Corpus-Paul

[Loren Rosson <rossoiii AT yahoo.com>]

Like Richard, I hope that other list members will join
in the fray.

Richard offers four possible reasons for Paul’s
failure to cite the Apostolic Decree in writing to the
Galatians:

> 1.
> Paul does not cite the decree because it did not
> deal with the issue in
> dispute. The decree implies that gentiles did not
> need to be circumcised to
> be accepted by the believing community. Paul, the
> apostles, the
> influencers, and the Galatians may well have been in
> agreement on that. . . One gets the
> impression that Paul and the
> apostles did not want to antagonise the
> conservatives in the Judean church,
> and deliberately failed to explain to them that Paul
> was offering full
> proselyte status to uncircumcised gentiles. 
> 
> Let us then suppose that Paul's gospel was never
> fully explained to the
> Judean believers (other than the pillars)...

I find it hard to believe that the circumcision
parties (whether in- or outside the church) would have
failed to “get the drift” here, especially considering
the way gossip mills worked in a city like Jerusalem.
It’s probably more than safe to assume that everyone
involved knew that all apostles (James, Peter, John,
Paul, etc.) were pushing for the full status of
uncircumcised Gentiles, in light of the belief that
the eschaton had somehow begun with the resurrection
of this Judean martyr. To suppose that “Paul’s gospel
was never fully explained” ignores the fact that these
sorts of things were “explained” efficiently through
gossip, and that word traveled fast and far in the
ancient Mediterranean.

> 2. [Loren's position]
> Acts 15 is not to be equated with Gal 2, and
> Galatians was written before
> the council of Acts 15. Loren has argued for this
> position...

> But the equation Gal 2 with the famine visit has
> problems of its own:
> 
> Why was another
> visit to Jerusalem necessary, if the question had
> already been answered on
> the earlier visit.


Another visit to Jerusalem was necessary, because it
was only after the apostles put the decision into
practice that major furor erupted. As I said before, I
think the Antioch incident of Gal. 2:11-14 shows the
immediate consequences of “giving the gospel a try”.

> It is unlikely that Paul would circumcise Timothy
> AFTER the controversy
> arose in Galatia. He would have been playing into
> the hands of the
> influencers. For me, it is more probable that the
> controversy arose partly
> as a RESULT of the circumcision of Timothy. I see
> probable references to
> the circumcision of Timothy in Gal 5.11...

In a sense I think you’re right, Richard. Paul
probably did play into the hands of the influencers.
Paul had no problems with circumcision per se -- he
even encouraged it in some contexts -- and I think
that Gal. 5:10-12 points to incidents similar to the
later Timothy episode in Acts 16:1-3. No doubt Paul
was already predicting he would be misunderstood when
he had people like this circumcised.

> 3. [Richard's position]
> Everybody agreed that the apostles were against
> circumcision (for
> gentiles), but the Galatians and the influencers had
> never accepted the
> authority of the apostles. I proposed this
> possibility in my post of 24th
> Sept, and suggested that Gal 1.1-2.14 can be read as
> Paul's assertion that
> he had not received his gospel from the apostles,
> but from God...

Certainly you make your case well, Richard, and I
admit that your well-presented paraphrase of Galatians
(in the earlier post of Sept 24) accounts for most of
Paul’s language. But it’s a Herculean struggle for me
to realign the poles here. If the Galatians, indeed,
perceived Paul (and not James) as the conservative
one, then this requires a shift in thought as to how
relationships between the apostles were seen in other
contexts -- not least in Romans. But your proposal
demands careful consideration, and I would like to see
other reactions to it on this list.

> 4. 
> Acts 15 = Gal 2, but there are inaccuracies in Acts.
> This solution is a
> last resort...

Yes, I agree.


Loren Rosson III,
Nashua NH
rossoiii AT yahoo.com



__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Messenger - Talk while you surf!  It's FREE.
http://im.yahoo.com/