Corpus-Paul

[Loren Rosson <rossoiii AT yahoo.com>]

Mark,

I'm glad my review of Esler coincided with your
correspondence with Anders. Thanks to both of you, for
good replies to Philip's criticisms. I forwarded your
post to Philip, to which he kindly replied and gave
permission to post on the list. So without further
ado, here's more on the church-synagogue question.

Loren Rosson III
Nashua NH
rossoiii AT yahoo.com

________________________________________________


Dear Loren,

I am surprised that Mark and Anders both appear to
have missed the significance of a mid first century
date for the Ostia proseucha in relation to Romans and
their idea that the Christ-movement was
intra-synagogal, especially when we have the
proseuchai in Philo's Legatio and there are no
proseuchai in sight whatever in Romans 16.

I do not deny the possibility that some Judean
Christ-followers continued to attend the Roman
proseuchai. I also do not deny the possibility there
may have been some newer congregations of Judeans
meeting in houses  (I make this point at length on p.
97 of the book). The simple fact is that there is no
positive evidence for Judean house-synagogues in Rome,
whereas there is for proseuchai (and the Ostia example
is marvellous in telling us what they must have been
like). If there were Judean house-congregations, they
were in the minority and the tailor-made proseuchai we
know from Ostia and from Philo in Rome for the 40s
were the characteristic architectural and
institutional _expression of the centuries-old
community of Judeans in Rome - with the consequences
for identity differentiation between them and a
Christ-movement meeting in houses that I have set out.

My argument is that the Christ-movement as such was
not within the Judean ethnic group. Anders' Swedish
example raises interesting questions but proves
nothing about Romans. It is axiomatic that you cannot
use such a comparison from another time and place to
prove something about the New Testament, only to raise
questions heuristically. And it is easy to come up
with a counter-example, such as members of a vibrant
ecumenical Christian charismatic group, where most of
the real action is and who have a long Sunday
afternoon meeting, who yet retain some affiliation
with their own denominational churches, by attendance
on Sunday morning (a phenomenon I know from
Australia). Although even here I hesitate about
offering such a comparison, covering two types of
religious grouping, since Judean identity in Rome was
ethnic and the Christ-movement (on my view) was not,
being trans-ethnic, indeed socio-religious.

My argument, moreover, is based on an interpretation
of the whole letter (as Mark himself requires), with
the architecture question only part of the case. I
could cite, as one only example of other evidence, the
anti-Judean views on the part of Greek
Christ-followers mentioned in Romans 11. I cannot see
them attending a proseucha with views like this. They
scorn Israel. But, as I say, my argument is a
cumulative and inter-connected one, which goes far
beyond the architectural question.    

Also I would have thought that my overall position
would have come as no surprise to Mark; I have much
the same view in relation to Galatians, although I
agree that in Romans Paul is much more conciliatory to
the Judean ethnos and its law.  He is careful to
preserve Judean ethnic identity and the man who writes
of its magnificent features mentioned in Romans 9.4
presumably knew of the no doubt impressive proseuchai
that certainly formed the Judeans' architectural and
institutional base in Rome. 

Still, it is a fascinating area of disagreement.

All the best.

Philip 



                
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail