Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

corpus-paul - RE: Gal 2:16 (Liz)

corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Corpus-Paul

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Liz Fried" <lizfried AT umich.edu>
  • To: "Corpus-paul" <corpus-paul AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
  • Subject: RE: Gal 2:16 (Liz)
  • Date: Wed, 2 Jun 1999 17:29:35 -0400


> From: Mike Myers [mailto:mmyers AT helium.biomol.uci.edu]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 1999 4:32 PM

>
> Liz wrote:
>
> Paul was indeed such a Jew. You must notice however that his
> audience did not consist of such Jews. His audience was composed of
> Gentiles. He was the apostle to the Gentiles. Among Jews he received
> the 39 lashes 5 times. If you can believe Acts, Paul attempted to
> preach at various synagogues around the world, but the ones who
> accepted him at these synagogues were Gentiles. You would have to
> show me evidence that there were Jews besides Paul who
> believed as he did.
> *****************************************************************
>
Dear Mike, I haven't a clue what the context of my comment above was. When
I I said "believed as Paul did" what was I referring to exactly??? In any
case, when I referred to Paul's audience, I referred to the recipients of
his letters. I take these to be non-Jews.

> The author of Hebrews is another one who thought this way.

I'm not sure the author of Hebrews was Jewish. Do people consider him
Jewish because he refers to "our ancestors?" Should that necessarily be
viewed in physical terms?

Speaking of Hebrews, the author uses the example of milk being for babies,
and solid food for the older child (5:12-14). I wonder if this example is
used among the Greek philosophers. I have heard it before, in another
context. It is not in the HB. Does anyone know where this may be from?

Your
> point about his being accepted only by Gentiles at the synagogues
> where he preached is one I don't fully accept, btw. I'll get back to
> that later.

This is the view expressed in Acts. I don't believe Acts in every instance,
so this could be polemical. Paul does say tho that he received the 40
lashes minus 1 five times, I think. This definitely supports the description
in Acts and suggests that Paul did not find his audience among those who
refer to themselves as Jews, and who would have been at the synagogues.
Among the synagogue-goers his appeal seems to have been primarily to the
god-fearers, the hangers-on at the synagogues, but who could not bring
themselves to circumcise themselves.



>
> But first some definitions need to be clarified. To me, there is a
> highly significant question hiding in Paul's use of terms like
> EQNOS, TA EQNH, hELLHNOS, TOI hELLHNES, TOI BARBAROI -- just who's
> caught up in Paul's semantic net "Gentile"? If Jew in 1CE means
> primarily "descendant of Judah", with some Levites and Benjaminites
> and perhaps a small number of converts and remnants of other tribes
> who threw in their lot with the Southern Kingdom thrown in to the
> mix, there still remains a majority, probably (certainly?), of the
> descendants of the children of Israel, scattered after the Assyrian
> invasion, located who knows where in the ANE.

I don't include the descendents of the ten lost tribes under the appelation
Jew. Except for the Samaritans, they lost their identity.
I consider as Jews those who call themselves Jews.
The Samaritans didn't call themselves Jews.

If Jew means something
> substantially different to you, let me know. But unquestionably,
> however the word Jew is defined, many descendants of Jacob are
> unaccounted for by that designation.
That's certainly true. A Jew was someone who called himself a Jew.


>
> Before I go on with this, maybe you could apprise me of any problems
> you have with it so far. My main intention though is to encourage a
> much more nuanced reading of Paul's letters and his take on the
> "Law." (Particulary since Eisenman's apparent success with some in
> passing innuendo about Paul off as scholarship seems to have muddied
> the waters, IMHO.)

I'm just starting the study of Paul. Nuanced views are way above me.
I'm still trying to get the *un-nuanced* views.

>
> The rest of your post was filled with stuff to chew on, so that will
> have to wait. It would help me to communicate more clearly if I knew
> what you thought about the working definition of "Jew" above, 1CE.
> We can look more closely at "Gentile" next.

A Gentile was someone who did not call himself a Jew.
Not nuanced, but there you are.

Best,
Liz

>
> Mike
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Michael D. A. Myers
> University of California, Irvine
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> <mmyers AT helium.biomol.uci.edu>
> 06/02/1999
> 12:31:47
>
Lisbeth S. Fried
Department of Hebrew and Judaic Studies
New York University
51 Washington Sq. S.
New York, NY 10012
lqf9256 AT is3.nyu.edu
lizfried AT umich.edu





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page