Abstract
In this book, Lewis aims to explore the Pauline phrase ‘spirit of adoption’ in Romans 8:15. He asserts that while scholars have explored the Jewish and Greco-Roman antecedents of ‘spirit’ and ‘adoption’ independently, Paul’s coupling of the phrase ‘has not yet been clarified’ (p. 1). Lewis notes the absence of adoption language in Jewish literature, finding the Roman context to best explain the Pauline expression. To justify his claim, Lewis must situate Paul firmly within his Roman milieu. Lewis attempts this by drawing on Richard Hays’ work concerning literary dependence, though with applications to imperial ideology (ch. 1). Throughout, Lewis assumes Paul’s familiarity with Roman household religion, Roman literature, and imperial language. In chapter 2, he provides an overview of secondary sources concerning Romans 8, Roman household religion, Jewish adoption, and Pauline pneumatology. Chapter 3 traces Octavian’s rise to power and suggests that his adoption by Julius was ‘the most famous adoption in all of human history’ (pp. 45, 48). For Lewis, Octavian’s model provides the context for Pauline ‘adoption.’ Julius’ posthumous adoption not only transferred power and military muscle to Octavian, but also the family genius. The genius of the Emperor became uniquely tied to the empire at large and, with the numen, forms the background for Paul’s ‘spirit’ language. Chapter 4 provides the internal evidence for a Gentile audience while connecting Pauline language to imperial antecedents. Chapters 5 and 6 examine the thrust of Paul’s argumentation through Romans 5–8, which communicates full inclusion to his Gentile audience who, being in the ‘flesh’, believe they are hopelessly outside of God’s family. Only by Jesus’ death and resurrection does the ‘Spirit of adoption’, with its Roman religious and political implications, provide the necessary invitation to welcome Gentiles.
At times, Lewis’s assumptions limit his effectiveness. Paul, while clearly noting Roman provenance (Rom. 1:7, 15), never purports a purely Roman perspective. In fact, Paul speaks namelessly concerning the ‘rulers’ (Rom 8:38), ‘powers’ (Rom 8:39), and ‘authorities’ (Rom. 13:1–7). The inner workings of the Roman world and specifically the religious institutions are never described when given ample chance (e.g. Rom 1:18–32). Additionally, I fail to see how Paul, and more importantly his audience, could decipher Roman religious and imperial concepts with the type of precision Lewis suggests. Nevertheless, Lewis’s arguments are bold and creative, and his work commendable. By connecting ‘spirit’ and ‘adoption’, Lewis offers a fresh perspective of an otherwise slippery Pauline phrase.