Corpus-Paul

["J.E.Harding" <BSP97JEH AT sheffield.ac.uk>]

With reference to Rowland's point, the idea of the revelation of 
heavenly secrets is fundamental to the understanding of apostleship 
found in Ephesians 3:5-6, and in (e.g.) Acts 18, where Paul is the 
recipient of a revelation from the Lord in a night vision. For me, 
this places Paul (I think he wrote Eph.) within the sphere of 
traditions that also encompasses the Daniel cycle and the 
presentation of the apostles in Mk 4par (see Freyne 1982, in JSNT). 
Paul is 'apocalyptic' not simply because his eschatological beliefs 
were 'apocalyptic', but because he understood himself to be the 
recipient of heavenly revelations. This is also very close to the 
role of S. John the Divine as a recipient of heavenly revelations in 
Rev., the work on the basis of which the terms 'apocalypse' and 
'apocalyptic' were defined, initially.

The whole debate has somewhere along the line lost its focus. Asking 
questions such as "was Paul's thoght apocalyptic?" begs far too many 
other questions. Was there, first of all, an ancient  concept of 
'apocalyptic?' 
Certainly there are texts which share similar features and have been 
dubbed 'apocalypses' or related to 'apocalyptic' thought: but that 
serves a modern desire to categorize and does not help us to 
understand ancient genres and concepts. I don't see where the debate 
can go from here. 

James Harding
University of Sheffield
>bsp97jeh AT sheffield.ac.uk<



On May 10, Jeff Peterson noted

As to the definition of apocalyptic, Christopher Rowland's _Open Heaven_
remains a compelling case for broadening the term to refer to the disclosure
of heavenly secrets... So the genre is constitued by concern for matters
ordinarily inaccessible to earthbound mortals but disclosed to chosen
persons by God.

Your point is very helpful in teasing out the meaning of "apocalyptic."  I'm
inclined to side with Collins and his SBL crew in restricting the term
"apocalypse" to a particular kind of revelatory literature.  By extension,
I'm reluctant to describe as "apocalyptic" (despite its etymology) all sorts
of revelatory literature or experience.  If by apocalypse we mean all
revelatory literature, then we must include works not traditionally or
explicitly called apocalypses.  (I'm thinking here of Ps.-Phocylides.)  That
Paul had one or more visionary experiences in which heavenly truths were
revealed does not suffice to identify him or his message as apocalyptic.
Consider the prophets of ancient Israel who had revelatory experiences,
including visions of judgment, otherworldly or transcendent realities (e.g.,
the divine council, the Kavod of YHWH), and two ages.  Few characterize the
prophets as apocalyptic.  (On this point, see Paul Hanson's Dawn of
Apocalyptic.)
        I find it sufficient to describe Paul as apocalyptic inasmuch as he 
seems
to subscribe to an apocalyptic eschatology.

Andrew T. Dolan, Ph.D. Cand.
Core Adjunct Professor of Religion and Classics
McShain Hall 211
LaSalle University - 129
1900 W. Olney Avenue
Philadelphia, PA  19141-1199
(215) 951-1327
dolan AT lasalle.edu
http://www.lasalle.edu/~dolan/home.htm


---
You are currently subscribed to corpus-paul as: bsp97jeh AT sheffield.ac.uk
To unsubscribe send a blank email to $subst('Email.Unsub')