Corpus-Paul

["Revd Dr Sean F. Winter" <sean.winter AT virgin.net>]

Brian,

Where to start in response.  Allow me to mkae just a few comments.      

1.  What I read in your posting is not argument but a thesis about the 
compilation of Philippians.  It is of course identical to that offered 
by Bornkamm and very similar to that offered by Rahjten (who adds 3.1 
from your letter B to letter C).  I do not think that I read anything in 
your posting that adds to their arguments.

2.  And in brief I do not find those arguments convincing.  The 
attribution of the final form of the letter to "accidental" compilation 
seems strange - how exactly do you envisage this accident happening?  
The Ephesian imprisonment hypothesis is, as I am sure you know, 
contested.  Above all however, there are several strong arguments to 
suggest that Philippians is a unity.  I won't go through them now, but 
look at the commentaries of O'Brien and Fee; articles by Garland and 
Watson, and books by Wick and Reed.  Schenk's partition theories based 
on his text linguistic analysis of the letter have been ably countered 
by Koperski.  Any partition theory must explain above all the close 
linguistic and conceptual parallels between 1.3-11//4.10-20 and 
2.5-11//3.3-21.

3.  The crux of course is the break between 3.1 and 3.2.  The formulae 
there have been examined carefully by Reed, and in my own thesis I 
suggest a reading of the polemic in chapter 3 that ties it in closely 
with the argument of the rest of the letter.

4.  Bibliography

Alexander, L. C. A., "Hellenistic Letter Forms and the Structure of 
Philippians", JSNT 37 (1989), 87-101.

Black, D. A., "The Discourse Structure of Philippians: A Study in 
Textlinguistics",NovT 37 (1995), 16-49.

Bornkamm, G., "Der Philipperbrief als paulinische Briefsammlung", 
Neotestamentica et Patristica, Freundesgabe fur O. Cullmann (NovTSup 6; 
Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1962), 192-202.

Dalton, W. J., "The Integrity of Philippians", Bib 60 (1979), 97-102.

Garland, D. E., "The Composition and Literary Unity of Philippians.  
Some Neglected Factors", NovT 27 (1985), 141-73.

Koperski, V., "Textlinguistics and the Integrity of Philippians: A 
Critique of Wolfgang Schenk's Arguments for a Compilation 
Hypothesis", ETL 68 (1992), 331-67.

Mackay, B. S., "Further Thoughts on Philippians", NTS 7 (1960-61), 
161-170.

Muller-Bardorff, J., "Zur Frage der literarischen Einheit des 
Philipperbriefes",WZUJ 7 (1958), 591-604

Rahtjen, B. D., "The Three Letters of Paul to the Philippians", 
NTS 6 (1959-60), 167-173.

Watson, D. F., "A Rhetorical Analysis of Philippians and Its 
Implications for the Unity Question", NovT 30 (1988), 57-88

Wick, P., Der Philipperbrief: Der formale Aufbau des Briefs als 
Schlussel zum Verstandnis seines Inhalts (BWANT 135; 
Stuttgart/Berlin/Cologne: W. Kohlhammer, 1994).

Hope this helps

Sean