Corpus-Paul

[Robert M Schacht <bobschacht AT juno.com>]

On Wed, 04 Aug 1999 08:50:53 -0500 "Jeffrey B. Gibson"
<jgibson000 AT mailhost.chi.ameritech.net> writes:
>
>Bob,
>
>I'm not sure exactly how to answer you other that to note that the 
>"sin" Paul engaged
>in was the epitome of the very sin that I see Paul proposing as "shown 
>the way out of"
>through the faithfulness of Jesus. After all, Paul was acting out of 
>zeal for the Law
>and therefore out of faithfulness to a vision of his nation that he 
>saw to be
>incumbent upon all of Israel when he engaged in his persecutions of  
>followers of the
>lawbreaker Jesus. So I don't see that we have here a contradiction -- 
>especially if we
>see (a) that individuals can engage in a national apostasy and (b) the 
>example of
>Jesus faithfulness is for Paul also an example of how an individual, 
>joining with
>others, can avoid, or be redeemed from, engaging in this particular 
>sin.
>

Jeffrey,
As usual, you write with clear logic, so that if I focus only on what you
wrote, I would have to agree. But let me go a little farther. Paul's
"sin" is VERY different from Jesus' "sin" in that  Jesus'  sin was sin
only from a human (pharisee?) perspective, but not from God's
perspective,  whereas Paul's sin was a sin against God, but had human
(establishment) approval. Your case would be stronger if Paul's sin in
question had been, say, eating with gentiles, etc. Paul had many of these
to choose from, but instead, he chose the one sin which is the mirror
opposite of the kind of sin for which Jesus was crucified. 

>>
>> Perhaps relevant to both questions is Galatians 4:...
>>
>> This seems somewhat far removed from Macabbees to me.
>>
>
>I'm not sure why you see this passage as a far removed from the 
>counter proposal that
>I suggested Paul is mooting in 1 Cor 15:3. After all it is talking 
>about -- if only
>implicitly -- whether those who are "sons of the covenant" should 
>devote themselves to
>the zeal for the law.
>

I see the issue of zeal as a red herring when looking at the first 10
verses of 1 Cor 15.
It is not explicitly mentioned either in reference to Jesus or to
himself. In fact, the portrayal of Jesus in this passage is remarkably
passive, as no reason whatever is given for his death. Thus it is only
his death, not what he did that caused his death, that is redemptive in
this passage, if I read it right.

Have I understood you correctly? 

Bob
Northern Arizona University
___________________________________________________________________
Get the Internet just the way you want it.
Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month!
Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj.