Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

corpus-paul - Re: C-P: Gal 1:12

corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Corpus-Paul

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Jeffrey B. Gibson" <jgibson000 AT mailhost.chi.ameritech.net>
  • To: Corpus-paul <corpus-paul AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
  • Subject: Re: C-P: Gal 1:12
  • Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1999 10:02:26 -0500


Liz Fried wrote:

> Dear Jeffrey,
> No matter how adamant we are, no matter how high the stakes, people are not
> good at knowing where their ideas come from. This was my recollection of
> the psychological literature as of 10 years ago. To be certain that the
> literature has not changed I wrote a friend of mind. Below is a letter from
> Professor Lynne Reder who teaches and does research in cognitive psychology
> at Carnegie Mellon University.
> Regards,
> Liz

Liz,

Not to be flippant, but as Freud reportedly said, "Sometimes a cigar is just
a cigar".
That is to say, while one cannot deny that there is always the possibility
that when
someone makes an adamant assertion about originality, it may still be only
subjectively true, one cannot therefore conclude that this is *always* the
case.
Sometimes a statement such as "nor was I taught it" *is* true, as your
Psychology
professor [letter snipped] implicitly admits.

In any case, to bring this back to Paul, we need to be clear here -- as
perhaps we
have not been -- about what Paul is claiming about himself that is not
derived. As I
have read over the texts again, I see that it may NOT be that the
idea/"doctrine) that
qualifications for membership in the people of God is to be based on whether
or not
one exhibits the faithfulness that Jesus displayed (PISTIS CRISTOU), but
whether his
commission *to be an apostle* is derived from men (though the issue of
whether or not
he was *taught* the Gospel he preaches seems to be denied by Gal. 1:12).

What seems to be at stake in Gal (though F. Matera [_Galatians_] and G. Lyons
[_Pauline Autobiography: Toward a New Understanding_] dispute this) is
whether Paul's
*commission* to preach what he preaches, his Apostleship, comes from or
through
"men", and NOT that the doctrine of justification by (imitation of the)
faithfulness
(exhibited by) Jesus is original to him

Perhaps what we should really be concentrating on is the meaning of the claim
in Gal
1:11 that "the Gospel preached by me is not KATA ANQRWPON". This would seem
to bring
all of Paul's statements about lack of derivation under the rubric of whether
the
particular message that he preaches really is "of God", and not whether what
he
preaches is original with him.

Yours,

Jeffrey

--
Jeffrey B. Gibson
7423 N. Sheridan Road #2A
Chicago, Illinois 60626
e-mail jgibson000 AT ameritech.net






Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page