Vincent Branick comments,
In pointing out Paul’s apocalyptic thinking, Beker joins K. Stendahl, J. Munck, and other great Pauline scholars who correctly eschew a modern ‘privatized’ and anthropocentric interpretation of Paul. Paul is not wrestling with the question, ‘How can I experience a saving God?’ or ‘How can I assure my personal salvation?’ Paul’s task is rather to understand what God is doing for his creation, how God has overcome and is overcoming the powers of death in the universe (“Apocalyptic Paul?” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 47 , 666).
*just noticed the page number*
Αυτω η δοξα
Posted by Jason on December 27, 2011
I was reading through Anthony Thiselton’s The Living Paul: An Introduction to the Apostle’s Life and Thought this morning and something caught my eye. The portrait of Paul used on the cover art bears a rather strong resemblance to Gerard Butler, better and forever known as King Leonidas from 300.
What do you think?
Αυτω η δοξα
Posted by Jason on May 4, 2011
One of the books that I’ve been reading for a paper this semester is Paul and His Theology. It’s a collection of essays from various scholars on, as you have brilliantly deduced, various aspects of Pauline theology. In fact, I would love to own a copy of this book, but because it is published by Brill, it’s outrageously expensive. $196 for a single book? I don’t think so. Not even Amazon offers this bank-busting volume at their signature discounted rate! I could, however, get a used copy for a mere $192!
Guess I’ll pass on this one.
Or, maybe Jim will buy a copy for me–he’ll do anything to support Brill!
Αυτω η δοξα
Posted by Jason on May 3, 2011
Michael Gorman posted an interesting proposal regarding the understanding of Paul’s reference to Abraham in Romans 4. For time’s sake I’ve not commented on it, but if I have opportunity later I may. Do give it a read–very interesting!
Αυτω η δοξα,
Posted by Jason on October 8, 2009
In preparing for this Sunday’s message (1 Cor. 3:1-4), I find myself still not totally convinced of an interpretation in the passage. The question I had was/is, “What exactly does Paul mean in his reference to milk and meat in 3:2?” Here’s the verse: “I fed you milk, not solid food, because you were not yet able to receive it. In fact, you are still not able” (HCSB).
My initial reading was a reference to the level of teaching Paul sought to impart to the Corinthians. Upon their conversion Paul would have started them on some of the basic truths of the faith, and, as they matured, they would be taught more advanced concepts. After all, Paul says that they were not ready and are still not ready. Persuing the notes in the NET in BibleWorks, the same interpretation was given there.
However, both Fee and Garland argue for a different interpretaion. Rather than seeing a reference to beginner vs. advanced teachings of Christian faith, they read a misperception of Paul’s teaching on the part of the Corinthians. Essentially, both Fee and Garland see “milk” and “meat” as synonymous; it was only the Corinthians’ misperception of Paul’s teaching that led him to say this. The Corinthians, then, perceived Paul’s teaching as “milk” due to their spiritual immaturity, when it was spiritual “meat” all along.
Sorry for not posting reference info (works cited, contextual indicators, etc.), but it’s late and I wanted to post this before I retired for the evening.
I’d be interested in your thoughts. Have a blessed Lord’s Day!
Αυτω η δοξα,
Posted by Jason on August 1, 2009