[XTalk] Re: Proto-Marcionite Paul?
>Reconstructing what Paul may have been referring to may well be as
> 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!
>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.
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
Thanks for an interesting debate.
Always the beautiful answer who asks a more beautiful question