Corpus-Paul

["Mark D. Nanos" <nanosmd AT comcast.net>]

Loren,
I appreciate when you make a distinction between what you believe Paul
upheld and what is "true" independent of his rhetorical interests. This is
what is often missing in Pauline exegetical and theological comments such as
you had cited. But I still think that you are not following out some of the
implications of reading Paul this way. And I took issue with you, because
you are usually quite careful. I do not suppose you actually believe what
you wrote should be internalized as true, but I did not sense the distance
was kept in focus.

You write: "What once had glory has lost its glory
> because of the greater glory".

I would suggest, perhaps, "lost its luster when compared to the arrival of
the awaited glory," to make your point. And yet, Paul still upholds that it
is "the glory" and still the basis of that which is of value to those
Christ-believing non-Jews to whom he writes, who now share in "it," not
something else. They have joined with Israelites (although not Israelites)
in being recipients of that very same treasure, so it is not in any way
emptied (lost), but realized "also" by themselves. (Don't forget the "not
only" and "also" that permeates the texts of late ch. 3 and through ch. 4 of
Romans.)

You write: 
>...as with so many converts in many times and
> places, the past suddenly becomes inferior relative to
> the new state of things.

Again, the emphasis should be on perspective and on relative. There is a
difference between relative and the kinds of absolute statements you cited
favorably. 

I was trying to say that the only evidence to judge the plight of Judeans
prior to Christ is the Scriptural testimony composed by those Judeans (and a
little common sense). And that is the very same basis from which Paul worked
to formulate and legitimate his viewpoints post faith in Christ, just as had
been the case before that event. Since Judean Scriptures includes examples
of indescribable joy, faith, and righteousness, such as heroes entering the
afterlife without death, and so on, which supports Judean identity
boundaries in the same way that Christians maintain their own at the expense
of the outgroup other, it (both) must be de-rhetorized. (Note to that it is
on the basis of Judean confidence in faith and righteousness that
self-criticism is exemplified in the same texts.) Paul's comparative
rhetorical statements cannot be made into absolute statements in the way
that they/you had/have done in that post.

So even if an interpreter internalizes Paul's worldview, he or she, if
representing themselves as more than an ideologue, are obliged to recognize
the interested view of Paul's rhetoric (as interpreted by him or her in that
direction), e.g., as that of an advocate of a certain group, whose view is
colored, so that it does not represent "reality." I failed to see that in
the statements you cited, or your post. It is acknowledge in this one.

I do not see the implications of the passages from Paul that you cite to be
in the direction you take them, but that is another matter, about which I do
not have time to engage at the moment. In short, I do not think that
Abraham's faith (or righteousness) was different from other heroes of faith
for Paul. Rather, the emphasis arises from the argument he was engaged
in--to explain how his non-Israelite addressees could be members of
Abraham's family (covenant) without becoming members of Israel's (additional
covenant)--accounts for the emphasis we now read. It is shortsighted to read
the few remnants of rhetorical engagement with specific people and
situations and topics as if we had comprehensive writing and eyewitness
testimony to the way he lived and the contexts he addressed (or those about
whom he wrote!). I suppose that he would react with incredulity, and provide
contradictory statements to many things that have been absolutized from the
limited rhetoric (and imagination) of the interpreters of his rhetoric
(then, and since).

Regards,
Mark
-- 
Mark D. Nanos, Ph.D.
Rockhurst University
Co-Moderator
http://home.comcast.net/~nanosmd/


on 2/1/05 5:55 AM, Loren Rosson at rossoiii AT yahoo.com wrote:

> Mark wrote:
> 
>> I think you and the trio you mention ought to read
>> the Tanak some time (and maybe Rom 9:4-5, real
>> carefully, word for word) and ask yourselves whether
>> Paul could possibly think that way about the texts
>> that tell of heroes of the faith and of
>> righteousness (some don't even die, their faith
>> is so great, for crying out loud)...
> 
> Yes, but does Paul understand their faith -- which he
> undoubtedly believed equivalent to his own
> (pre-Christ) mentioned in Philip 3:4b-6 -- to be
> equivalent to the particular measure of faith advanced
> in Rom 4:18-25? I don't think the understanding being
> advanced here contradicts the fact that "to the
> Israelites belong adoption, glory, "covenants, law,
> worship, and promises" (9:4-5), because Paul
> understands this era to be one of "condemnation": how
> much "more glorious" is the era of justification (II
> Cor 3:9). In other words, it's all a hindsight
> perspective. "What once had glory has lost its glory
> because of the greater glory".
> 
> You know I don't believe Paul actually experienced any
> of the "gloom and doom" implied by Rom 4 and made
> explicit in Rom 7 (Philip 3:4b-6 more than trustworthy
> here), but, as with so many converts in many times and
> places, the past suddenly becomes inferior relative to
> the new state of things. The past becomes anticipatory
> at best -- and I'm beginning to think this is how Paul
> sees Abraham: the exception who proves the rule in a
> hopeless era (again: Paul's point of view, and
> hindsight perspective only). This is why scripture can
> become such a battleground. And it's also why most
> Judeans (quelle surprise) had trouble seeing
> eye-to-eye with Paul. Does this sound at least
> plausible, even if disagreeable and (to you) rather odious?
> 
> =====
> Loren Rosson III
> Nashua NH
> rossoiii AT yahoo.com
> 
> "In the natural sciences a person is remembered for his best idea; in the
> social sciences he is remembered for his worst."
> 
> 
> 
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!? 
> Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today!
> http://my.yahoo.com
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Corpus-Paul mailing list
> Corpus-Paul AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/corpus-paul