Corpus-Paul

["Perry L. Stepp" <plstepp AT flash.net>]

Not to be an iconoclast or anything, but I remain unconvinced by the
arguments--those I've read elsewhere and those offered here--articulated in
support of the pseudonymity of the Pastorals.

One of the major sticking points, is that I'm not convinced that
pseudonymity was an acceptable device IN JEWISH/CHRISTIAN PERSONAL LETTERS
OF RELIGIOUS CONTENT.  This is a different subgenre than circular letters or
general letters (e.g., Ephesians?), where a different argument would need to
be made.

I don't doubt pseudonymity's acceptance in certain genre--the Platonic
letters, or "epistolary" testaments, for example, which would seem to
include 2 Peter.  But personal letters?

Only a century later than Paul's writings, (Tertullian, *Baptism*) we read
of how the 2nd century church disciplined a leader who (inspired by pure
motives, apparently) wrote a letter in Paul's name.  Not to be flip, but are
we to believe that 1st century Christians accepted the device with a wink
and a nod, and failed to let their descendants in on the joke?

PLStepp

********************************************************************
Senior Pastor, DeSoto Christian Church, DeSoto TX
DCC's webpage: http://come.to/DeSotoCC
Ph.D. Candidate in Religion, Baylor University
#1 Cowboy Fan

Does it not concern us that God's name is often
dishonored because of poor theologies of God?
                   --Clark Pinnock, *The Openness of God*
********************************************************************