Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

corpus-paul - Re: [Corpus-Paul] Ambiguous irony in Galatians 1 & 2

corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Corpus-Paul

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Frich107 AT aol.com
  • To: corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [Corpus-Paul] Ambiguous irony in Galatians 1 & 2
  • Date: Wed, 28 May 2003 15:55:19 EDT

Dear Mark,

Thanks for your post.

>Fred,
>Your second text, Gal 2:9, seems to me to be ironic. The interesting
>question this raises for me at least is what the ironic turn of phrase
>signifies. (no small question)
>The kind of irony suspected must of course be defined, and its context
>established. I believe that this is classic Socratic irony, as it is
>throughout the letter (The Irony of Galatians, Fortress, 2002).

Your definition of Socratic irony and the accompanying comments you make in
Irony are highly enlightening, and after my initial misunderstanding I find
them to be very plausible. The way that you discuss the form of the irony not
being static or textbook like in style is particularly helpful.

>Since the apostles are represented here by Paul to have supported Paul's
>position (2:5, 7-10), that non-Jewish Christ-believers should not become
>proselytes, why does Paul cast doubt upon their identity as pillars of
>the best sort?
>
>Most interpreters of Galatians take it to mean Paul and the other apostles
>referred to here are in "opposition" by the time of the writing of this
>letter. <snip>
>But Paul uses irony throughout the letter to express "disappointment."

Is it not possible that there is also an element of inconsistency here with
Paul? Could he be writing/dictating the letter while he is feeling very
heated
about the whole situation in Galatia, and so not necessarily argue everything

logically, or in a fully thought out form?

>Paul berates the addressees with ironic rebuke like a parent dealing with
>a teenager seeking to alleviate peer pressure by adopting behavior considered
>by the parent to be compromising. It is not in the parent's view possible
>to satisfy the expectations of the peers and of the parents, although the
>child may try to do so, as when thinking/saying, as long as they (the
parents)
>do not know about the adoption of the non-permitted behavior, no harm done.
>The parent however, if learning of (or anticipating) this thinking/behavior,
>may be expected to carry on much as does Paul in Galatians.

I find your analogy here helpful, especially considering the way that Paul
speaks elsewhere of being like a father to various believers. In some ways I
think that this is one of Paul's methaphors that too little is often made of.

><snip>--In summary: What does this mean for the reference to James and the
other
>apostles mentioned in 2:9?
>
>I think it suggests they are on the same team, but that the addressees
>should not ultimately trust even them or himself if they were to fail to
>uphold that which they have themselves experienced in the Spirit as
>confirmation of the proposition that apart from proselyte conversion they
>have become children of Abraham, and thus recipients of the promise of
>God in Christ.

I agree that Paul sees Cephas and the other apostles as being on the same
team to himself, with the provisos that you outline above, but am ultimately
not
convinced that James should be counted amongst this number. I still feel that
James is not an apostle in Paul's sight, and what are we to make of 'those
from James'? I am aware that you distinguish between them, James, and the
other
various groups in Irony, but I am not sure I entirely agree. I certainly
think
that Paul wishes to imply a connection with James, which paints him in a very
negative light.

Regards,
Fred Rich.

Ph.D. Student,
Department of Biblical Studies,
University of Sheffield,
Sheffield,
South Yorkshire,
UK.




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page