Corpus-Paul

[Jerry Sumney <jsumney AT lextheo.edu>]

Roy writes:

First, regarding 4QMMT, Jerry suggests "It is a rather large leap from a
use of a somewhat similar expression in a different language in _one_
document of a quite sectarian group to the idea
that this expression was current in the vernacular of the larger population
and has moved to Greek-speaking Jews AND that whatever they meant is what
Paul meant."

I find it curious that people scoured the Rabbinic literature in search of
this precise expression (the one they used to translate the Greek into
Hebrew) and when it is found in a context that just HAPPENS to discuss
JUSTIFICATION by means of these works of the law someone (you Jerry!) could
suggest that it is a "large leap" to consider it relevant.  I point out
that 4QMMT was not meant primarily for internal consumption within the
Qumran community, but appears to be a document prepared to persuade people
outside the community of the correctness of their views.  In that context
it describes its contents as "works of the law" as though the reader(s)
(outside the community) will know what they mean by that expression.

Jerry re-replies:
Roy makes an interesting point about 4QMMT being intended for external 
consumption.  But there, as in Paul, the document may define what the 
expression means.  I am not one of those who have scoured other literature 
for a precise verbal parallel, but I think having can be a good thing. 
 These parallels are interesting and _sometimes_ informative, but not 
necessarily relevant.  Finding verbal similarity or correspondence is just 
the beginning step of identifying a good parallel.  See S. Sandmel's, 
"Parallelomania,: _JBL_ 81(1962):1-13 or J. Barr's _Semantics of Biblical 
Language_, pp. 233ff; 245-6; 269-72; from a different ideological camp, 
D.A. Carson, _Exegetical Fallacies_, 43ff. OR  my own _Identifying Paul's 
Opponents_ 89-94 (where I talk about how to identify parallels).  These 
references do not discuss Gal 2, but how to identify valid parallels.

Again part of the reason I doubt that this expression means the same thing 
in both documents/contexts is the very different rhetorical function the 
expression has in the differing documents.

Jerry
Jerry L. Sumney
Lexington Theological Seminary
631 S. Limestone
Lexington, KY 40508
jsumney AT lextheo.edu
(606) 252-0361