Corpus-Paul

[<stephen.finlan AT durham.ac.uk>]

[Dr Krentz, on Luke 22:19b-20, following Fitzmyer:]

> it is the only passage in Luke that interperts the death
> of Jesus positively... Acts 2 interprets Jesus' death as 
> an evil to be set right by the resurrection.

Right.  It is fascinating that Luke repeatedly has Jesus
speaking of the inevitability of his death, but not that
salvation will emanate from that event.

Now on my remark that Acts 20:28 sounded Pauline, and 
your reply that "Paul does not seem to have any interest
in the blood of Jesus," I would have to respectfully
disagree.  You go on to mention four chapters in which
the theme occurs (1 Cor 10; 11; 15; Rom 3[:25]), but we 
also have Rom 5:9 ("having been justified by his blood"),
the sacrificial references in 1 Cor 5:7 and Rom 8:3
(PERI HAMARTIAS), participation in the death (Rom 6 
and 7), scapegoat references in 2 Cor 5:21; Gal 3:13,
and "the blood of his cross" in Col 1:20, which is 
certainly very close to Paul (perhaps from Paul and
Timothy, as 1:1 claims).

You are right that the actual word "blood" does not
occur often, but the centrality of the death begs for
an interpretive context, either martyrdom or sacrifice,
or both (then there is also scapegoat...).

And of course, you are correct that Paul does not use
the word "forgiveness," as Matthew does, but he seems
to be interested in the concept, he just demands that
you hear him out and not jump to forgiveness before you
have heard his soteriology and typology.  The mention
of purchase in Acts 20:28 reminds me of "you have been
bought with a price" in 1 Cor 6:20; 7:23, and of
redemption (APOLYTRWSIS) in Rom 3:24.

So I see more than one swallow here, but then, I have
a vested interest in seeing them, since I am writing
my dissertation on this subject!

Thanks,
Stephen Finlan 
University of Durham