Corpus-Paul

[Jill and Dale Walker <jilldale AT rcn.com>]

Thanks for your comments, John.

I would like to add that the presence of non-Christians among Christians
at worship could reflect the various social functions of a house. Given
the Roman custom of conducting business from the house, people could have
been in the house for purposes other than Christian gathering. (I am
assuming that the abundance of Latin inscriptions in Corinth reflects
social practices.) Someone perhaps stopped by to greet a prominent
citizen and encountered ecstatic speech. Given that Paul had to dispense
the utterly pragmatic advice of "wait for each other" indicates
that Christian worship wasn't organized by the clock. An assumption that
there were periods of exclusive Christian access and use of a house may
be unwarranted.

Dale Walker
Chicago


At 07:13 PM 8/19/03 +1000, you wrote:

Dear Mark (Given),
Glad you're enjoying the conversation, as am I.
Have I done anything with 1 Cor 14:23-25? Yes, indeed: on pages 293-302 of my previously mentioned book. Openness to outsiders was, it seems, a feature of the synagogue celebrations in antiquity (at least at Alexandria and Antioch and, I assume, elsewhere as well). Pauline congregations will not have been any less open. The fact that converts were meeting in a home - probably of a wealthier and therefore more prominent Corinthian - will not have been a problem since, as I think Jeff pointed out, philosophical gatherings of various types were known to meet on occasion in homes. I doubt there was a sign outside the front gate - 'Revival meeting inside'! - and a simple invitation from believer to unbeliever is easy enough to imagine.
What may be said about the text in question? First, that Paul speaks of the presence of outsiders at public worship suggests that the scenario was not (as far as he was concerned) out of the ordinary. Furthermore, the argument would lack substance entirely were the ‘hypotheticals’ in the text not believable in the minds of Paul’s readers. The high level of social integration already practiced by some Corinthian believers (1 Cor 8, 10) will have contributed to the ease with which unbelieving friends and family, curious to know what went on among the Christians, could enter their gatherings. Secondly, that Paul expected the potential incorporation of new believers described in 1 Cor 14:23-25 to provide a motivation for the Corinthians to change their ways (in the practice of 'tongues'), implies that concern for the conversion of outsiders was a shared assumption among Paul and his converts. Thirdly, Paul clearly believed that the visitor’s presence at public worship contained mission possibilities. This is not to say the prophetic speech of v.24 is in any way directed toward the outsider. Paul’s language describes the would-be-believer simply entering the gathering while the prophesying is already going on; he merely ‘overhears’ a typical utterance aimed at the gathered faithful and is convinced. I'm sure many of those who attend churches regularly today will know of modern analogies.
Kind regards,
John
 
Dr. John P. Dickson
Sydney, Australia
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

----- Original Message -----

From: Given, Mark Douglas

To: Corpus-Paul

Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2003 12:12 PM

Subject: RE: [Corpus-Paul] Re:Judaism: a missionary religion or just open toconverts?

Hi John and others,

 

I'm enjoying this. I wondered, John, if you did anything with 1 Corinthians 14:23-25 in your study:

 

23 Suppose that, if the whole congregation were meeting and all of them speaking in tongues, and some uninitiated people or unbelievers were to come in, don't you think they would say that you were all raving? 24 But if you were all prophesying when an unbeliever or someone uninitiated came in, he would find himself put to the test (elengcho) by all and judged (anakrino) by all 25 and the secrets of his heart revealed; and so he would fall down on his face and worship God, declaring that God is indeed among you. (New Jerusalem Bible).

 

I find this passage fascinating because it conjures up an image for me of prophesying as being similar to an elengchos ("refutation," as practiced by Socrates, some the Sophists, et al.), but, be that as it may, how did unbelievers and the uninitiated get there?  Did a believer invite them? I must say it's fascinating (entertaining?) to think of someone being invited over to a friend or relative's house for a friendly little "gathering," only to find him/herself getting "refuted" and "examined/evaluated," and by ALL no less!  Sounds a bit too much like some of the "revivals" I occasionally witnessed growing up in the hills . . .  (-;

 

Anyway, is it possible that believers bringing unbelievers in was not unusual?

 

Mark

 

 

Mark D. Given

Associate Professor

Department of Religious Studies

Southwest Missouri State University

901 S. National Ave.

Springfield, MO 65804

-----Original Message-----

From: corpus-paul-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org [mailto:corpus-paul-bounces AT lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of Bigpond Dial-up

Sent: Monday, August 18, 2003 8:13 PM

To: Corpus-Paul

Subject: [Corpus-Paul] Re:Judaism: a missionary religion or justopen toconverts?

Dear Jeff and others,

Thank you for the 'congratulations' and for the indication of your eagerness to read my study. I hope you find it stimulating.

I agree that there is a difference between an activity done merely to gain respect for the Jewish communities and one done in the hope that Gentiles would embrace the worship of the Jewish God. It is evidence of the latter that I was talking about in my previous email. There is evidence across a surprising range of sources that some Jews of the period not only were eager for the conversion of Gentiles ('conversion' understood here simply as a new allegiance to the God of the Jews) but hoped to effect this through, as I said previously, prayer, good works, persuasion, public worship and, on occasion, formal proselytic instruction.

Perhaps of more interest to members of this list is the observation that a similar outlook may be discerned in the Pauline epistles. While evidence of formal proselytic instruction of 'outsiders' is plentiful in our documents, notice that this evidence does not relate to congregations generally. Paul, Timothy, Peter, James, et al., are said to preach the gospel to outsiders but believers in general are not. I don't doubt that Paul would have been very happy to see his converts 'evangelising' their neighbours at every opportunity but he does not appear to have taught them to do so. They are, however, urged to engage in various supportive activities - or expressions of 'mission-commitment' - such as prayer, financial support, ethical and verbal apologetic, and the orientation of public worship for the sake of the outsider. Hence, I suspect that belonging to a Pauline congregation will, in this respect, have felt a little like belonging to a synagogue in the Diaspora: while you were conscious that some saw it as their duty to proclaim the message of salvation to outsiders, generally you hoped merely to play an auxiliary role in that cause - through prayer, godly living, church gatherings, and so on.

As an aside, I too agree that 'mission' is not a very useful term in our discussion since it implies sending/commission. The problem is, this word is firmly embedded in the secondary literature: the title of my own book perpetuates that! But what is an appropriate alternative? 'Proselytising' is perhaps etymologically more accurate, since it connotes simply the gaining of adherents, but its pejorative sense in modern English makes it awkward. 'Evangelism' is limited in its usefulness not only because it excludes Jewish activities but also because, strictly speaking, it denotes gospel-telling only. The fact that there isn't an obvious biblical term for this range of activities (ones oriented toward the inclusion of outsiders) is instructive in itself. I suspect Paul didn't have a category in his head that could be labeled 'mission' or whatever - at least, not in relation to the converts in his congregations. For the apostle, all of these activities were probably just aspects of the expectation that believers were to 'do good to all'. 1 Cor 10:31-11:1 appears to move us in that direction.

Kind regards,

John

 

John P. Dickson

Sydney, Australia

 

 

 

----- Original Message -----

From: Jeff Peterson

To: Corpus-Paul

Sent: Monday, August 18, 2003 9:39 PM

Subject: Re: [Corpus-Paul] Re: Judaism: a missionary religion or just open toconverts?

Dear John,

The initial question I'd press is what activities the various kinds of evidence you rightly mention constitute evidence for. I.e., there's a difference between a religion that welcomes outsiders when they present themselves on the doorstep (as opposed to driving them away) and one that actively recruits among outsiders; it's the difference between most Orthodox and many Evangelical churches in this neck of the woods. The interesting thing in your summary of evidence is the motive clauses; it's not my impression that the sources are so clear that gentile conversion is the motive of the Jewish actions you refer to, which leaves open the interpretation that e.g. good works were done with a view to improving gentile perceptions of Judaism, which might have a number of benefits besides conversion, e.g., averting a contemporary replay of Nebuchadrezzar or Antiochus Epiphanes.

Congratulations on the publication of your study. I will look forward to an opportunity to read it -- sometime after the beginning of the semester!

All best,

Jeff Peterson

On Monday, August 18, 2003, at 01:14 AM, Bigpond Dial-up wrote:

Dear Cameron and others,

Very happy to interact on this question. My recently published dissertation - if you will forgive the shameless self-promotion - is substantially devoted to this question. Actually, it was devoted to the question of Paul's indebtedness to Jewish traditions about outreach to the Gentiles (John P. Dickson, Mission-Commitment in Ancient Judaism and in the Pauline Communities: the shape, extent and background of early Christian mission, WUNT 2, vol.159, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2003).

I believe it is important to distinguish between a 'missionary religion' (such as Pauline Christianity surely was) and a religion in which one simply finds evidence of 'mission-commitment' (activities consciously oriented toward the inclusion of outsiders). Some forms of Judaism in antiquity certainly fall into this latter category.

There is some evidence of Jewish preachers to Gentiles (akin to Christian missionaries) in the period, and Goodman and McKnight have by no means had the last word here. But the more significant evidence, I believe, is that which indicates a desire on the part of many Jews of the era to draw Gentiles to the worship of the true God. That desire was expressed variously through 'prayer' for the salvation of Gentiles, 'good works' designed to win Gentiles to the Jewish life, 'verbal persuasion' (as distinct from formal teaching) and 'public worship' in which the synagogue provided a powerful and self-conscious, albeit indirect, means of winning Gentiles to true worship.

Happy to discuss this theme in detail but I thought I'd throw out this preliminary response to your question.

Kind regards from Sydney,

John

 

Dr. John P. Dickson

Sydney, Australia

 

 

 

 

----- Original Message -----

From: <?color><?param 1999,1999,FFFF>Cameron VanEpps<?/color>

To: <?color><?param 1999,1999,FFFF>corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org<?/color>

Sent: Sunday, August 17, 2003 4:50 PM

Subject: [Corpus-Paul] Judaism: a missionary religion or just open to converts?

Dear Readers,

I have recently read Paula Fredriksen's essay, "Judaism, Circumcision, and Apocalyptic Hope" in Mark Nanos' new book, The Galatians debate, and found my mind pricked with many interesting thoughts. I will only pose one question at a time in the hope that each will be dealt with fully. My first question, which I never really gave much thought to, is the idea of Judaism as being a "missionary" religion. Does it make sense to think that there was such a thing as outreach based preaching/teaching prior to the great commission? Or is it more likely that what really happened was teachings or philosophical debates between a Rabbi and those holding to another theological application in an open air arena, thus drawing those inclined to monotheism into the fold. I would love to hear people's thoughts on this topic.

Cameron P. VanEpps

215 W. Illinois St.

Bellingham, WA 98225

phone: (360) 715-8873

cell: (360) 319-6653

<image.tiff>

_______________________________________________

Corpus-Paul mailing list

Corpus-Paul AT lists.ibiblio.org

http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/corpus-paul

_______________________________________________

Corpus-Paul mailing list

Corpus-Paul AT lists.ibiblio.org

http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/corpus-paul

Jeffrey Peterson
Austin Graduate School of Theology
Austin, Texas

---

_______________________________________________
Corpus-Paul mailing list
Corpus-Paul AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/corpus-paul

---

_______________________________________________
Corpus-Paul mailing list
Corpus-Paul AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/corpus-paul

_______________________________________________
Corpus-Paul mailing list
Corpus-Paul AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/corpus-paul