Corpus-Paul

[Jim West <jwest AT highland.net>]

At 02:57 PM 1/12/2005, you wrote:

> But this way of stating things (in the post copied here responding to Lee,
> which engages a discussion already under way from the topic of Philemon)
> will no doubt result in posts about soteriology, which will likely make the
> same unrecognized?] move, since you "introduce" the question of "a [J]ewish
> 'way to' [G]od and a gentile 'way'" when beginning with a different topic,
> having to do with "observing the law [Torah]" (brackets my adjustments).

They seem connected to me.  Philemon has a slave who has run away.  Paul 
disobeys the law (Dt) and says he is sending him back.  Paul sees the way 
of salvation as lying in a) torah for the jew and b) Christ for the 
gentile.  This seems to me dichotomous.
I realize that it is common for folk to suggest that Paul did not have such 
a bifurcated theology.  But then again he does.  Its all over Romans, for 
instance, where theres one way for Jews and one for gentiles.


> But you have made a shift here that requires an argument you do not make;
> namely, that the observing of law has something to do with "getting in,"
> instead of being the covenant obligation of those who are "already in" by
> the gracious act of God's election of someone who trusted God (i.e.,
> Abraham), and the people who have descended from him (Israel), keeping that
> trust, and thus those covenant obligations (which are not for the other
> nations, since they are not in that covenant).

I don't really think theres a shift at all.  Because I don't see it 
as  "getting in".  Indeed, it is all about being in.  Paul addresses Jews 
and Gentile christians, not pagans.  Salvation is lived out by the jews in 
torah observance- while for gentiles torah observance is unnecessary.  It 
is THIS dichotomy that is troubling.    I apologize if I wasn't clear 
enough but let me state plainly now- Im not talking about how jews or 
gentiles get saved- im talking about how they live saved.

> Hence you set the argument up
> in the same old categories that were designed to set the reformers apart
> from the Catholic church to which they objected; but these have nothing to
> do with the categories of Paul's Jewish/non-Jewish context (in my view).

I dont think so at all- because again, im not talking about how faith 
comes- im talking about how faith is lived.


> Thus, I won't be surprised to see the same old arguments paraded as if
> disclosing something new (already begun, I see), with folks proof-texting
> what they already know to be the truth about Paul's view, and sometimes
> making plain what is ideologically at stake for them when that view is
> challenged.

It isnt ideology that drives me- it is an intense discomfort with the 
notion of Paul that there are two ways of living.  And more than that, it 
is a sense that Paul is requiring more of Jews than Gentiles (cf. Acts 
15!).  My question is, why would he do that?  And again, do remember, im 
not talking about how they come to faith- im talking about how they live 
the faith.

Best

Jim


++++++++++++++++++++
Jim West, ThD

http://biblical-studies.blogspot.com  Biblical Theology Weblog
http://web.infoave.net/~jwest Biblical Studies Resources