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 12:36:21 +0200


Dear David


> I think you will find that such hypotheses are exceedingly unpopular.
> That is why they are not discussed. Why? I suppose that they take away
> much of the mystery and romance of the Pauline epistles. After all,
> those contrasting, interweaved concepts about justification and
> salvation are great mysteries to be solved, and many hope that the key
> to God's romantic salvation story exists somewhere in that tangle. If
> they search hard enough, and creatively enough, someday the secret may
> be cracked ...

This is a very interesting observation!!


> Those who propose an origin for a letter collection at the hands of
> Marcion propose either cut-up versions of genuine letters or
> semi-Gnostic fabrications that were "Judaized" in some way. If the
> former, why presume that the version Marcion cut up was the original?
> Why not a "marked up" version? Rumors that the Pauline letters were
> only recently published and the subject of editorial activity,
> especially if the letters were previously unknown, may have encouraged
> Marcion to try to "reclaim" what he felt were the original parts. Yet
> if Marcion rather fabricated them whole cloth, and they were later
> Judaized, why do not the Christological and antinomian portions
> congenial to Marcion's theology form a consistent undercurrent in
> those 10 epistles? Van Mannen's reconstruction of Marcion's version of
> Paul's letter to the Galatians is no more consistent in the ideas
> expressed than the canonical one.


I don't know if I understand the point (unfortunately I don't speak, read
and write English very well), but Van Manen's reconstruction of Galatians
is somehow surpassed.
In Hermann Detering's site there is a (Greek-German) reconstruction of it
and in his "Paulusbriefe ohne Paul" and "Der Gefalschte Paulis" a detailed
explanation of the marcionite character of the unredacted Epistle, with
linguistic and stilistic hint on the interpolation.
All this is obviously a work in progress, but the results seem positive to
me.
Moreover, about the diverse possibility (Marcion author, Marcion first
redactor and then a second catholic redaction, Marcion redactor of catholic
original), pracically only the last had been investigated. Why?
The unprejudiced investigation of each possibility is a scientific
necessity, no matter the conclusion. I don't believe that this has been the
case.
But perhaps I'm wrong, of course!

Thanks a lot for the posting
Best regards

Fabrizio Palestini





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page