Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

corpus-paul - Re: The Dutch Radical Approach to the Pauline Epistles

corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Corpus-Paul

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Fabrizio Palestini" <fabrizio.palestini AT tin.it>
  • To: "Corpus-paul" <corpus-paul AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
  • Subject: Re: The Dutch Radical Approach to the Pauline Epistles
  • Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2001 12:11:38 +0200



Ciao John!

Sono contento di sapere che conosci l'italiano, sono interessato a discutere
con te fuori lista!

------------------------------------------


I don't believe that the extremely early date of p46 proposed by Kim was
generally condivised, the Comfort&Barrett view being much more cautious.
Moreover, "ca 150 AD" doesn't mean "exactly 150 AD", I am not an expert in
paleographical and papyrological studies, but it seems to me that a gaussian
distribution of probabilities (centered in 150 AD) was a better description
of the dating process of a manuscript, isn't it?
What is, in this kind of researches, the standard deviation (i.e., the
intrinsic imprecision)?

Koester, for instance, speaks of p46 as being "written about 200CE"
("History and Literature of Early Christianity", pag 23).
In addition this papyrus present a great amount of peculiarity (Hebrews
immediately after Romans, the Pastoral are missing, many variants etc)
deserving more attention from me. So thank you for the hint.

The authenticity of the Epistle of Polycarp to the Philippians, of 1Clement
and Ignatian Letters is strongly questioned both in the articles I listed
(Pauline Paradigm and Pauline Autenticity, D. Doughty; The Evolution of
Pauline Canon, R. Price; The Dutch Radical Approach, H. Detering; Der
Gefalschte Paulus, H. Detering) and in other articles (The Philippian
Epistles, Van Manen http://www.depts.drew.edu/jhc/vanphil.html, Paulusbriefe
ohne Paulus?, H. Detering 1992).

The last thing: a scientific theory can be more or less reasonable, it can
give explanation of many evidences or not. The theory of the marcionite
origin of the Pauline Epistles obviously could reveal itself as completely
erroneous.
But what does the sadness enter in all this? The scientific work is familiar
with the so-called working hypothesis, and there isn't sadness in this, the
opposite!
So come on! Don't be afraid to explore new territory, let for a while pose
yourself in the viewpoint of the Journal of Higher Criticism, to taste "from
inside" the matter! ;-)

Thanks again a lot
Best regards

Fabrizio Palestini






Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page