Corpus-Paul

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

on 2/20/05 2:37 PM, Richard Fellows at rfellows AT shaw.ca wrote:

> My point is that there was confusion in Galatia and that the confusion is
> more likely to have occured soon after Paul's first visit than at a later
> date. 

Mark replies:
I do not think that the logic is sound. It is possible, but not "more
likely." The implications of these non-Jews' views in their subgroups may
take some time to become clear to non-Christ-believing members and
especially leaders of the larger Jewish communities in which these subgroups
function (in my understanding of the social context). And those responses
could change with time. And it is their (the influencers) response to which
the addressees must react, which reaction Paul seeks to control by way of
this letter. That may just as well develop slowly. (There is a big deal
being made right now about something Ward Churchill wrote over three years
ago, when Sept. 11 occurred; on your logic, based on the current heated
debate, it should have happened long before now; but it did not.)

>I cited 5:11, but there are other cases of confusion, so my argument
> does not rest on 5:11 alone. Let's look at 5:11, though. James Dunn lists 6
> distinct interpretations of this verse, all of which involve the Galatians
> having a misunderstanding of Paul's position, I think, so they all argue
> against a late date for the letter.

Mark replies:
I do not think that the addressees are that confused about Paul's earlier
message against proselyte conversion, but they are trying to find a way to
"add" it to their faith in Christ, and convince themselves that is OK. I see
them reasoning like teenagers often do when faced with peer pressure: "what
the folks don't know won't hurt them, and it is "necessary" for us to
negotiate social acceptance." Paul's response is that of the parent who
finds out that the game he had said was not permitted is being considered an
option (good news alongside the good news of Christ, 1:6-9). So I do not
believe that this passage suggests a late date.

[deleted interaction with Dunn]
> 
> Mark, you have offered a very different interpretation of 5:11. I find your
> writing style difficult to follow so I am not sure that I have understood
> your interpretation. I think you are saying that Paul wishes to say, "I take
> a stand against circumcision and am persecuted as a result, so you should
> follow my example in opposing circumcision at whatever cost". I have some
> serious reservations about this interpretation of 5:11. Firstly, I do not
> see how it explains the wording of 5:11. Why does Paul not simply say what
> he meant?

Mark replies:
I think he does. I see no point in restating it, since it was clear enough
that you understood my point.

> It is hard to see how the Galatians can have been expected to
> extract this meaning from the words written in 5:11. Secondly, there is
> nothing in the context about persecution. Paul is writing to those who want
> to be justified by the law (5:4) and, while there may have been external
> pressures on them, this is not the theme of 5:2-12.

Mark replies:
The passage says someone is obstructing the course upon which they had set
out based on Paul's teaching. That someone wants them to become proselytes,
and in view of 6:12-13, is bringing pressure to bear upon them. I believe
that they are being threatened with exclusion from their claim to Abrahamic
kinship. 

Now the details of a claim to "persecution" are simply indefinable. It is an
assessment of someone's behavior as inappropriate, illegitimate, but what
form it takes is not clear. I see the persuasion here as pressure to comply
with prevailing conventions, and that is the persecution at issue. They ones
bringing the persuasion and pressure see it as helpful, appropriate, for
their best interests, etc. They do not call is persecution.

By the way, in my view, the issue is not precisely "justified by law" if by
that you mean observing the law. The issue is to be justified/legitimated by
the convention of proselyte convention. As far as observing the law, if that
is what your statement means (I do not know, but it is common to see this
view), that is something that they do not seem to be considering fully,
since Paul can use it to say, in effect, you have you eyes on the social
result you wish for, but not on the responsibilities of Torah observance
that will thereafter entail (5:3).

> In this passage Paul is
> worried about the PERSUASION of the influencers. He is not here concerned
> with any PRESSURE that they might have exerted. Thirdly, I don't think that
> Paul can be giving his own life's experiences as an example for the readers
> to follow. 

Mark replies:
I do. And the letter often appeals to Paul's example (4:12), and that of the
crucified Christ (3:1). Whether that is what Paul is doing in chapters 1 and
2 with the narrative of his life is a matter that cannot be settled, since
it is the result of rhetorical interpretation. But it seems pretty likely to
be the thrust of 6:11-18, arguably Paul's summary comments written in his
own hand. For a good argument in this direction, see the essay by
Mitternacht in Galatians Debate, to which he has already referred.

>If the were, the Galatians would simply reply, "Just because you
> are persecuted for your beliefs, that does not mean that we should be
> persecuted too". 

Mark replies:
Good point. Wonder if they did.

>The Galatians were not followers of Paul exclusively.
> Paul's authority in Galatia was not so strong that the Galatian believers
> would accept persecution just because Paul did.

Mark replies:
I do not know how you can know this. But anyway, Paul's letter is based on
his assumed authority with them, as a mother, an ironic rebuking one at
that: "they should know better!" He is the one who has brought them to
faith, and now it looks like he needs to do it all over again (cf. 4:11-20).

> I have the same reservation
> about your interpretation of Gal 2:1-14, Mark. But I may have misuderstood
> you.
> 
> I have two questions for Mark.
> 
> Can you explain why the Galatian situation arose only in Galatia?

Mark replies:
I don't know that it did, and suppose it was quite common to have a problem
resulting from Paul's non-proselyte conversion policy for non-Jews when
bringing them to claim they are children of Abraham. At least in cases where
they functioned as subgroups within Jewish communities. I have written a
book on Romans, where I think it has been at issue too, although the
addressees are past considering that option, and instead are growing
resentful for not being accepted on their own terms, which attitude Paul
seeks to check, leading to a very different rhetorical approach by the same
guy (but probably with a different secretary, unless Galatians was also
written from Cenchrea).

> If the
> influencers are homegrown Galatians, why do we not see a similar situation
> develop in Thessalonica, for example?

Mark replies:
I cannot know. It does seem (from the rhetoric of that letter) that the
groups of Thessalonica might not be meeting within Jewish communities, so
this issue might not arise.

> Why Galatia only? Why did Paul not
> have to write similar letters to other churches that he founded?

Mark replies:
Who knows; maybe he did. Or maybe he got to them in person, which leaves us
no data.

> 
> Doesn't your reading of Galatians require that it was written soon after
> Paul's founding visit to the region in question? Why would your home-grown
> influencers sprout up at a later date if they did not sprout up earlier?

Mark replies:
I have answered these above, at the start of this reply.

As a matter of methodology, you seem to work as if we had comprehensive data
in the few documents we do have. I do not. I think we have very limited,
very occasional information, and we have to guess at the occasions based on
what we think makes the most sense of the one-sided rhetoric we have at
hand. They do not always work together very well; but that is no surprise,
given the nature of the data available to us, and what is at stake in its
interpretation.

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