Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

corpus-paul - Re: Paul: Renegade or Insider?

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: Paul: Renegade or Insider?
  • Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2002 05:17:13 -0700 (PDT)


Mark wrote:

>Now as I am working more fully on
>Paul's relationship with
>Jerusalem, I am engaging [Philip Esler's]
>work even more. I am confident he will
>appreciate--and would invite--the
>challenge I herein seek to pose.

I think he would too, Mark. I emailed him my post
yesterday. Who knows, maybe it will inspire him to
join us in discussions on the list.

>...the question of whether there was a
>cultural value that permitted
>intentional deceit if no oath was given
>(sometimes it is even argued to be
>the case even when an oath was made),
>with the person duped thereby
>suffering the loss of honor. Esler cites
>a 20th century study of a Mediterranean
>village in developing his model.

Let me also note that I noticed some of this while
serving as a Peace Corps volunteer in Africa. Lesotho
isn't "honor-shame" in the same way much of the
Mediterranean is, but it's certainly more so than what
we're accustomed to in the West.

>While sufficient evidence of Biblical characters
>failing to live according to their promises
>can be found, they are not condoned, and
>sometimes are punished.

But who is the arbiter? That's really the question,
isn't it? What is condoned for an in-group member will
more than likely be censured for an enemy or rival. In
any case, public perception decides whether or not
honor is to be granted or denied, and thus whether or
not the lie is justified. Compare Jezebel with Jesus,
for instance. Jezebel ruinded Naboth's honor with a
lie of false imputation (Pilch's term) -- claiming
that he "cursed God and the king" -- and she comes off
pretty bad, to say the least. But Jesus also used lies
of false imputation -- as in Jn 8, calling the Judeans
"offspring of the devil and murderers". The Judeans
were no more offspring of the devil (and it's doubtful
they were all murderers) than Naboth was a curser of
King Ahab. But lies and insults are often understood
as legitimately offensive ways of protecting honor.
Jezebel comes off bad and Jesus good -- but the
gospels are written by Jesus-followers, of course.

>Perhaps more to the point for this
>case, these are Jesus-followers, James being
>kin to Jesus, and the letter of James
>expresses that one should not swear
>oaths but keep their word (5:12),

Good point. And I believe that this letter was written
by James himself (following Bauckham's commentary), so
this needs attention. Esler might say this is why Paul
could extract no oaths from the pillars at the
conference (2:1-10); but how would he reconcile Jas
5:12 with his view that James didn't keep his word? I
don't know. In any case, I've become convinced more by
your (rather than Esler's) interpretation of Paul's
relationship to the pillars, so, for me, Jas 5:12 is
somewhat a moot point. But it certainly does indicate
that the honor-shame model of lying and deception is
not quite so monolithic.

Thanks for the further comments about Peter's
hypocrisy. Good food for thought as I keep pondering
this stuff. Now if we can only persuade Philip to join
these discussions!

Best, as always,

Loren Rosson III
Nashua NH
rossoiii AT yahoo.com

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup
http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page