Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

corpus-paul - Re: The purpose of the law in salvation-history

corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Corpus-Paul

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Loren Rosson <rossoiii AT yahoo.com>
  • To: Corpus-paul <corpus-paul AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
  • Subject: Re: The purpose of the law in salvation-history
  • Date: Sun, 2 Sep 2001 03:00:05 -0700 (PDT)


Dieter wrote:

> Alright, what happens then if we deal with
> exaggeration of theological assertion just as we
> deal with exaggeration with regard to person
> slander? Words like 'compel' and 'only' in 6:12, or
> 'exclude' in 4:17, 'false' in 2:4, to mention but a
> few examples, are words that seem unequivocal. Yet
> they are part of a rhetorical strategy and it is
> rather obvious to me that they have to be treated as
> rhetorical overstatements with the primary purpose
> of connoting rather than denoting (see L.T. Johnson,
> Anti-Jewish Slander, JBL 108: 433).
>
> If we apply this approach to theological assertions
> that include expressions like the ones you mentioned
> above: 'confine', 'all things,' 'imprison,' what
> does that do to our perception? Do we need to assume
> shifts in thought or contradiction? I doubt it. My
> impression of Paul is that he is a 'natural' with
> regard to rhetorical skill. He knows what he is
> doing and, given the purpose in his mind, he is
> doing it well. But if you would meet him a year
> later at Corinth and ask him what he meant with
> 'confine', 'imprison' etc. he may reply: "I had no
> choice. The stakes were extremely high. It was a
> matter of winning it all or loosing it all." In
> other words, Paul does not need to change his mind.

Paul must have been quite exceptional
(less-than-human?) if he never had to change his mind
about some of these things!! Surely you don't believe
this strictly as stated? With everything Paul was
invloved in doing as a missionary... We'd better
believe Paul had some reassessing to do on occasion.
But I do want, again, to emphasize my agreement with
you on the point of rhetorical strategy. After all,
how else can we understand Paul's remarks about the
law being a "curse" in Gal. 3:10-14. Ditto for the law
as a "pedagogue" in Gal. 3:19-25. But is it not also
possible that underneath Paul's exaggerated rhetoric
lies some "truth"? All I'm asking you to take
seriously is that Paul surely worried about God's
constancy in dealing with Israel and the world. Rom
9-11 is an obvious case, and I think we also see hints
of such concerns beneath the rhetoric of Gal.
3:19-25/Rom. 7:7-25.

> I am not saying I like or wish for the implications
> of this suggestion. But I think we need to explore
> the potential parallels between "character slander"
> and "law slander" in Gal.
>
Agreed! But I think we need to take hand-in-hand
issues of Paul's rhetorical strategy and
development/change in theological thought.

Loren Rosson III
Nashua NH
rossoiii AT yahoo.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email alerts & NEW webcam video instant messaging with Yahoo! Messenger
http://im.yahoo.com




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page