Corpus-Paul

["Jim Hester" <hester AT jasper.uor.edu>]

On May 8, Andrew Dolan wrote:

> I would appreciate any description of Paul as apocalyptic to include a
> definition/explanation of such a use of "apocalyptic."

Fair enough!  Given the fact that the word "apocalyptic" is an adjective,
and not a noun, then ISTM that one would expect that it functions to modify
its referent.  Furthermore, given the morphology of the genre of apocalypse
provided by Semeia 14 and monographs by John Collins and Adela Yarbro
Collins, then we may be close to being able to argue that a kind of
consensus is emerging about the topography of apocalypse.  If I interpret
the matrix on page 6 of J. Collins, Apocalyptic Imagination, correctly, then
it would appear that among the most common "temporal and eschatological"
elements found in apocalypses are:  judgement/destruction of the wicked;
eschatological upheavals; cosmic transformation; forms of afterlife.  I take
these elements, and the others listed, to be specific expressions of the
definition of apocalypse offered on p. 4 and then modified by the discussion
throughout the chapter.

If, then, some feature of Paul's teaching is described as "apocalyptic", I
would assume that the author of that description means that that teaching
manifests one or more of the distinctive elements of an apocalypse, whether
historical, otherworldly, etc.  For example,  if I am reading Martyn
correctly, he identifies Paul's theology in Galatians as "apocalyptic"
because of the nature of the revelation Paul received and the implied
dualism of the reference to the "present evil age."  (He references other
features but you can read them for yourself.)  The vision narrated in 2 Cor
12:1-10 is apocalyptic without being directly eschatological.

One task in analyzing apocalyptic elements in Paul's teaching is the
analysis of their inter-texture.  It occurs to me that discomfort with
describing Paul as "apocalyptic" might lie not only with the confusion the
use of that term can generate, but also with the fact that Paul doesn't
appear to be a full-blown apocalyptist as conventionally understood.  Having
said that, however, I think we need to come to some widely held
understanding that there are apocalyptic themes, teachings, and world views
in his writings.

Are we in agreement on that, or am I, once more, simply stating the obvious?

BTW, I have found the description of apocalypse formulated by Lois Zamora in
Writing the Apocalypse:  Historical Vision in Contemporary and Latin
American Fiction (Cambridge U Press, 1989) very useful.  I am just now
getting into Stephen O'Leary's, Arguing the Apocalypse (Oxford U Press,
1994) and Norman Cohn's, Cosmos, Chaos and the World to Come (Yale, 1993).
Has anyone else read those, and if so, what is your evaluation?

---------------------
Jim Hester
736 Buckingham Drive
Redlands, CA  92374
(909) 792-0533
hester AT uor.edu
"Let the games begin!"