corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Corpus-Paul
List archive
- From: "Michael Davies" <miser17 AT epix.net>
- To: corpus-paul AT franklin.oit.unc.edu
- Subject: Re: Disputed Pauline letters
- Date: Thu, 1 Apr 1999 15:34:23 -0500
> From: Edgar Krentz
>
> May I suggest that this discussion would progress better if people would
> begin to carry on an exegetical discussion on this list.
>
> For example, what might suggest in the text of Colossians and the history
> of the first century that it is Paul's first letter? Before one might take
> that as a starting point, one would need to argue somewhat cogently that 1
> Thessalonians comes after Colossians theologically.
Yes. I've already noticed on this list that the questions are
generally too broad to be intelligently discussed on email.
"Which letters are authentic?" is simply an unworkable discussion
topic. "Is Colossians authentic?" might be discussable. Folks
ought to consider, when posing a question or (worse) a set
of questions whether in fact it is reasonable to think that coherent
answers could, even in theory, be given through email.
Steve Davies
College Misericordia
-
Re: Disputed Pauline letters,
Frank Glenn, 04/01/1999
- <Possible follow-up(s)>
- Re: Disputed Pauline letters, Christopher Hutson, 04/01/1999
- Re: Disputed Pauline letters, Edgar Krentz, 04/01/1999
- Re: Disputed Pauline letters, Chris Cutler, 04/01/1999
- Re: Disputed Pauline letters, Michael Davies, 04/01/1999
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.