What do you think?
Rate this book
Early Christianity and Its Literature #9
Paul and Scripture: Extending the Conversation
This book, which grew out of the Society of Biblical Literatures Paul and Scripture Seminar, explores some of the methodological problems that have arisen during the last few decades of scholarly research on the apostle Pauls engagement with his ancestral Scriptures. Essays explore the historical backgrounds of Pauls interpretive practices, the question of Pauls faithfulness to the context of his biblical references, the presence of Scripture in letters other than the Hauptbriefe, and the role of Scripture in Pauls theology. All of the essays look at old questions through new lenses in an effort to break through scholarly impasses and advance the debate in new directions. The contributors are Matthew W. Bates, Linda L. Belleville, Roy E. Ciampa, Bruce N. Fisk, Stephen E. Fowl, Leonard Greenspoon, E. Elizabeth Johnson, Mitchell M. Kim, Steve Moyise, Jeremy Punt, Christopher D. Stanley, and Jerry L. Sumney.
368 pages, Paperback
First published August 28, 2012
1 person is currently reading
4 people want to read
About the author
Christopher D. Stanley
16 books16 followers
Christopher D. Stanley recently retired as a Professor in the Department of Theology and Franciscan Studies at St. Bonaventure University in western New York, where he taught courses in biblical studies and courses that explore the role of religion in contemporary society.
Dr. Stanley has written widely in the field of biblical studies, including three authored books, three edited books, and dozens of articles in leading international journals. He has presented papers and given lectures at conferences, universities, seminaries, and churches around the world, including South Africa, Australia, New Zealand, Belgium, Austria, Romania, England, Scotland, Ireland, and India. He is a member of the Studiorum Societas Novi Testamenti (SNTS), an elite international organization of New Testament scholars, and served as the founding chair for two ongoing sections of the Society of Biblical Literature.
In recent years Dr. Stanley has expanded his repertoire into historical fiction, publishing the first two novels in a trilogy called "A Slave's Story" that takes readers into a neglected corner of the Roman world, first-century Asia Minor. The novels, titled A Rooster for Asklepios and A Bull for Pluto, are available on Amazon.com along with several of his academic books. To learn more about the novels, visit his Website for the series, http://aslavesstory.com .
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
Currently reading
October 4, 2014A summary based on Nijay Gupta's book review on RBL
Link: http://www.bookreviews.org/pdf/8628_9...
1. Leonard Greenspoon:
Paul's education requires verbatim quotation. Thus Pauline citation discrepancies with respect to OT texts might be better accounted by Paul's intentional Christological hermeneutic scheme.
2. Jeremy Punt:
Paul's appeal to ancient texts is not merely about looking at the past but about "putting past and present selves together" (41), about invoking a "cultural memory" that could resonate with and reinforce the social identity of the largely gentile Christian communities.
3. Bruce Fisk: Paul is a free Christian narrative theologian who engaged in retelling the tale of Israel like some of his rabbinic contemporaries, rather than the conventionally perceived "legalistic sage" or "an ad hoc pastoral troubleshooter." Thus Paul did not merely cite or record Old Testament texts but engaged in interpretation of those texts
4. Mitchell Kim: Michael Polanyi's concept of "latent knowledge," whereby someone knows more than he or she can say (i.e., assumed knowledge) is likely what Paul was capitalizing on, namely, Paul goes beyond verbatim quotation because, confessionally and hypothetically speaking, the Holy Spirit has given him the "latent knowledge" that have possessed the original author's subtext of writing.
5. Steve Moyise: What Mitchell Kim offers is merely a baseless hypothesis.
6. Stephen Fowl: "communicative intentions" (which is rhetorically encoded into the text) must be distinguished from true "authorial motives" (which exists only in the author's [subconscious] mind and is impossible to ascertain except for "mind-reading" as these are "latent knowledge").
Fowl contends that even though the biblical authors and contemporary readers are unfamiliar communicative partners, it is important for the readers to get as close to the authors' communicative intentions as possible.
Paul's subtle allusions to Old Testament texts and historical questions have to be treated as serious matters by contemporary students of the Bible, as they are essential for interpreting Scripture theologically (one may find theological support for such an endeavor from the point of canonical integrity, form-critical accuracy, or post-Easter divine revelatory significance per the narrative of the Emmaus dialogue).
7.
8.
9. Linda Belleville: extra-biblical traditions may have directly or indirectly featured in Paul's writings, such as cultural sayings, early Christian liturgy, and Jewish folklore.
Thus, Paul's ostensible deviation from the OT wording details might not just be his "imagination gone wild," but might be attributed to those traditions that were known at his time and unknown to ours.
10. Matthew Bates: If we look at how Justin Martyr and Origen, the apostolic fathers after Paul, interpret the OT, we wouldn't be so concerned about Paul's ostensible deviation from the OT wording details. Diachronic intertextuality happens.
11. Roy Ciampa: Paul was "translating" the meaning of OT to his intended audiences. There are different [good and proper] purposes and even ideological motivations that affect this work. But just as there is no singular "subjectivity-free" translation of any text out there, we should look at Paul's use of the OT as dynamic and healthy.
12. Christopher D. Stanley: ongoing trends of debate:
- Where does Paul's re-contextualization of OT stand in relation to the original context of OT writings (which many see as pertaining to ANE studies)?
- Did Paul expect his first readers to catch his rhetorical allusions? To what ends?
Link: http://www.bookreviews.org/pdf/8628_9...
1. Leonard Greenspoon:
Paul's education requires verbatim quotation. Thus Pauline citation discrepancies with respect to OT texts might be better accounted by Paul's intentional Christological hermeneutic scheme.
2. Jeremy Punt:
Paul's appeal to ancient texts is not merely about looking at the past but about "putting past and present selves together" (41), about invoking a "cultural memory" that could resonate with and reinforce the social identity of the largely gentile Christian communities.
3. Bruce Fisk: Paul is a free Christian narrative theologian who engaged in retelling the tale of Israel like some of his rabbinic contemporaries, rather than the conventionally perceived "legalistic sage" or "an ad hoc pastoral troubleshooter." Thus Paul did not merely cite or record Old Testament texts but engaged in interpretation of those texts
4. Mitchell Kim: Michael Polanyi's concept of "latent knowledge," whereby someone knows more than he or she can say (i.e., assumed knowledge) is likely what Paul was capitalizing on, namely, Paul goes beyond verbatim quotation because, confessionally and hypothetically speaking, the Holy Spirit has given him the "latent knowledge" that have possessed the original author's subtext of writing.
5. Steve Moyise: What Mitchell Kim offers is merely a baseless hypothesis.
6. Stephen Fowl: "communicative intentions" (which is rhetorically encoded into the text) must be distinguished from true "authorial motives" (which exists only in the author's [subconscious] mind and is impossible to ascertain except for "mind-reading" as these are "latent knowledge").
Fowl contends that even though the biblical authors and contemporary readers are unfamiliar communicative partners, it is important for the readers to get as close to the authors' communicative intentions as possible.
Paul's subtle allusions to Old Testament texts and historical questions have to be treated as serious matters by contemporary students of the Bible, as they are essential for interpreting Scripture theologically (one may find theological support for such an endeavor from the point of canonical integrity, form-critical accuracy, or post-Easter divine revelatory significance per the narrative of the Emmaus dialogue).
7.
8.
9. Linda Belleville: extra-biblical traditions may have directly or indirectly featured in Paul's writings, such as cultural sayings, early Christian liturgy, and Jewish folklore.
Thus, Paul's ostensible deviation from the OT wording details might not just be his "imagination gone wild," but might be attributed to those traditions that were known at his time and unknown to ours.
10. Matthew Bates: If we look at how Justin Martyr and Origen, the apostolic fathers after Paul, interpret the OT, we wouldn't be so concerned about Paul's ostensible deviation from the OT wording details. Diachronic intertextuality happens.
11. Roy Ciampa: Paul was "translating" the meaning of OT to his intended audiences. There are different [good and proper] purposes and even ideological motivations that affect this work. But just as there is no singular "subjectivity-free" translation of any text out there, we should look at Paul's use of the OT as dynamic and healthy.
12. Christopher D. Stanley: ongoing trends of debate:
- Where does Paul's re-contextualization of OT stand in relation to the original context of OT writings (which many see as pertaining to ANE studies)?
- Did Paul expect his first readers to catch his rhetorical allusions? To what ends?
Displaying 1 of 1 review