Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

corpus-paul - [Corpus-Paul] The Apostle to the Greek Israelites

corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Corpus-Paul

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: <dhindley AT compuserve.com>
  • To: "'Corpus-Paul'" <corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: [Corpus-Paul] The Apostle to the Greek Israelites
  • Date: Sat, 4 Feb 2006 12:22:49 -0800

I believe my 3 earlier attempts at sending this yesterday and the day before
were not delivered. I have trouble responding to list
emails or sometimes even sending new messages to the list through CompuServe
when I use a hotel's high speed internet. Sorry about
any possible duplications.

-----Original Message-----
From: David Hindley [mailto:dhindley AT compuserve.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2006 11:23 PM
To: 'Corpus-Paul'
Subject: RE: [Corpus-Paul] The Apostle to the Greek Israelites

Steve,

What practical difference would distinguish a "Judean (Israelite)" from a
"Greek (Israelite)"? If it is circumcision on the 8th day
(as Paul claims he had been), there may have been many persons of Judean
heritage who had been slaves or descendants of slaves, most
of whom would not have had the benefit of proper, if any, circumcision. What
about persons of Judean descent, living far from home
(there were several Jewish colonies established by Syrian rulers) whose
parents had lapsed into Greek ways and never had them
circumcised? Those among the latter class, who had not been circumcised on
the 8th day, I suppose could get a "2nd class"
circumcision and adopt as many ancestral traditions (Sabbath observance,
diet, etc) as practical.

Would that not essentially make those who get such a circumcision proselytes
to Judaism?

Also, I think there is evidence that some folks, probably of Jewish descent,
who lived more or less according to Roman ways, at some
point received circumcision or adopted Judean ways, scandalizing proper
Romans like Juvenal who thought they should have been above
that kind of thing. I say "descent" because in Juvenal's satire he seems to
say that the father's of the men he satirizes practiced
Sabbath, and their fathers' fathers practiced abstention from pork,
suggesting that the level of adherence to Jewish customs was
lessening(?) generation to generation, only to suddenly be adopted in earnest
by the grandsons. These grandsons had "received
circumcision." Or does this really suggest that some Romans were adopting
sundry Jewish customs, more serious from generation to
generation, that *culminates* in circumcision? What would a typical Roman
have considered more barbaric: abstinence from pork or
abstinence from work on the Sabbath?

Hans Conzelmann alludes to A. N. Sherwin-White, saying that "[a]lthough Jews
could become Roman citizens, the normal way of social
ascendancy - military service - was blocked for them. The Jewish colony in
Rome was rather proletarian." Unless one was a Herodian
descendent, about the only option open would be Judean slaves manumitted by
Roman masters. Manumitted slaves of Judean descent, with
the financial means and with their former master's/patron's leave, could
theoretically emigrate to Judea to retire. There were
certainly a number of folks, even members of the Roman equestrian class, who
were living in Judea according to Josephus. Many of
these certainly would have been manumitted slaves of Roman citizens, or
descendants of same, although I suppose some could also have
been Herodian descendents. Josephus had no problem calling the Roman knights
executed by Florus, "Judeans".

The Context Group sure does seem to come up with doozies of ideas at times.
After reading one of their works, I often come away
wondering whether they are not really using scholarship to make some kind of
social commentary upon modern beliefs.

Respectfully,

Dave Hindley
Cleveland, Ohio USA

Juvenal, Satire 14:96ff "Some who have had a father who reveres the Sabbath,
worship nothing but the clouds ... in time they turn
to circumcision [mox et praeputia ponunt]. Having been wont to flout the laws
of Rome, they learn and practice and revere the Jewish
law ... For all which the father was to blame, who gave up every seventh day
to idleness ..." (_Gentiles/Jews/Christians: Polemics
and Apologetics in the Greco-Roman Era_, tr. Eugene Boring, pg 107, citing
the edition of Wm Heinemann, with its English translation
by G. G. Ramsey)

Hans Conzelmann, _Gentiles/Jews/Christians: Polemics and Apologetics in the
Greco-Roman Era_, tr. Eugene Boring, pg 108, citing
Adrian Nicholas Sherwin-White, _Racial Prejudice_, pp 98f.

Josephus, Wars of the Jews 2:308 "and what made this calamity the heavier,
was this new method of Roman barbarity; for Florus
ventured then to do what no one had done before, that is, to have men of the
equestrian order whipped, {d} and nailed to the cross
before his tribunal; who, although they were by birth Jews [to genos
Ioudaiwn], yet were they of Roman dignity notwithstanding."


-----Original Message-----
From: corpus-paul-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org
[mailto:corpus-paul-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of Steve Black
Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2006 2:36 PM
To: Corpus-Paul
Subject: Re: [Corpus-Paul] The Apostle to the Greek Israelites


Paul's polemic related to circumcision means that for this theory to work,
some evidence for a large scale abandonment of the
practice of circumcision among Jews in antiquity would have to be provided.

Steve Black
The Toronto School of Theology






Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page