesus" is a mystical being who exists in the heavens, and through initiation into Paul's traveling roadshow (just 5 denari, available on installments), you get to pretend that you're "wearing" the Lord Jesus. 

 

My feeling is that all of this nonsense was written in the second century and retrojected back into the recent past. So Paul, perhaps, is predicting that "the Lord Jesus" will save them when the Romans destroy Jerusalem. Such a view would also explain the "little apocalypse" in Mark when Lord Jesus says this generation will not pass until all these huge stones in the Temple come falling down.

Blood, thanks for the additional background on the word soteria. If Paul was predicting that Jesus would save them when the Romans destroyed Jesus, then his prediction must have failed in that regard.  Jesus did not return and save them from the Romans, and the Romans destroyed the Jerusalem template and soundly defeated the Jewish revolt.

 

Yeah, I also think Paul is probably referring to a mystical, spirit type of Jesus.  Maybe it's just how the text reads in the English translation, but when Paul says "salvation is nearer...", that suggests to me that whatever Paul meant by "salvation" had not occurred yet.  Paul's command to the reader to clothe or put on the Lord Jesus seems to be a command made as to what the reader needed to do in order to be properly prepared for the soteria/salvation - as in what the reader needs to do in the meantime, before the soteria/salvation occurs.  During time between "when we became believers" and when Paul wrote the letter  (~30 CE to ~60 CE), there were gentiles already hearing Paul's message and converting to Christianity, making them bound to follow Paul's teachings and instructions in the present time. I think that suggests the activity of clothing oneself in the Lord Jesus is something one would do in the lead-up to the salvation/soteria.

 

Paul also includes himself as one whose salvation is near (...For salvation is nearer to us now than when we became believers...).  But Paul is the one instructing the reader, so Paul is already saved by the savior and should be in that mystical state of being clothed in Jesus at the time he wrote the letter.  So he must be referring to a different type of salvation, no?  If Paul was describing a salvation that he already had, then he would have written, "...For salvation is nearer to you now than when you became believers...".

 

I wonder about that of the destruction of the Jerusalem temple in the gospels, too. Many of the events described in the Olivet discourse can be claimed as occurring in the lead up to the destruction of the temple (e.g., wars, persecution of the disciples, people fleeing to the mountains). Mark 13:24 can be explained as solar and lunar eclipses. But Mark 13:25 says that the stars would fall from heaven, and at least in one other location in the Bible (Revelation 6:13), falling stars are described as falling to the earth - this could not have occurred if taking a literal interpretation.  Most starts are a magnitude of times bigger than the Earth.  As I understand it, a single star headed towards Earth would destroy the planet if it came within close proximity to Earth's atmosphere. 

[readyforchange]

In case anyone is interested, I also posted this question on the "Christian Texts and History" forum on EarlyWritings.com forum.  Some interesting insights and perspectives there - http://earlywritings.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=2548