Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

corpus-paul - justification: a pre-Pauline doctrine?

corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Corpus-Paul

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Jeffrey B. Gibson" <jgibson000 AT mailhost.chi.ameritech.net>
  • To: Corpus Paulinum <corpus-paul AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
  • Subject: justification: a pre-Pauline doctrine?
  • Date: Wed, 16 Jun 1999 18:49:14 -0500


Inspired by Jonathan Ryder's question regarding what works exist on the
issue of what in Paul is "pre-Pauline", I have been reading the very
book I recommended to him, A.M. Hunter's _Paul and His Predecessors_.
An up shot of this is that I have been struck by something Hunter says
with regard to the question of whether or not the "doctrine" of
justification was something which Paul's *peculium*. Hunter argues that
it was NOT. His grounds for his conclusion are four considerations:

It is agreed that in Romans Paul often appeals to
Christian beliefs shared in common by the Roman church and by
himself. Must not the doctrine of 'justification of faith'
which bulks so large in this epistle have been familiar to
them?
Both the standard Old Testament proof texts for the
doctrine (Gen. xv.16 and Hab. ii.4) are probably common
Christian *testimonia*.
In Gal. ii.16 Paul can appeal to Peter on this very
common ground. 'Knowing that a man cannot be justified by
works of the law, but only through faith in Jesus, we also put
our trust in Jesus Christ.' Let us give this passage its full
weight: 'You and I, Cephas and Paul, ' says Paul, 'are at one
in this doctrine of justification by faith. We agree that a
man is accepted by God not for his works of law but for his
faith in Christ.' (Cf. Peter's speech, Acts xv. 7-11.)
When we remember too that the germs of he doctrine are in
the gospels (Luke xviii. 10 ff. and Luke xv. 11 ff.) we may
well doubt the commonly accepted view that this doctrine is
stamped with the Pauline hallmark


Now what ever may be made of each of these arguments or the assumptions
behind them, they nevertheless point up something that I had not really
given much thought to (possibly because of not reading widely enough),
namely, that "justification" is historically NOT strictly a Pauline
doctrine. It is not original to Paul.

So two questions. Is Hunter's thesis (which he notes was adumbrated by
Weiss in his _History of Primitive Christianity_, p. 231) that the
justification is not "Pauline" sound?

Second, if it is sound, to whom or to what do we attribute its origin?

Yours,

Jeffrey Gibson
--
Jeffrey B. Gibson
7423 N. Sheridan Road #2A
Chicago, Illinois 60626
e-mail jgibson000 AT ameritech.net






Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page