Corpus-Paul

["Sheila E. McGinn, Ph.D." <smcginn AT jcu.edu>]

Ron, I have no quarrel with the idea that Paul received the title "Messiah" 
for Jesus
rather than inventing it.  That he put a particular spin on that idea is, I 
think,
indisputable (i.e., especially the oxymoron of "Christ Crucified") and is 
more worth
developing than this point of uniqueness.

Yet, there is no evidence that Jesus himself adopted this title. You will 
notice that
none of your own arguments (a-d) establish that he did -- only that others 
seem to
have thought of him in this way.  This, however, is an issue beyond the 
Pauline list,
so I will discontinue the conversation.  SEMcGinn

Ron Price wrote:

> I wrote:
>
> >>   My intention was to focus on theological assertions pioneered by Paul.
> >> There is abundant evidence that the title "Messiah" was adopted by Jesus
> >> and applied to him by Peter et al. before the crucifixion. The
> >> application of the title "Messiah" to Jesus was therefore not pioneered
> >> by Paul.
>
> Sheila McGinn replied:
>
> >Really?  I would love to see where you find this "abundant evidence,"
> >especially given
> >the standard criteria for historicity in "historical Jesus" research (in
> >this case,
> >especially the criterion of discontinuity).
>
> Sheila,
>
>  The criterion of discontinuity has been used in different ways. So you
> would need to explain how you think it applies to the use of the label
> "Messiah" for Jesus if you want me to comment on it.
>
>   My case is as follows (taken from one of my postings to XTalk in Aug
> 1999):
>
>       Jesus' messiahship was already so well established by Paul's time
> that in his letters he usually indicated it by the use of a proper name
> ("Christ"). The idea that Jesus was the Messiah could not have arisen
> after the crucifixion because the Jewish scriptures apparently did not
> foretell the death of the Messiah, and certainly did not foretell his
> crucifixion.
>      So Peter et al. must have thought Jesus was the Messiah whilst he
> was alive. The remaining question is whether Jesus himself accepted
> this. There are several indications that he did.
> (a) The so-called "messianic secret" in Mark's gospel is nowadays
> increasingly accepted as a fabrication of the author. Mark knew the
> connection between messiahship and nationalism, and he was muddying the
> water so as to make Jesus more palatable in a Roman environment.
> (b) In spite of these concerns, Mark felt obliged to tell the story of
> Jesus' triumphant entry into Jerusalem. In it Jesus acts out the
> prophecy of Zech. 9:9, openly publicizing his claim to be the Messiah.
> (c) The story of the anointing (Mark 14:3-9) is probably a distorted
> account of the ceremony in which Jesus was formally recognized as the
> Messiah (= the Anointed One).
> (d) Mark records that the inscription on the cross was "The King of the
> Jews" (15:26). This also suggests that Jesus had behaved as if he were
> the Messiah-king. Mark is unlikely to have invented the wording here,
> because in 12:35-37 he tries to dissociate kingship from the Messiah.
>
>   Thus, I contend, Paul was not the first to apply the label "Messiah"
> to Jesus.
>
> Ron Price
>
> Weston-on-Trent, Derby, UK
>
> e-mail:  ron.price AT virgin.net
>
> Web site:  http://homepage.virgin.net/ron.price/index.htm
>
>
>
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to corpus-paul as: smcginn AT jcu.edu
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to $subst('Email.Unsub')
begin:vcard 
n:McGinn, Ph.D.;Sheila E.
tel;fax:216-397-4518
tel;work:216-397-3087
x-mozilla-html:TRUE
url:http://www.jcu.edu/bible/mcginn
org:John Carroll University;Religious Studies
adr:;;20700 N. Park Blvd.;University Heights;Ohio;44118;USA
version:2.1
email;internet:smcginn AT jcu.edu
title:Associate Professor, Biblical Studies & Early Christianity
fn:Sheila E. McGinn, Ph.D.
end:vcard