Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

corpus-paul - RE: Paul's Use of Early Christian Formula

corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Corpus-Paul

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Anders Eriksson <anders.eriksson AT teol.lu.se>
  • To: Corpus-paul <corpus-paul AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
  • Subject: RE: Paul's Use of Early Christian Formula
  • Date: Tue, 15 Jun 1999 16:38:14 +0200


Dear Jonathan Ryder

Thanks for your inquiry concerning Paul's Use of Early Christian Formula.
In my recent book Traditions as Rhetorical Proofs: Pauline Argumentation in
1 Corinthians, ConBNTS 29, 1998, I study Paul's use of early Christian
traditions in 1 Corinthians. You might find the methodological discussion
in chapter three especially helpful. I deleniate the criteria that are
usually employed by form critics and discuss them critically.

I arrive at a list of five criteria, in descending order of importance:
1) The presence of an introductory formula
2) The self-contained nature of the passage
3) Style
4) Repeated occurrence
5) Theological content.

The rarity of words that you mention fall under the stylistic criteria
above. Form critics have often followed Norden in their use of the
stylistic criteria to discover "einen hochaltertümlichen Typus erhöhter
Rede" characterized by relative clauses and participial constructions, (see
Agnostos Theos, 201-207, 220, as well as my discussion on pages 81-86).

I myself is quite critical of the loose use of the above criteria by those
form critics who in the sixties and seventies searched the Pauline letters
for pre-pauline traditions. Only a clear introductory formula can make it
certain that the qoutation is a pre-pauline tradition. In all the other
cases one must carefully weigh the evidence for and against the existence
of the tradition.

Beside my criticism you might take a look at: Greenwood's criticism of the
unproven hypothesis in stylostatistics (Rhetorical Criticism and
Formgeschichte, JBL 89, 1970, 418-26); Martin Rese Formeln und Lieder im
Neuen Testament: Einige notwendige Anmerkungen, VF 15, 1970, 75-95.

As the date of these two articles indicate, the search for pre-pauline
traditions pretty much came to an end around 1970. IMHO this was due to
some inherent flaws in the methodology which led to a too loose use of the
above criteria. When the criteria are used more cautiously nothing new is
to say. The existence of a broad number of pre-Pauline traditions is now
part of the scholarly consensus in Pauline studies. The date around 1970
also indicates a change of interest from diachronic to synchronic
perspectives on the Pauline text, an issue I have discussed with Edgar
McKnight, author of the introduction to Form Criticism in the Guides to
Biblical Scholarship as well as Postmodern use of the Bible.

The question I am asking in the book was hardly ever raised by the form
critics. They studied the traditions primarily for two reasons: theology of
the earliest Christians and the historical development of this theology.
The questions of theology and history often go hand in hand in historical
critical research. I instead ask how Paul uses these commonly accepted
traditions as a basis for his argumentation with the Corinthians, how the
traditions function as rhetorical proofs.

Hope you will find this useful, Jonathan.


Anders Eriksson




Anders Eriksson, Teol. Dr., Forskarassistent "Many a false step is
Lunds Universitet, Teologiska Institutionen made by standing
still."
Allhelgona Kyrkogata 8, 223 62 Lund, Sweden






Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page