Corpus-Paul

["Gary Burnett" <gwburn AT ntlworld.com>]

So people from pre-industrial agricultural societies have little or no
concept of the future? Sounds just the sort of claim we might expect from
someone who has suggested people from this background had no sense of their
own selves as distinctive, unique and self-aware, or of others as distinct
and unique beings - people for whom individual psychology, uniqueness and
self-consciousness were of no conseqence. (see Malina's "New Testament
World" & my own "Paul & the Salvation of the Individual")

Could I suggest that Malina's extreme views owe more to 21st century
US/Western imperial culturalism than to a sympathetic approach to other
cultures? Attributing such simplistic outlooks to other cultures, including
that of the 1st century Mediterranean world, seems much too patronising for
my liking - aside from the fact that in extensive travel and work amongst
both the urban and rural poor in Asia, I have never come across either the
sort of community "embeddedness" so much touted by Malina, nor this latest
idea that such people cannot have a thorough understanding, appreciation and
hope for the future. (Yes, I've seen much more community-orientation, but
"dyadic" personalities? Not at all.)

Just as a matter of interest, how does this idea of Malina's fit the
situation of black slavery in the US, where so much of the outlook, as
evidenced by the singing - the "spirituals" - seems focused on the future?

Dr Gary W Burnett
Union Theological College
Belfast


----- Original Message -----
From: <corpus-paul-request AT lists.ibiblio.org>
To: <corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org>
Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2003 5:01 PM
Subject: Corpus-Paul Digest, Vol 3, Issue 14


> Send Corpus-Paul mailing list submissions to
> corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/corpus-paul
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> corpus-paul-request AT lists.ibiblio.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> corpus-paul-owner AT lists.ibiblio.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Corpus-Paul digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Time: Paul's Peasant Present (Loren Rosson)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2003 04:39:40 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Loren Rosson <rossoiii AT yahoo.com>
> Subject: [Corpus-Paul] Time: Paul's Peasant Present
> To: Corpus-Paul <corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org>
> Message-ID: <20030417113940.7705.qmail AT web41504.mail.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
> List --
>
> Bruce Malina has written an interesting essay called
> "Christ and Time: Swiss or Mediterranean", in which he
> argues that pre-industrial peasants had no
> understanding of eschatology as we know it today. He
> distinguishes between "forthcoming" (the focus of
> peasants) and "future" (the concern of prophets,
> and/or scribes and elites). The latter may rightly be
> called eschatology, but the former is really
> "soonology", "nextology", or "proximatology" in which
> present and immediate future blend together under a
> prolonged "now". Here is a snap-shot of Malina's
> presentation, which I cited recently on the Dale
> Allison Seminar in our discussions of the historical
> Jesus:
>
> "Peasant societies invariably have the present as
> first-order temporal preference; secondary preference
> is past; and the future comes in as third choice...For
> members of Jesus-movement groups, God's Kingdom was
> forthcoming, Jesus' emergence as messiah with power
> was forthcoming, the transformation of social
> realities in favor of God's people was forthcoming.
> Yet for the audiences of Mark, Matthew, and Luke,
> things changed. The coming of Jesus was moved into
> imaginary time...In the New testament writings, we can
> see how the forthcoming became future, how the
> experienced became imaginary...Jesus was once
> perceived by present-oriented people as the
> forthcoming messiah with power. This perception was
> rooted in actual, experienced time situated in an
> operational realm abuting the horizon of the present.
> Given the press of events, however, this perception
> had subsequently proceeded beyond that horizon into
> the realm of the possible, of the future rooted in
> imaginary time...accessible only to [Christian]
> prophets." (pp 182,193,208)
>
> Malina concludes that for peasants no tension exists
> between the "now" and "not yet" -- since both are
> subsumed under a rather broad and prolonged "now",
> any future dimension understood as immediately
> "forthcoming" which impinges directly on (or is
> actualized in) the present. The (non forthcoming)
> future, on the other hand, as the realm of the
> imaginary, belongs exclusively to God who speaks
> through his prophets. (See pp 210-211.)
>
> The distinction between forthcoming and future is one
> I find interesting, if a bit murky. In a series of
> private emails, Bruce Malina has been very helpful in
> clarifying his position to me. I (along with seminar
> guest Dale Allison) had found the forthcoming/future
> distinction a bit superficial -- and perhaps yet
> another scholarly device by which unnattractive and
> embarrassing notions of future eschatology can be
> banished away from "heroes" like Jesus and Paul.
> Malina wrote (in his email, which I quote with his
> permission):
>
> "My distinction [between forthcoming and future] is
> based on basic data from field studies on folks
> interested in time. The first datum is that peasants
> and ghetto youth today are present oriented and the
> reason for that is that they are not sure of having
> their daily basic needs (food, clothing, shelter)
> taken care of. It was only with the Industrial
> Revolution that an economy of abundance emerged so
> that people might plan for a future that allowed for
> several years of crop failure. Modern ghetto youth are
> not interested in college (a typical future oriented
> endeavor in which young people are kept out of the
> labor market for a good number of years, hence must be
> supported by someone's surplus; no surplus, no
> future!). The same is true with peasants: no surplus,
> no future."
>
> This entails a revision of how we should understand
> any "future" expectations of people like Jesus and
> Paul. Malina continues:
>
> "Jesus' proclamation was for 'soon' or 'this
> generation.' Peasants have a nothing ventured nothing
> gained attitude. So lets wait and see if it happens in
> this generation. If not, forget about it. Notice Paul
> has this problem with the Thessalonians as 'this
> generation' began to 'sleep.' One generation's wait is
> forthcoming, not future. This generation is actually
> around, standing and seeing stuff and can await the
> culmination of its present rooted hopes. Once this
> generation goes, the game is over and all go home. No
> harm in expecting, but now back to work. This not
> eschatology but soonology, nextology, proximatology."
>
> Malina is currently working on a Romans commentary,
> which he kindly outlined for me. I won't copy the
> outline here, only summarize his theme of "Time:
> Paul's Peasant Present" under three divisions in
> Romans. (1) Rom 2:1-3:20 is called "from past to
> present" (focusing on the law, decalogue,
> circumcision, Judean advantages); (2) Rom 3:21-8:39 is
> called "now" (focusing on a new revelation for Israel
> + the proof-text, humanity reconciled to God, dead to
> sin and alive to God while living in the spirit); and
> (3) Rom 9:1-15:13 is called "forthcoming based on the
> present" (focusing on what will soon happened to
> Israel and the Gentiles, based on the present
> attitudes and activites of each).
>
> So even I Thess passim and Rom 11:25-27 are understood
> by Malina to be "forthcoming" (and thus really
> present-focused), not "future".
>
> There is much about Malina's argument I find helpful,
> but I remain dubious about the idea that peasants as a
> rule could not have been future-oriented. Indeed,
> Malina's argument stands the
> eschatological/millenarian model on its head. We have
> been told that eschatology -- the millenarian dream --
> is the hope of the disaffected and those unhappy with
> their lot in life; that peasants often bank hopes on
> future eschatology so that God will start providing
> the much-needed surplus and set things to right.
> Malina now insists that soonology (or nextology, or
> proximatology) is the actual hope of these folks; that
> peasants are invariably focused on the present.
>
> I am interested in seeing what other list-members
> think about Malina's argument in general, and the
> forthcoming/future distinction in particular --
> especially (for the sake of this list) as applied to
> the apostle Paul.
>
> Loren Rosson III
> Nashua NH
> rossoiii AT yahoo.com
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo
> http://search.yahoo.com
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Corpus-Paul mailing list
> Corpus-Paul AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/corpus-paul
>
>
> End of Corpus-Paul Digest, Vol 3, Issue 14
> ******************************************
>