Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

corpus-paul - Re: Paul as apostate (was:Paul Not a Pharisee?)

corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Corpus-Paul

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Sakari H�kkinen" <sakari.hakkinen AT sci.fi>
  • To: "Corpus-paul" <corpus-paul AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
  • Subject: Re: Paul as apostate (was:Paul Not a Pharisee?)
  • Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2000 15:42:23 +0200



Hi Mark,

> >The Ebionites did not accept Paul, because their
tradition
> >of interpreting the Torah was different.
>
> The point I would make is not that their tradition of
interpreting
> the Torah was necessarily different, but that they
understood Paul to
> interpret it differently. This is based upon a
"construction" of Paul
> that in my view does not tell us about Paul, but about
their view of
> him. The question is whether they got Paul right!

True. I think they did not get Paul right. Who could have?
"The only person, who understood Paul was Marcion, but even
he did not understand him right." (I do not remember, who
said this). Your statement is almost hermeneutical. Tell me,
Mark, what do you mean with "getting someone right"? There
are many interpretations, is someone of them right and the
other wrong? Are Deutero-Pauline letters right, letter of
James or Apocalypse wrong? How about interpretations of the
Torah? Are you suggesting that there were one right
interpretation in second temple Judaism, some kind of
commonly accepted, which was the same for Paul and all other
representatives of Jesus-movement? I have thought that where
there were two Jews there were three opinions of the Torah.

> Yes, Torah would provide the grounds upon which both Paul
and any
> "opponents" would stake their alternate views. But to
apply to my
> point any supposed opponents would have to be Paul's
contemporaries
> to carry the weight of the comment to which I initially
objected. And
> the way you put it is not clear to me that this is their
"opinion"
> that it was against Torah; whether it was or not is
another matter,

So, we agree that Paul had opponents, but the difference is
that you say these (contemporary) opponents did not accuse
Paul for deviating their interpretation of Torah, I say they
did. Is that the core?

> and that which I want to remain open about in the
investigation of
> Paul on his own terms.
Fine!

Best wishes,

Sakari

Sakari Hakkinen, PhD
University of Helsinki
Department of Biblical Studies
sakari.hakkinen AT evl.fi
http://www.helsinki.fi/teol/hyel/henkilo/henkilo.html






Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page