Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: Dating Paul

Expand Messages
  • mwgrondin <mwgrondin@comcast.net>
    ... Hi Gordon- Just to clarify - the sow s ear I was referring to in that passage was Paul. What I meant was that if he had been regarded as a relatively
    Message 1 of 38 , Jan 30, 2003
      --- Gordon Raynal wrote:
      > You use the metaphor of "silk purse out of a sow's ear" and
      > that doesn't fit the judgment of role and station and actual
      > participation.

      Hi Gordon-

      Just to clarify - the "sow's ear" I was referring to in that
      passage was Paul. What I meant was that if he had been regarded
      as a "relatively minor character" at the time of writing of Acts,
      Luke's "history" of the movement would probably not have been so
      successful. But I see you've covered that by appealing to the "black
      hole" of pre-Pauline history which had evidently been largely
      forgotten by the time of Acts.

      > In fact I think of those nameless folks who spread the work into
      > Syria, up to Antioch, down to Egypt... to Rome!... on the basis
      > of the establishment work done by James, Peter, Martha, Mary
      > Magdalene etc. etc. are the major historical players. I think
      > Paul had ***a real movement*** to join...

      D'accord. But Martha and the Magdalene as "major historical
      players"? Based on what? Even with respect to most of the twelve,
      we can only guess at what they were doing.

      > ... one where the central theogical ideas, the ethical ideas,
      > the chief symbolic ideas, the pattern of midrash, the dining
      > practices... to name some key things;)!, were in place.

      I think you're on slippery grounds here. Something was in place, no
      doubt, but it evidently wasn't the same as what came to be in place
      via Paul's confrontational efforts with the pillars. Dining
      practices in place? If so, why the later dispute over them? As
      for "central theological ideas" and "chief symbolic ideas", that
      seems to deny any significant degree of originality to Paul's
      thinking, which surely can't be right. And if the ultimate
      relationship to the gentiles hadn't been worked out pre-Paul, then
      what was it that was "in place" with respect to that?

      What we do know for sure is that by the end of the first century,
      we have Clement writing from Rome appealing to Paul's authority,
      and Ignatius on his way from Syria (Antioch) to Rome appealing to
      Peter and Paul both, so that even in those communities not founded
      by Paul, his status as a major player has been solidified some
      thirty years later, while others have been forgotten.

      Mike Grondin
      Mt. Clemens, MI
    • mwgrondin <mwgrondin@comcast.net>
      (from the site you mentioned): Half Shekel - the currency of the Jerusalem Temple At the Great Temple in Jerusalem the annual tax levied on Jews was 1/2
      Message 38 of 38 , Feb 8, 2003
        (from the site you mentioned):
        "Half Shekel - the currency of the Jerusalem Temple
        At the Great Temple in Jerusalem the annual tax levied on Jews
        was 1/2 shekel per male. The 1/2 shekel and shekel were ... the
        only coins accepted by the temple."

        Richard-

        I'm confused. The Tyrean half-shekel contained an image of Melqarth,
        yet it was acceptable at the Temple? Practically speaking, it may
        have been the most stable non-Roman currency, but I was under the
        impression that the reason the Herodian coinage - as well the shekel
        minted 66-70 by Jewish revolutionaries - contained no human image,
        was a supposed ban on "graven images". What's the story? Money win
        out over principle, no such principle, or was the principle not so
        simplistic?

        Regards,
        Mike Grondin
        Mt. Clemens, MI
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.