corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Corpus-Paul
List archive
- From: Bob MacDonald <bobmacdonald AT shaw.ca>
- To: 'Corpus-paul' <corpus-paul AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
- Subject: Re: Jerusalem conference
- Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2002 18:27:37 -0700
Steve Black wrote:
>>How about the possibility that Paul simply didn't like the decrees, and
did not want to actively support them or spread them
Mark Nanos makes a good case for the decree as a principle underlying the
Epistle to the Romans in Mystery of Romans (I can't give you a reference
since I have lent my copy, but it is a well reasoned argument - and somewhat
central to the intent of the decree and of Romans - a little accommodation
of each other's scruples or weaknesses.) I also think an argument could be
made for the underlying thinking of the decree in 1 Corinthians as I think I
remember form John Hurd in his The Origin of 1 Corinthians - yes long
section on this beginning p 246 and a conclusion on p 261 that the 'previous
letter' contained a summary of regulations arising from the decree.)
I think the possibility that Paul conformed his priorities to his own likes
and dislikes is nearly zero.
Bob
mailto::BobMacDonald AT shaw.ca
+ + + Victoria, B.C., Canada + + +
Catch the foxes for us,
the little foxes that make havoc of the vineyards,
for our vineyards are in flower. (Song 2.15)
http://bobmacdonald.gx.ca
-
Re: Jerusalem conference
, (continued)
- Re: Jerusalem conference, Hyam Maccoby, 08/28/2002
- Re: Jerusalem conference, Eric Zuesse, 08/28/2002
- Re: Jerusalem conference, Eric Zuesse, 08/28/2002
- Re: Jerusalem conference, Vince Endris, 08/28/2002
- Re: Jerusalem conference, Bob MacDonald, 08/30/2002
- Re: Jerusalem conference, Hyam Maccoby, 08/30/2002
- Re: Jerusalem conference, RSBrenchley, 08/30/2002
- Re: Jerusalem conference, David Inglis, 08/30/2002
- Re: Jerusalem conference, Steve Black, 08/30/2002
- Re: Jerusalem conference, Edgar M. Krentz, 08/30/2002
- Re: Jerusalem conference, Bob MacDonald, 08/30/2002
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.