Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

corpus-paul - Re: Paul a Pharisee?

corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Corpus-Paul

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Steve Black <sblack AT axionet.com>
  • To: "Corpus-paul" <corpus-paul AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
  • Subject: Re: Paul a Pharisee?
  • Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2001 06:15:26 -0800


Dave Hindley wrote

So, what function would gospel stories about Jesus healing on the
sabbath have served (especially if healing on the sabbath, in the
manner portrayed, was not a violation, or "serious" violation, of the
law)? I have a couple suggestions:

If "healing" was Jesus' occupation (or a significant component of it)
then I could see a valid objection to it being performed on the
sabbath, even if no physical work were performed. This scenario would
suggest that the story's function was to counter an image of Jesus in
which he was a mere (?) healer or shaman. However, Jewish traditions
about Onias the circle drawer suggest that this was not a shameful
(although maybe annoying) occupation. It would, though, not coincide
with the developed Christian tradition in which Jesus plays the part
of a divine mediator.

But, on another level, what if Jesus had even more serious image
problems? Could Morton Smith have been onto something when he
developed, in _Jesus the Magician_, the pagan and Jewish traditions
that represent Jesus as a MAGOS or GOHS? In Josephus, such an image is
associated with certain socio-political agitators, and would likely
have carried a strong negative connotation to Roman governors and
their retainers. In this scenario, the Gospel traditions would serve
the purpose of deflecting such criticisms into much less controversial
(maybe even trivial in Gentile eyes, but that was the idea) venues.
Does this then suggest gospel literature served an apologetical
purpose?


If I understand your argument correctly, this would address the agenda behind various "pronouncements" (such as "You are forgiven" etc) that are associated with the Sabbath/healing conflicts, but I don't see how it really addresses the conflict element itself, which was more what I was wondering about. The realization that it is unlikely that the Pharisees would have responded how they did makes me wonder if the Xtians of the time were simply out of touch with the current realities of "Pharisee-ism" (which I'm not sure is likely considering how close much of the early church was to the teachings of the Pharisees).
--
Steve Black
Vancouver, BC




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page