Corpus-Paul

["Edgar M. Krentz" <ekrentz AT sbcglobal.net>]

> [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).

But Paul is in each case citing traditions. Rom 5:9 is an Old 
Testament citation. Rom 3:25, 1 Cor 10, 11, 15  each cite a 
tradition. When Paul interprets the tradition he makes no use of the 
blood or sacrificial imagery. read each text in context. Paul uses 
the paschal reference in 1 Cor 5:7 to argue for his recommendation 
about the incestuaous man, not to say anything about the significance 
of Jesus' death. 1 Cor 5:21 refers to substitutionary death, not to 
sacrificial death. And redemption in Gal 3:13 uses the language of 
manumission,n ot of sacrifice. Col. 1:20 is deutero-Pauline, in spite 
of Jimmy Dunn's attempt to argue for Pauline authorship. Hence it is 
evidence for a later interpretation of Paul, not Paul himself.

So I am not persuaded by these references.

> 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 my point is that sacrificial language is rare in Paul.

> 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.

No way. Paul uses HAMARTIA about 60 times. It is a power that holds 
men in slavery, as Romans 6 holds, belongs with death and the law as 
the unholy trinity from which one must be liberated, as Romans 8:2 
holds

> 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.

Once again, manumission language, change of Lordship.

> 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
> ______________________________________________

I don't expect that these comments will persuade you; but if I were 
on your dissertation committee, I would really be pushing you for 
more substantial evidence than the above. and you may indeed be able 
to provide it. So have at it--and refute the above suggestions.

Ed Krentz

--
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Edgar  Krentz                                                     
Professor Emeritus of New Testament                       
Lutheran School of Theology at Chicago
1100 East 55th Street
Chicago, IL 60615
Telephone: (773) 256-0773               Home Tel: 773-947-8105
Office e-mail:  ekrentz AT lstc.edu        Home e-mail: ekrentz AT sbcglobal.net
 GERASKO D' AEI  POLLA  DIDASKOMENOS.
 "I grow older, learning many things all the time." [Solon of Athens]
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + ++