Corpus-Paul

[Loren Rosson <rossoiii AT yahoo.com>]

Many list members will be interested in the new book
by Donald Akenson: “Saint Saul: A Skeleton Key to the
Historical Jesus”, published by Oxford University
Press, ISBN 0-19-514157-1. The book is relevant to
both Paul- and Jesus-scholars, and it bridges the two
fields by arguing that the apostle offers more of a
window onto the historical Jesus than commonly
assumed.

I think the following excerpt from p. 173 adequately
sums up the author’s position:

“[Saul] taught the historical story of the earthly
Yeshua to his own disciples in person, and [in]
writing his letters he took for granted that they had
assimilated the basic facts and, perhaps, sayings.
That he taught the Yeshua-history while he was in each
community is not merely plausible, but has prima facie
validity. However, it lacks explanatory robustness in
relation to the matter at hand. . . [This] possibility
(I think it is a probability) [is one] that most
biblical scholars abhor: that Saul did indeed know the
life of the historical Yeshua; that he had a full
awareness of the miracle-stories, sayings, and of the
various folk-beliefs about Yeshua, most of which are
now forever lost; that he taught the most important
stories and sayings to his own followers -- but that,
when moments of spiritual crisis loomed, all the
stories, all the sayings, and indeed the entire
earthly life of the historical Yeshua did not count.
Only the post-earthly Christ did. . . No wonder
questors of the historical Yeshua dislike Saul. Yet,
Saul actually tells us a lot about the historical
Yeshua; however, he does so almost unintentionally. .
.”

According to Akenson, Paul believed (a) that Jesus
never declared himself to be the messiah, and that he
did nothing during his lifetime which certified his
messiahship (the resurrection did that); (b) that
Jesus’ transformation into the Christ (the
resurrection) was a cosmic and not a physical event --
that there never was a physical, bodily resurrection
of Jesus; (c) that the only valid way of understanding
Jesus’ life on earth is to see him as the “Son of
God”, but in a way incompatible with later “virgin
birth” theology. These “basic facts”, as Akenson calls
them, naturally call into question traditional ways of
understanding Paul’s Christology.

I won’t rehearse Akenson’s arguments from this point,
except to say that throughout the book methodologies
which have governed Jesus-studies are given sobering
reappraisal (such as the limitations surrounding
hypothetical documents like “Q”, in contrast to actual
surviving letters). It’s refreshing, for a change, to
watch a liberal academic pronounce that, “At the risk
of being labelled a Luddite, I conclude that the most
likely way to gain access to the historical Jesus is
through the canonical New Testament” in general, and
through Paul in particular (p. 116). While I disagree
with certain premises staked out in “Saint Saul”, I
highly recommend it to all Paulinists and other NT
specialists. You won’t fail to be stimulated.

By the way -- for any fellow librarians out there --
you might wonder how to catalogue this baby. The
vendor Baker & Taylor assigns it Dewey & LC numbers
for Jesus (232.9 and BT30. . .), but I went with the
category for Paul (225.9 and BS26. . .). Either one
can be justified, really.

Loren Rosson III,
Nashua NH
rossoiii AT yahoo.com


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Shopping - Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products.
http://shopping.yahoo.com/