Corpus-Paul

[Bob MacDonald <bobmacdonald AT shaw.ca>]

Dear Hyam,

thank you for your reply. I am continuing to enjoy 'Ritual and Morality'. It
surprises me that such topics could have so many resonances - religious,
psychological, medical, historical and so on. What does one 'expect to
accept' to use your phrase?

It seems to me we are on closer wavelengths than I might have thought. In
your last post, you wrote:

>>I argue that Paul re-introduced centrally ideas which had long been
banished from Judaism, leaving only inconsiderable traces; thus, by turning
the clock back, Paul produced a new religion, irreconcilable with either
Judaism or with the views of the Jerusalem Church.<<

What you have implied also is that these traces were available to everyone
in Judaism - not just to Paul. Why then would Paul produce a new religion?
Perhaps he did - but he was not alone. (Your use of the term banished seems
strong if the vestiges like the Red Cow are still 'in' the Torah).

I think we have some loaded terms here too: like mystery religion - all
religion is a mystery. If there were no mystery to our lives, we would not
need religion (if I must use these terms). Even the science of time and
space is a mystery to scientists - quantized relativistic equations have no
time variable! Is this God's point of view? Parallel universes and string
theory of multiple unseen dimensions imply much about life that intrigues. I
expect the ancients were equally intrigued by the created order.  Theories
of calendarization alone are enough to inspire our awe at their capacity.

My point is that we do not need one 'genius' to make a new religion. I am a
bit suspicious of Akenson - Surpassing Wonder - when he suggests a single
person compiled the first 9 books of Tanach. I am equally suspicious of the
mind of a single person governing an entire religion. In the New Testament
as in Tanakh, I see the work of many, not the work of one human. (The 2 or 3
witness requirement.) That the residual syncretisms of Judaism were
available to the Temple and to Paul means there were precedents in the
Judaisms of the time independent of one parochial Hellenist named Saul/Paul
that could have been used by many to explain the impact of the life of
Jesus.

You also wrote: >>Of course you will not expect me to accept that his
[Jesus] teaching was about salvation through his death and resurrection.<<

I am very grateful for this interaction. And I respect that your
appreciation and assessment will differ from mine - and that yours and mine
may each change - not necessarily in convergent paths but not impossibly.

I suggested it was psychologically possible for Jesus to have understood his
death as sacrificial. As far as his teachings (flesh and blood) are
concerned, I wrote about these in my essay #7 on Romans (one short page on
the whole subject of Paul and Jesus and their teaching!). Jesus teachings
are Torah - as are Paul's. There is one difference. Jesus is portrayed as
teaching with authority - as the Author. Paul sees himself as in the
prophetic tradition - 'Thus says the Lord'. But they both teach Torah fully
and with respect. ('Not one jot or tittle' - including the Red Cow! and
Romans 2:13 - 'the doers of the Law who will be justified').

The problem is that we humans have not the power to live the Torah (Romans
7). Hence the need for a power beyond us. Paul sees this and proclaims the
power in the death of Jesus. Many others saw this and proclaimed it - with
Paul, before Paul and independently of him.

This religion is a mystery but what I hear is that it works. If we 'put to
death the deeds of the body we will live' (Romans 8). The result may indeed
be fully explicable as human psychology: one is shown a means of stopping
destructive behaviour and the body heals itself. Those who have acted on
this by faith have found the result of a love that laid down its own life
for another - the human sacrifice that was intimated by the animal
sacrifices. (Hebrews)

with respect and gratitude

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