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

[XTalk] Re: Proto-Marcionite Paul?

Expand Messages
  • Hermann Detering
    Hermann Detering - answer to Mike Grondin (I hobe the family name is correct) and Steve Black MIKE wrote That s fine as far as it goes, but you present your
    Message 1 of 3 , Sep 2, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      Hermann Detering - answer to Mike Grondin (I hobe the family name is
      correct) and Steve Black

      MIKE wrote

      That's fine as far as it goes, but you present your own theory with
      a difficulty, for if the author of this portion of 1 Cor is a
      Marcionite, and if he identifies with the Acts of Paul, then by
      implication he must also have approved of what appear to be
      anti-Marcionite sentiments in AP:

      "They are thus not children of righteousness, but children of wrath,
      who reject the providence of God, saying <far from faith> that
      heaven and earth and all that (are) in them are not works of the
      Father." (3 Cor, in section 8, "Paul in Philippi", Schneemelcher)

      Reductio ad absurdum? Or do you posit also a Catholic redaction
      of the Acts of Paul?

      ________________________
      HERMANN DETERING

      Indeed I don not believe that III. Cor had ever been an integral part of the
      AP.
      TESTUZ (Papyrus Bodmer X-XII, 1959) has come to a similar result (against W.
      Schneemelcher). Testuz has shown that III Cor (which also had been come to
      us as single piece ("Einzelst├╝ck"): FBodm, M,L,P, B and syrian canon) is
      connected with AP only in a very loose manner (by means of few sentences).

      The Corinthian correspondence as a whole seems to me an alien element inside
      AP and a pure catholic antignostic/Marcionitic product. Note the following
      point in M.R. James translation (linked with Kirby`s website):

      2 There have come unto Corinth two men, Simon and Cleobius, which
      are overthrowing the faith of many with evil (CORRUPT) words, 3 which do
      thou prove AND EXAMINE: 4 for we have never heard such words from thee nor
      from the other apostles: 5 but all that we have received from thee or from
      them, that do we hold fast.
      ....
      10 They say that
      we must not use the prophets,
      11 and that God is not Almighty,
      12 and that there shall be no resurrection of the flesh,
      13 and that man was not made by God,
      14 and that Christ came not down (is not come, Copt.) in the flesh,
      neither was born of Mary, 15 and that the world is not of God, but of the
      angels.

      This is apparently our wellknown list of Gnostic/Marcionitc "errors".
      Thereagainst the theology of AP seems to have similarity with ideas of
      Encratism (so Erik Peterson, Bemerkungen zum Hamburger Papyrus-Fragment der
      Acta Pauli Fr├╝hkirche, Judentum und Gnosis, 1982, 183-208) - let me add:
      with Marcionite/ascetic ideas (note eg the frequent occurrence of the
      Marcionitic keyword word "stranger"/"strange" - peregrinus! - for the
      apostle - in actual and non-actual sence, resp. in "eigentlichem" und
      "uneigentlichem" Sinn).
      Anyhow, AP (and other Apostle-Acta) had been read by Mani and his successors
      Peterson 204).
      The author of the III Cor then uses the authority (and the language) of Paul
      (resp. some other letters of Paul, eg Gal) to refute the Marcionite/gnostic
      errors. This example can give once again insight into the importance of
      pseudepigraphic letters in dogmatic struggles of 2. CE.

      STEVE BLACK
      A fairly straight forward suggestion (re: 1Cor15:32) ... is that
      Paul was speaking figuratively when using the word "beast". This
      is a typical Pauline use of rhetoric. Acts of Paul might have
      misunderstood this as literal (not unlike ourselves???), and
      constructed a whole story around it. No way to prove any of this,
      but this seems very reasonable to me!

      HERMANN DETERING

      Possible but not probable: where do you find such figuratively speaking of
      theriomachein in CP or anywhere which gives evidence to your thesis? The
      resurrection-context + kata anthropon makes it more evident that the author
      of I Cor is actually relating to the wellknown legend-tradition, which has
      been literary described by the author of AP.



      __________
      Dr. Hermann Detering
      Wilmersdorfer Str. 78
      10629 Berlin
      www.radikalkritik.de







      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Steve Black
      ... Reconstructing what Paul may have been referring to may well be as difficult and tentative as trying to understand what he meant by baptizing for the dead.
      Message 2 of 3 , Sep 2, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        >
        >
        >STEVE BLACK
        > A fairly straight forward suggestion (re: 1Cor15:32) ... is that
        > Paul was speaking figuratively when using the word "beast". This
        > is a typical Pauline use of rhetoric. Acts of Paul might have
        > misunderstood this as literal (not unlike ourselves???), and
        > constructed a whole story around it. No way to prove any of this,
        > but this seems very reasonable to me!
        >
        >HERMANN DETERING
        >
        >Possible but not probable: where do you find such figuratively speaking of
        >theriomachein in CP or anywhere which gives evidence to your thesis? The
        >resurrection-context + kata anthropon makes it more evident that the author
        >of I Cor is actually relating to the wellknown legend-tradition, which has
        >been literary described by the author of AP.
        >

        Reconstructing what Paul may have been referring to may well be as
        difficult and tentative as trying to understand what he meant by
        baptizing for the dead. I take it as possible that there may be a
        kernel of history in Luke's Ephesian riot (Acts 19). A kernel of
        history inasmuch as there may have been a riot, and Paul may have
        been at the center of it. This would reveal the use of the word
        "beast" as quite an accurate description of human's in "riot mode".
        Perhaps there was real danger to Paul, which would make a great deal
        of sense given the possible context, so that his life really was in
        question. This, in this context, could be a rather clever word play
        by Paul tying together the actual games (with "real" beasts) and
        people in riot mode ("figurative" beasts). This in a plausible
        reconstruction, I pretend no more.

        As to evidence that theriomachein can be used figuratively, Ignatius
        1 Romans 5:1, "...from Syria to Rome I am fighting with wild animals
        (theriomachein), bound to ten leopards, that is a detachment of
        soldiers..."

        Thanks for an interesting debate.

        --

        Steve Black
        Vancouver, BC

        Always the beautiful answer who asks a more beautiful question
        ee cummings
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.