The DOI matches its Crossref record; 47 of the 50 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 32 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
Romans 10:5–13 revisited
Open accessAbstract
The aim of this article is to investigate Romans 10:5–13 and specifically the impact of the chiasm (chiasmus) in Romans 10:9–10 on this sub-pericope. In the chiasm Paul makes the following statement(s):A If you confess with your mouth Jesus as LordB and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead,C you will be saved.B For with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness,A and with the mouth/he confesses, resulting in salvation.What gives the chiasm existential value here is the fact that this is the only passage in which Paul uses confess with your mouth as a condition for salvation. The sub-pericope will be discussed against the background of the introduction to the letter (Rm 1:16–17) as well as Romans 3:21–31.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
This article argues that Romans 10:9–10 contains a double chiasm whose centre is “you will be saved,” and that Paul uniquely combines confession with faith as a condition for salvation in this sub-pericope. It reads Romans 10:5–13 against Romans 1:16–17 and 3:21–31, concluding that the passage stresses the prophetic “something-being-said” alongside faith.
Key findings
- Romans 10:9–10 is structured as a double chiasm: A-B-C-B-A with C as “you will be saved,” plus an inner 1-2-3-4 / 4-3-2-1 pattern linking “mouth/confess” and “heart/believe.”
- The confession formula is unique in Paul: Romans 10:9–10 is “the only passage” where Paul uses “confess with your mouth” as a condition for salvation, making it a kind of Hapax Legomenon in his letters.
- Paul encases his own words in Old Testament prophetic citations (Lv 18:5; Dt 30:11–14; Is 28:16; Jl 2:32; Is 52:7), emphasising orality through κηρύσσομεν, ὁμολογέω, and ἐπικαλέω.
- The article concludes that in this sub-pericope “something-being-said” is linked to salvation, and Romans 10:14 implies believers must enact the prophetic task of conveying the Word so others can call on the Lord.
Methods
- Exegetical and rhetorical analysis of Romans 10:5–13, with Romans 10:14–15 added, focusing on the chiasm/chiasms in verses 9–10.
- Uses the Greek text, structured translations, and tables of Old Testament citations, while comparing the sub-pericope with Romans 1:16–17 and Romans 3:21–31.
- Engages secondary scholarship on Romans, chiasmus, faith, righteousness, and salvation; no empirical sample or quantitative data are used.
Limitations
- The paper states no formal limitations section.
- Evident from the text: the argument is exegetical and theological, with no empirical data or independent manuscript evidence.
- Evident from the text: the conclusion depends on contested interpretive choices and secondary scholarship; the author himself notes that some alternative readings are “too subjective,” “doubtful,” or lack contextual evidence.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
48 No basis given · 21 Own interpretation · 14 Sources not found · 8 No full text of the sources · 4 Not checked yet · 4 Own result
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Paul has already corrected that view in Romans 1:17: Ὁ δὲ δίκαιος ἐκ πίστεως ζήσεται 6 [The righteous will live by faith].”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The 'sea' of Deuteronomy 30:13 is changed to the 'deep (abyss)' (Rm 10:7) that would better refer to bringing Christ from the dead.”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Whereas Moses was referring to the Law (Dt 30:11), Paul changes that to 'the righteousness that is by faith' (Rm 10:6a).”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Although Paul quotes directly from Deuteronomy in this passage, he changes/'edits' significant words to fit the quotation into his argument (Ito 2006:252).”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Ito 2006:252 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The words in verse 13 are a citation from a prophecy by Joel 2:32 (as part of Jl 2:28-32).”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Paul elaborates on the link between πίστις and δικαιοσύνη (found in Rm 1:16-17) by clearly stating here that God's δικαιοσύνη has no connection to the ἔργων νόμου.”
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“we discover that verses 9-10 actually serve as a sort of a Hapax Legomenon, 21 as this is the only passage in”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“The phrase ἐὰν ὁμολογήσῃς (ἐν τῷ στόματί σου) κύριον Ἰησοῦν [If you confess (with your mouth) Jesus as Lord] is only used once in connection with gaining eternal life (Mt 10:32; Lk 12:8; cf.Carson 1984:490; Hagner 1993:289)”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Carson 1984:490
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Hagner 1993:289
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This is therefore the only occasion that Paul uses these words as a condition for gaining eternal life.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“That which the righteousness (works) of the νόμος failed to accomplish, was in fact already done by God himself (Palmer 1975:127):”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Palmer 1975:127
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
- Probably not a substantial claim. 76
- It may state two separate claims as one. 19
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In Romans 10:10 (as the second part of the chiasm) Paul makes two statements and these statements end in respectively δικαιοσύνη and σωτηρία.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The structure of Romans 10:5-13 (with vv.14-15 included) is given (Figure 1), with the strong chiasmus in verses 9-10 emphasised.”
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In Romans 1:17 Paul states that the righteous will live by faith, and in Romans 10:9-10 he explicates how the righteous will live by faith.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Verse 6a brings the new δικαιοσύνη which is ἐκ πίστεως to the fore.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These two verses are depicting two 'kinds' of δικαιοσύνη:”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“• If a person confesses with her or his mouth, the result will be salvation.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In Romans 1 Paul connects δίκαιος and πίστις as in Romans 10:10: Ὁ δὲ δίκαιος ἐκ πίστεως ζήσεται [the righteous person will live by faith].”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although Acts 13:1 refers to Paul as a prophet and a teacher at Antioch, in his letters to the Corinthians, Romans and Galatians Paul claims the title of apostle for himself.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, nothing inside the text of verses 9-10 is indicating that the phrases forming part of the chiasm are also in a parallel structure.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Verse 6 shows that ἡ ἐκ πίστεως δικαιοσύνη is in sharp contrast to τὴν δικαιοσύνην τὴν ἐκ νόμου of verse 5.”
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“From verse 6b to verse 10, the behaviour of a person who lives according to the righteousness (works) of πίστις is described.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The first chiasm is found in the structure A-B-C-B-A, with C as the centre-piece.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Paul does not cite these words, but implicates them in his own context.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In verse 28 Paul remarks: λογιζόμεθα γὰρ δικαιοῦσθαι πίστει ἄνθρωπον χωρὶς ἔργων νόμου [For we maintain that a person is justified by faith apart from the works of the Law].”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There is no evidence in the context for this postulation.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“In Romans 1:16 Paul declares that the gospel is the power of God that brings salvation to everyone who believes and in verses 9-10 he explicates how one should believe (cf.Matlock 2010:80).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Matlock 2010:80
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“In Romans 10:9-10, as part of the pericope that spans from Romans 9:30-10:21 (cf.Bechtler 1994:290), Paul utilises a chiasm to emphasise the point he wants to make (cf.Edwards 1992:254).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Bechtler 1994:290
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In verses 5-10 Paul describes the means of God's salvation, contrasting verse 5 (righteousness according to the Law) with verses 6-10 (righteousness according to faith).”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In verse 11 Paul cites the prophetic words of Isaiah 28:16.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“As is clear from Romans 10:2-3, the Jews had a zeal for God (… ὅτι ζῆλον θεοῦ ἔχουσιν - Barrett [1991:183] called it an 'enthusiasm'), but their zeal was misdirected according to Paul.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Barrett 1991:183
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As shown under the previous sub-heading, Paul makes ample use of Old Testament citations in this sub-pericope.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Instead, Paul clearly states that the 'heart' is the location of faith, while the 'mouth' is the location of confession.”
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The phrase ἐκ πίστεως, occurring in Romans 1:17 and employed again in Romans 3:26, 30, 4:16 and 5:1, is also employed in Romans 10:6 where Paul once more uses the faith-Law antithesis.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“With the four statements to follow (v.11-13), each introduced by γάρ and each supporting the previous statement, Paul asserts the universality of God's salvation, with words or phrases such as πᾶς (vv.11 & 13) and κύριος πάντων (v.12) (cf.Bechtler 1994:306).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Bechtler 1994:306
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Romans 10:5 (ὁ ποιήσας αὐτὰ ἄνθρωπος ζήσεται ἐν αὐτοῖς) refers to living according to the Law to gain righteousness and be saved.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The ῥῆμα τῆς πίστεως is near you, it is in your mouth and in your heart.13”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Verse 5 depicts the 'old' (Jewish) δικαιοσύνη, which is ἐκ νόμου and attached to Moses.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In Romans 4 Paul supplies the reason for this in a quite elaborative way by referring to Abraham who first believed in God before he acted according to God's will (cf.Kaiser 1971:20-28).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Kaiser 1971:20-28
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Romans 10:10 'amplifies' (Dunson 2011:32), or rather, elaborates on the words of Deuteronomy 30:14 by saying that:”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Dunson 2011:32 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In Romans 10:1, being part of the pericope of Romans 9:30-10:21, Paul declares his desire for the σωτηρία of Israel.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In Romans 1:16-17 Paul sets a sequence that appears again in Romans 3:21-5:11 and 9:30-10:21: Mankind's faith leads to salvation/righteousness.”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The second chiasm (without a centrepiece) is found in the sub-sections of the mentioned block letters: 1-2 and 3-4 in verse 9 are chiastically linked to 4-3 and 2-1 in verse 10.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“• If a person believes in her or his heart, the result will be righteousness.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Paul uses the noun πίστις twice (vv.6 & 8), while the verb πιστεύω occurs three times (vv. 9, 10 & 11).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Verse 13, which should serve as a conclusion to this passage, in fact offers something 'new': Πᾶς γὰρ ὃς ἂν ἐπικαλέσηται τὸ ὄνομα κυρίου σωθήσεται [Everyone who calls on 17 the Name of the Lord will be saved].”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“What gives the chiasm existential value here is the fact that this is the only passage in which Paul uses confess with your mouth as a condition for salvation.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Looking at this structure, one can conclude that the content of the ῥῆμα τῆς πίστεως consists of two actions: A confession with the mouth -that Jesus is Lord (Rm 10:9), and faith in one's heart -that God raised him from the dead (Rm 10:9).”
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“This ῥῆμα τῆς πίστεως ὃ κηρύσσομεν is expanded with a double chiasm structured around a centre-piece in verses 9-10 (cf.Ito 2006:250) (Figure 2).”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Ito 2006:250 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The expression in Romans 10:9 that God raised Jesus from the dead, reaches back to Romans 4:24 where Paul said that 'God will credit righteousness -for us who believe in Him who raised Jesus our Lord from the dead'.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In verse 5 Paul claims that τὴν δικαιοσύνην τὴν ἐκ νόμου is only built on the principle of eschatological life for those who obey the Torah and act accordingly.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The 'outcome of this dual action is that one will be saved (σωθήσῃ)' (Dunson 2011:31-32).”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Dunson 2011:31-32 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This contrast is set in the form of a stark a-b-b-a chiasm in verses 5a and 6a:”
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“After he has cited Leviticus and Habakkuk, he cites Deuteronomy 30:11-14 (Table 2).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The pericope, however, does not seem to support this possibility, as Paul is rather informing his listeners about what the consequences of their actions are.”
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This ῥῆμα is specified to be τὸ ῥῆμα τῆς πίστεως ὃ κηρύσσομεν (the message concerning faith that we proclaim -Rm 10:8).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In Romans 10:6 Paul states that ἡ δὲ ἐκ πίστεως δικαιοσύνη [the righteousness that is by faith] affirms the words in that chiasm.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“With the exception of verse 12 (which actually is just a repetition and elaboration of a part of Rm 1:16) in the sub-pericope of Romans 10:5-13, only the words in verses 9-10 are Paul's own words derived from the Scriptures he quotes around these words.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Paul uses these words only one more time, in 1 Corinthians 1:2, where he classifies those who call on the Name of Jesus together with the 'church of God in Corinth' and 'those sanctified in Christ Jesus and called to be his holy people'.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Verse 8-10 -in a positive way: These verses clarify what this person will do to be saved.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“which Paul combines 'confession' and 'faith' in order to receive salvation.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The reason is that nowhere else does Paul put emphasis on 'something-being-said' as in this passage (read together with vv. 14 & 15).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Very important within this prophetic context is the fact that the στόματι-'something-being-said' in verse 10b and not the καρδίᾳ-'faith' now results in σωτηρίαν.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As Paul's combination of 'something-being-said' and 'faith' in the sub-pericope of Romans 10:5-13 is quite unique”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In his writings Paul makes use of different artistic (rhetoric) methods to convey his message, especially in the very rich passage of Romans 10:5-13.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“However, because of the obvious inter-connectedness between Romans 1:16-17, 3:21-30 (within the context of 3:21-5:2) and Romans 10:5-13 (within the context of 9:30-10:21) (cf.Dunson 2011:22), and especially the verses of Romans 10:9-10 and 13, the answer obviously tends to get difficult.”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Dunson 2011:22 source
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“So, in fact, the whole chiasm is summed up in Romans 1:16-17.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The close relationship between the two sub-pericopes of Romans 1:16-17 and 3:21-31 (as part of the bigger pericope of Romans 3:21-5:11) is noted by many scholars (such as Campbell 2005:190-191;Dunn 1988b:163, 183;Dunson 2011:23-29;Haacker 2003:121;Heliso 2007:2;Käsemann 1973:20;Moo 1996:67;Powers 2001:91;Schmithals 1988:124, Stuhlmacher 1989:55;Watson 2004:40-76;Wright 2002:426).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Campbell 2005:190-191
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites Dunn 1988b:163, 183
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Dunson 2011:23-29 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It leaves the impression that, besides the use of the (double) chiasm, Paul has encased these words with Scriptures so as to highlight it more or to give it more prominence (Table 1).”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“In this sub-pericope Paul explicates the 'precise nature of faith as it functions in antithesis to the law regarding the attainment of righteousness' (Dunson 2011:30).”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Dunson 2011:30 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This sounds like a question with an easy answer if one only reads verses 9 and 10: A person is obligated to perform both actions.”
plaindirect- Asserted: fails — The authors may not put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The authors may not put it forward as true. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In this passage he is referring to Christians in general.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“The 'direct association' (Dunson 2011:28) we find in Romans 10:9-10 (also v. 13) between faith and salvation originates from Romans 1:16, but is elaborated on here (cf.Eckstein 1988:217).”
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“According to verse 10c, confession is actually not the result of salvation.The contrary, however, is true: Salvation is the result of confession (cf.also Hodges 1989:197).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Hodges 1989:197
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It certainly looks as if Romans 9:30-10:21 provides the hermeneutical key to the book of Romans and especially to the discussion of the three concepts.”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The argumentation of both these passages is flowing directly into Romans 9:30-10:21.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This double chiasm serves to emphasise the way in which salvation is taking place, and is used to strengthen the message by putting it in this rhetoric form.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“This citation of Deuteronomy 30 is taken from a prophetic part of Deuteronomy where Moses prophesied about the future restoration of Israel (cf.Ito 2006:251).”
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Ito 2006:251 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“From these references it becomes clear that Paul is focusing on prophetic passages from the Old Testament in this subpericope.”
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In Romans 10:14-15 Paul elaborates on verse 13 (citing a part of Is 52:7), emphasising his calling as an apostle, bringing the message orally:”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Paul therefore contrasts righteousness gained through keeping the Law with righteousness gained through the act of Christ.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“With this solid structure Paul wants to claim that the salvation (C) of a person is available to her or him in a certain way.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The 'remote' ῥῆμα suddenly became very near to Israel.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The implication is that a person receives δικαιοσύνη before receiving σωτηρία.”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“σωθήσεται is the future form of the verb, indicating that this is something yet to come (cf.Hart 1999).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Hart 1999
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Not matched
In the paper
“The question may be asked why Paul, in so many passages, refers to 'faith' as the only 'prerequisite' for salvation (cf.Hodges 1989:107), but in this passage he adds something 'new' -even on two occasions: in verses 9-10 and verse 13.”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Hodges 1989:107
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“whilst his words in Romans 10:5-13 do not really form a clear symphony with the rest of his letter.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
In the paper
“It also looks as if Paul utilises these terms in a specific sequence.This is confirmed by verse 14 (with v. 15 added to it) where the role of the messenger (the one who brings the Good News, cf.v 15) is indicated (citing a part of Is 52:7) and where Paul uses these terms in reverse order:”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Is 52:7
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The fact that Paul is serious about combining 'confession' and 'faith' in order to receive salvation is beyond any doubt.”
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“To summarise the setting of prophecy: Paul uses Old Testament citations originating from prophetic parts of the Old Testament in which he encases a chiasm filled with his own words.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although he always only links πίστις to σωτηρία, in this passage he adds the spoken word -'somethingbeing-said' by using three different verbs (of which he links ὁμολογεῖται in v. 10 directly to σωτηρία), which form part of his role as herald of God:”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Paul's theology elsewhere always links πίστις alone to σωτηρία and never makes confession a condition for salvation.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This is in total contrast to Paul's whole 'gospel' and theology, but it fits well within this prophetic context.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Paul's theology elsewhere always links πίστις alone to σωτηρία and never makes confession a condition for salvation.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Then, as if with a crescendo, Paul confirms in verse 13 what he has said in verse 9: It is the 'something-being-said' (in this case a repetition of the verb he has just utilised in verse 12) that results in σωτηρίαν.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The paper relies on this without support.
Paul's theology elsewhere always links πίστις alone to σωτηρία and never makes confession a condition for salvation.
“Although he always only links πίστις to σωτηρία, in this passage he adds the spoken word”
“This is in total contrast to Paul's whole 'gospel' and theology, but it fits well within this prophetic context.”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Discussion of Romans 10:5-13
“Verse 9b: God brought Jesus back to earth: Therefore a person confesses that God has raised him from the dead.”
§ Discussion of Romans 10:5-13
“If you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved:”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ The function of the chiasm
“The term λέγει is repeated in verses 10 and 11.”
§ The function of the chiasm
“That is why Paul utilises the term λέγει (vv.6, 8 & 11) in this sub-pericope.”
Citations
Cites
Hubbard, D. A., Barker, G. W., Watts, J. D. W., & Martin, R. P. (1982) · Word Books · Cited by 841
Marcos, N. F., & Sen, F. (1993) · DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · Cited by 824
A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature
BAUER, W. H., & Danker, F. W. (2000) · University of Chicago Press eBooks · doi:10.7208/chicago/9780226028958.001.0001 · Cited by 648
PAUL AND PALESTINIAN JUDAISM: A COMPARISON OF PATTERNS OF RELIGION
Sanders, E. P. (1978) · Religious Studies Review · doi:10.1111/j.1748-0922.1978.tb00009.x · Cited by 630
The Apostle Paul and the Introspective Conscience of the West
Stendahl, K. (1963) · Harvard Theological Review · doi:10.1017/s0017816000024779 · Cited by 387
A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans
SANDAY, W., & Headlam, A. C. (1979) · Bloomsbury T&T Clark eBooks · doi:10.5040/9781472556370 · Cited by 311
Die antike Kunstprosa vom VI. Jahrhundert v. Chr. bis in die Zeit der Renaissance
Norden, E. (1995) · De Gruyter eBooks · doi:10.1515/9783110959796 · Cited by 237
Commentary on the New Testament use of the Old Testament
(2008) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.45-6100 · Cited by 226
The expositor's Bible commentary
Longman, T., & Garland, D. E. (2005) · Zondervan eBooks · Cited by 220
The faith of Jesus Christ : the narrative substructure of Galatians 3:1-4:11
Hays, R. (2002) · Cited by 200
Research works printed but not linked: 36
- Aho, 1981, Concordia Theological Quarterly, 45, 308
- Barclay, 1975, The letter to the Romans
- Barrett, 1991, The epistle to the Romans
- Bartsch, 1968, Biblical Research, 13, 41
- Bengel, 1742, Gnomon of the New Testament by John Albert Bengel: Now first translated into English with original notes explanatory and illustrative, 5
- Boice, 1993, Romans 9–11
- Dillow, 1992, The reign of servant kings: A study of eternal security and the final significance of man
- Dunn, 1988b, Word Biblical Commentary
- Edwards, 1992, Romans
- Fetler, 2005, The world of Saint Paul: A biography
- Gibbs, 2013, Chiastic structuring: An introduction
- Hagner, 1993, Word Biblical Commentary
- Hart, 1999, Journal of the Grace Evangelical Society, 12, 23
- Hodges, 1985, Grace in eclipse: A study on eternal rewards
- Hodges, 1989, Absolutely free: A Biblical reply to lordship salvation
- Jewett, 2007, Romans: A commentary, Hermeneia
- Johnson, 1974, The freedom letter
- Kaiser, 1971, Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, 14, 20
- Käsemann, 1973, An die Römer
- Liddell, 1996, Greek-English lexicon
- Louw, 1989, Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament based on semantic domains
- MacArthur, 1994, The Gospel according to Jesus: What does Jesus mean when he says, ‘Follow Me’
- Man, 1984, Bibliotheca Sacra, 141, 146
- McGinn, 2000, Paul: Prophet or apostle
- Moo, 1996, The epistle to the Romans
- Moyer, 1997, Free and clear: Understanding and communicating God’s offer of eternal life
- Murray, 1968, The epistle to the Romans
- Palmer, 1975, Salvation by surprise: Studies in the Book of Romans
- Powers, 2001, Salvation through participation: An examination of the notion of the believers’ corporate unity with Christ in early Christian soteriology
- Ridderbos, 1959, Commentaar op het Nieuwe Testament: Aan de Romeinen
- Schliesser, 2007, Paul and Palestinian Judaism: A comparison of patterns of religion
- Schreiner, 1998, Romans
- Stuhlmacher, 1989, Der Brief an die Römer
- Weiss, 1897, Theologische Studien: Festschrift für B. Weiss, 165
- Wilckens, 1980, Der Brief an die Römer
- Wright, 2002, The new interpreter’s Bible, X, 393
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Faith, righteousness and salvation in Romans
Oliver, W. H. (2018) · HTS Teologiese Studies / Theological Studies · doi:10.4102/hts.v74i4.5068 · Cited by 1
Self-citationThe Trinity and the Bible: How All Scripture Testifies to One God in Three Persons
Rutherford, J. A. (2022) · doi:10.60080/icek2375 · Cited by 1
Race and Interpersonal Interactions
Bell, M. (2024) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-32257-0_105-1
Race and Interpersonal Interactions
Bell, M. (2026) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-76750-0_105
Metadata
- Authors
- Oliver, W.
- Affiliations
- University of South Africa (ZA)
- Corresponding author
- Oliver, Willem
- ORCID
- Oliver, Willem
- Venue
- HTS Teologiese Studies / Theological Studies
- Publisher
- AOSIS
- Published
- 2015-03-11
- Volume
- 71
- Issue
- 3
- ISSN
- 0259-9422 (ISSN-L)
- 2072-8050
- OpenAlex
- W1819457002
- Semantic Scholar
- 65a45230712d291001b227af0738b95fc11c8fa5
- Cited by
- 4
- References
- 50
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2018: 1
- FWCI
- 6.73
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by
- Locations
- HTS Teologiese Studies / Theological Studies (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Religious studies › Biblical Studies and Interpretation
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Karl Barth and Christian Theology
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Religious studies › Contemporary Christian Leadership and Education
- Keywords
- chiasmus, Pauline epistles, faith and salvation, justification by faith, righteousness of God, pericopes
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-11-03, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-11-03 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
