corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Corpus-Paul
List archive
- From: "John Dickson" <dicksonj AT bigpond.net.au>
- To: "Corpus-paul" <corpus-paul AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
- Subject: Re: Colossians Pauline?
- Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2001 16:38:13 +1000
Bob MacDonald asked:
> Is the epistle to the Colossians considered by Paul?
>
> Would Paul have used the imagery of circumcision = crucifixion, the way it
> is used in 2:11?
It is probably fair to say that a slight majority of NT scholars regard
Colossians as pseudonymous. Put the other way, a significant minority regard
the letter as authentic.
On the question of circumcision, note two elements in Paul's 'authentic'
thought:
1) 'Outward/physical' circumcision may be set in contrast with
'inward/spirit' circumcision (Rom 2:25-29).
2) Baptism, as the ritual marker of the Christian community, is associated
with the death and resurrection of Christ (Rom 6:1-4) and, consequently,
with our own death to sin.
It is a combination of precisely these two thoughts that appears in Col
2:11-12, suggesting - to me at least - that the paragraph represents an
authentic Pauline proposition.
Regards,
John Dickson
Department of Ancient History
Macquarie University
Sydney, Australia.
jdickson AT bigpond.com
-
Colossians Pauline?,
Bob MacDonald, 10/09/2001
- <Possible follow-up(s)>
- Re: Colossians Pauline?, John Dickson, 10/09/2001
- Re: Colossians Pauline?, Frank W. Hughes, 10/09/2001
- Re: Colossians Pauline?, Daniel Streett, 10/09/2001
- Re: Colossians Pauline?, Alan Missen, 10/09/2001
- Re: Colossians Pauline?, moon-ryul jung, 10/09/2001
- Re: Colossians Pauline?, Daniel Streett, 10/09/2001
- Re: Colossians Pauline?, Bob MacDonald, 10/09/2001
- Re: Colossians Pauline?, Jim Hester, 10/10/2001
- Re: Colossians Pauline?, Daniel Streett, 10/11/2001
- Re: Colossians Pauline?, Richard Fellows, 10/11/2001
- Re: Colossians Pauline?, Michael Abernathy, 10/11/2001
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.