Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

corpus-paul - Re: Pseudonymity of 2 Thessalonians

corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Corpus-Paul

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Jim Hester" <hester AT jasper.uor.edu>
  • To: "Corpus-paul" <corpus-paul AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
  • Subject: Re: Pseudonymity of 2 Thessalonians
  • Date: Tue, 04 May 1999 10:35:22 -0700


On May 4 Frank Hughes provided a very useful review of the debate on the
authenticity of 2 Thess. Thanks, Frank!

Listers may remember that Charles Wanamaker provides a somewhat more
developed discussion -- by that I mean that Frank is limited by audience
tolerance in this format -- of the debate in his commentary on 2 Thess. (pp.
17-28)

I mention Wanamaker also in context of the discussion of the sequence of the
letters, recently expanded by the posting from Jeff Peterson. Wanamaker
(pp. 37-45) lays out an interesting argument for 2 Thess as the first in the
sequence.

Finally, in response to Peterson, I am not sure that it is necessary to
assume that "Paul" would have had to have written a letter in order to
comment that the congregation had to be careful of letters purporting to be
from him. The point of the comment might be to highlight the fact that as
far as he was concerned, this was the first letter he had sent them.
---------------------
Jim Hester
736 Buckingham Drive
Redlands, CA 92374
(909) 792-0533
hester AT uor.edu
"Let the games begin!"




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page