"Ancient Testimony to Luke's Gospel" Wenham, pp. 183-197
p. 183 "Testimony is virtually universal that the author of the third gospel was Luke, the beloved physician and companion of Paul."
p. 183 "clement of Alexandria says that 'those gospels were first written which include the genealogies'. This would seem to mean that Luke (and Matthew) were written before Mark (and John). This is the strongest argument in the Griesbach case, for Clement is early (c. 150-215) and well informed."
Wenham sets out to answer who the author of Luke might be and where it comes in the sequence of the gospels.
p. 184 "The unanimous testimony of the early Christian writers attributes the gospel to Luke. This is found in irenaeus, the Muratorian fragment, Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria and in those who came after, and is never disputed. They usually make clear that he was the companion of Paul."
The issue of the anonymity seems to clash with the early identification of the author, though. People have tried to identify Luke as the author based on the knowledge that there was a Luke with Paul sometimes, though he is not identified as Paul's chronicler anywhere. Some have attempted to identify Luke by the process of elimination. Streeter observes that the preface would not make sense to readers without knowledge of the author.
p. 185 "It is probable that Theophilus' own copy would have been tagged with the author's name. Private libraries were common among the rich, and before placing a book-roll in the library, it was customary to tag it. Unlike oriental practice, Greco-Roman libraries were indexed by the author's name. Thus the authorship of a catalogued book which had no author's name in the text would nonetheless be known beyond doubt to its readers, and this was presumably true of Luke."
Wenham discusses several other, but possibly less persuasive, theories which can point to Luke as the author. p. 186 "The three other traditions of Luke's identity to which we referred are of little value as historical evidence." He then goes on to discuss a tradition that Luke was one of the seventy and therefore would have had information about that mission and would have had access to Jesus and the apostles. There is another tradition, which is supported by the identity of Luke as one of the seventy, that he was the disciple on the Emmaus road who is not named. We also see some suggestions that Lucius of Cyrene, Paul's kinsman (Romans 16:21) was the Antiochan church leader. None of those traditions help us identify the author, but they do all point to someone who was present early in the Christian period. p. 187 "The earlier we envisage Luke participating in the Christian mission the stronger will be the case for taking his narrative as a sound historical source."
The question of the sequence of the gospels is open to debate as well. Some point out that Clement, quoted by Eusebius, may suggest that the gospels including genealogies were first. This would suggest that Matthew and Luke came before Mark and John. However, Origen knew the order to be Matthew, Mark, then Luke. p. 189 (quoting Origen) "...as having learnt by tradition concerning the four Gospels, which alone are unquestionable in the Church of God under heaven, that first was written that according to Matthew, who was once a tax-collector but afterwards an apostle of Jesus Christ, who published it for those who from Judaism came to believe, composed as it was in the Hebrew language. Secondly, that according to Mark, who wrote it in accordance with Peter's instructions, whom also Peter acknowledged as his son in the catholic epistle, speaking in these terms: 'She that is in Babylon, elect together with you, saluteth you; and so doth Mark my son.' And thirdly, that according to Luke, who wrote, for those who from the Gentiles [came to believe], the Gospel that was praised by Paul. After them all, that according to John. (HE 6.25.3-6)"
Wenham quotes Zahn on p. 190. "What Origen gives as a tradition, without any thought of a divergent view, is expressed also by Irenaeus and the author of the Muratorian fragment without the least indication of uncertaintiy. It continued to be the prevalent view of antiquity, and it was this more than anything else which brought it about, that the arrangement of the Gospels familiar to us displaced more and more the other arrangements..."
The difficulty is a parallel tradition involving Clement and Origen, two church fathers who were near each other in time (Clement was Origen's teacher). He traces Zahn's argument in some detail.
Augustine listed the gospels in order as Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. However, Augustine tends to make some other statements which could suggest that Mark appears dependent on Matthew and Luke. Yet the statements of Augustine do not appear to be entirely clear. Augustine may suggest affinity without suggesting dependence.
Wenham concludes the chapter without necessarily resolving the difficulty. He has stated strengths and weaknesses of a variety of arguments. The chapter actually closes with questions about whether or not we are wise looking for literary relationships and particularly literary dependence. This is the big question of Wenham's book.
Saturday, February 4, 2012
Friday, February 3, 2012
Bible Reading Challenge - Week 5 Day 5 Exodus 32-36
Our reading challenge for the day is Exodus 32-36. I'll hit a few highlights. You make comments too and fill in the gaps. What strikes you as specially significant?
Notice as we read today how there's a strong tension between the holiness of God and the sinfulness of man. The people flee from God's covenant. They are afraid to hear directly from God. And the Lord says that he cannot come among his people lest he should destroy them in their sin. In chapter 34, though God proclaims his character, that he is steadfast, loving, faithful. He does not abandon his people though they abandon him. God establishes his covenant with his people, promising to bring them into the land of promise. What do the people agree to? Only that they will strive to live a holy life so they do not depart from the blessing that God has given them. We then see the central features of the covenant life in the reception of the Sabbath, a day of rest, symbolic of resting from our sin and its consequences, then the construction of the tabernacle, a place where God is among his people, bringing them peace and rest.
Notice as we read today how there's a strong tension between the holiness of God and the sinfulness of man. The people flee from God's covenant. They are afraid to hear directly from God. And the Lord says that he cannot come among his people lest he should destroy them in their sin. In chapter 34, though God proclaims his character, that he is steadfast, loving, faithful. He does not abandon his people though they abandon him. God establishes his covenant with his people, promising to bring them into the land of promise. What do the people agree to? Only that they will strive to live a holy life so they do not depart from the blessing that God has given them. We then see the central features of the covenant life in the reception of the Sabbath, a day of rest, symbolic of resting from our sin and its consequences, then the construction of the tabernacle, a place where God is among his people, bringing them peace and rest.
"Mark's Gospel: Further Considerations"
"Mark's Gospel: Further Considerations" Wenham pp. 173-182
This chapter discusses additional considerations about the dating of Mark's Gospel.
pp. 173-174 "Another possible source of information about the writing of Mark's gospel is the tradition of the Alexandrian church. We have seen that the dismissal of the age-long tradition of the Roman church by nineteenth-century scholars may have been ill judged. Perhaps the same applies to Alexandria."
Wenham goes on to cite early authorities who state that Mark went to Egypt, proclaiming the gospel which he had previously written.
p. 175 "Thus in the fourth century, not only does Alexandria claim Mark as its founder, but this claim is acknowledged in East and West, and it has remained the steadfast tradition of the Coptic church to the present day."
p. 175 "It is a case of putting Eusebius' encyclopedic knowledge of the Eastern church together with the solid tradition of the Copts against conclusions based on what Roberts calls the 'jejune and scrappy references' available to present-day scholars in our extant literary sources."
We then look at the ease of travel for both people and documents in imperial Rome, documenting that it was fairly easy for people to travel throughout the Mediterranean region.
Wenham discusses the fragment 7Q5, which may possibly be asserted to be a fragment of Mark 6:52 and following. pp. 178-179 "If 7Q5 is tentatively identified with Mark 6:52f, some of O'Callaghan's other identifications at once become plausible. 7Q4 fits 1 Timothy 3:16-4:3 (O'Callaghan thinks this certain) and 7Q8 fits James 1:23f. That epistles like 1 Timothy and James, commonly dated round about the end of the century, should have been in the possession of a Christian community in Palestine in 68 is a conclusion almost too shocking to be contemplated! But if the traditional dating of these New Testament documents is in general sounder than the modern dating (as the present book maintains), there is nothing impossible about it. We ought therefore, in spite of the fragmentary nature of the evidence, to keep the possibility in mind."
Finally, Wenham looks at some internal features of Mark, indicating that the vividness of details may indicate a very early authorship, not bearing the marks of a long tradition which could smooth out the physicality of the gospel.
Wenham's conclusion is that Mark's gospel was informed by Peter's preaching and that it was handed down to the church after Peter's death, probably having been written some time before that, possibly as early as the first half of the 40s.
This chapter discusses additional considerations about the dating of Mark's Gospel.
pp. 173-174 "Another possible source of information about the writing of Mark's gospel is the tradition of the Alexandrian church. We have seen that the dismissal of the age-long tradition of the Roman church by nineteenth-century scholars may have been ill judged. Perhaps the same applies to Alexandria."
Wenham goes on to cite early authorities who state that Mark went to Egypt, proclaiming the gospel which he had previously written.
p. 175 "Thus in the fourth century, not only does Alexandria claim Mark as its founder, but this claim is acknowledged in East and West, and it has remained the steadfast tradition of the Coptic church to the present day."
p. 175 "It is a case of putting Eusebius' encyclopedic knowledge of the Eastern church together with the solid tradition of the Copts against conclusions based on what Roberts calls the 'jejune and scrappy references' available to present-day scholars in our extant literary sources."
We then look at the ease of travel for both people and documents in imperial Rome, documenting that it was fairly easy for people to travel throughout the Mediterranean region.
Wenham discusses the fragment 7Q5, which may possibly be asserted to be a fragment of Mark 6:52 and following. pp. 178-179 "If 7Q5 is tentatively identified with Mark 6:52f, some of O'Callaghan's other identifications at once become plausible. 7Q4 fits 1 Timothy 3:16-4:3 (O'Callaghan thinks this certain) and 7Q8 fits James 1:23f. That epistles like 1 Timothy and James, commonly dated round about the end of the century, should have been in the possession of a Christian community in Palestine in 68 is a conclusion almost too shocking to be contemplated! But if the traditional dating of these New Testament documents is in general sounder than the modern dating (as the present book maintains), there is nothing impossible about it. We ought therefore, in spite of the fragmentary nature of the evidence, to keep the possibility in mind."
Finally, Wenham looks at some internal features of Mark, indicating that the vividness of details may indicate a very early authorship, not bearing the marks of a long tradition which could smooth out the physicality of the gospel.
Wenham's conclusion is that Mark's gospel was informed by Peter's preaching and that it was handed down to the church after Peter's death, probably having been written some time before that, possibly as early as the first half of the 40s.
Thursday, February 2, 2012
Bible Reading Challenge - Week 5 Day 4 Exodus 27-31
Our reading challenge for the day is Exodus 27-31. I'll hit a few highlights. You make comments too and fill in the gaps. What strikes you as specially significant?
Exodus 27 - God cares about the location where the people of Israel will receive their forgiveness. He is concerned about every detail.
Exodus 28 - See the symbolism in the many special garments which the priests wear. First we observe that these are garments which would not be worn when the priest was not engaged in his priestly duties. We also see that the garments are not owned by the priest, but that the garment and the ceremonial authority which goes with it would be imposed upon the priest. Garments worn for special purposes are very important in Scripture. How do the clothes a pastor wears when performing his pastoral office serve symbolically?
Exodus 29-30 - God cares for the way priests are ordained. Even though the children of Aaron are to be priests, they are still set aside in a special way. See that the sacrifices for sin are great and precious, greater than any person could afford, repeated again and again. Our sin brings condemnation. The price is greater than we can pay.
Exodus 31 - God appoints people with skill and ability to do his work. He then increases their skill. But notice he then immediately points out that there is a right pattern of work and rest. May the Lord bless us with increase in our ability to serve him as well as a right balance of work and rest.
Exodus 27 - God cares about the location where the people of Israel will receive their forgiveness. He is concerned about every detail.
Exodus 28 - See the symbolism in the many special garments which the priests wear. First we observe that these are garments which would not be worn when the priest was not engaged in his priestly duties. We also see that the garments are not owned by the priest, but that the garment and the ceremonial authority which goes with it would be imposed upon the priest. Garments worn for special purposes are very important in Scripture. How do the clothes a pastor wears when performing his pastoral office serve symbolically?
Exodus 29-30 - God cares for the way priests are ordained. Even though the children of Aaron are to be priests, they are still set aside in a special way. See that the sacrifices for sin are great and precious, greater than any person could afford, repeated again and again. Our sin brings condemnation. The price is greater than we can pay.
Exodus 31 - God appoints people with skill and ability to do his work. He then increases their skill. But notice he then immediately points out that there is a right pattern of work and rest. May the Lord bless us with increase in our ability to serve him as well as a right balance of work and rest.
"The Date of Peter's Going to Rome"
"The Date of Peter's Going to Rome" Wenham, pp. 146-172
This chapter was of great interest to me. I had always wondered where the tradition came from that Peter was in Rome, as there seems to be no mention of it in the Scripture. Wenham lays the ideas out in very clear terms.
p. 146 "For many centuries the church of Rome held that Peter in fact arrived there after his escape from prison in 42 (when it is said that he 'went to another place', Acts 12:17) and that he was in some sense the overseer of that church for twenty-five years."
This idea, paired with Mark's being informed by Peter's preaching to write his gospel, gives us insight into the possible dating of the gospel. p. 147 "The substantial truth of the patristic tradition about Mark could be maintained without necessitating a date somewhere after the mid-60s, and a date as early as the mid-40s becomes possible."
So how are we going to argue for Peter's presence in Rome, when (largely Protestant) recent scholarship tends to deny it?
p. 149 "There was a large and world-famous church in Rome in 57 with which Paul had been in contact for some years. . . When Paul arrived in Italy in 60 he found brethren at the great port of Puteoli with whom he stayed for seven days." Judging from the many greetings to the churches (plural) in Rome found in Paul's epistle to the Romans, written from Corinth in 57, this was a well-established church. This can explain the fact that Priscilla and Aquila, whom Paul meets in Acts 18, coming from Italy. There had been an expulsion of Jews from Rome under Claudius, possibly because of dissension among Jews over the question of Christ. This occurred about the year 50.
p. 154 "According to a well-grounded tradition the foundation of the church in Rome was laid by Peter in the second year of Claudius." It is possible that Paul is hinting at this by his intention only to stop briefly in Rome to visit. p. 155 "It was his policy not to preach the gospel where Christ had already been named, lest he 'build on another man's foundation' (Rom. 1520-24). While the idea of the powerful church at Rome does not require a powerful founder, (p. 155) "it gains force if (as missionary experience in general confirms) the church of Rome did not arise merely through the chance movements of Christian converts, but was in large measure the result of one man's vision and work."
Early tradition, though there are some discrepancies, seems to point toward Peter serving as a leader of the church in Rome either from Claudius' second year to Nero's last year (42-67) or else from the ascension of the Lord to the year 55. Wenham discusses this on p. 157. He then cites Edmundson's analysis of Ignatius, Dionysius of Corinth, and Irenaeus. The conclusion that Irenaeus makes as quoted by Edmundson is cited on p. 159 of Wenham. "The Blessed Apostles, having founded and established the Church, entrusted the office of the episcopate to Linus. Paul speaks of this Linus in his epistles to Timothy, Anencletus succeeded him, and after Anencletus, in the third place from the Apostles, Clement received the episcopate." It seems no mistake, then, that early Roman tradition places the church in Rome on the foundation of Peter and Paul, not Paul or Peter individually.
p. 165 "This tradition fits without difficulty into the account of Peter in Acts. Direct evidence for Peter's movements after the death of Stephen is scanty: we find him at Samaria (Acts 8:14), and moving about among all the growing churches of Judea, Galilee and Samaria (9:31ff); we find him nitiating the first Gentile misson at Caesarea (10:1-11:18). During Agrippa's reign (41-44) he escaped from Jerusalem and fled Agrippa's territory (12:1-17). e was in Jerusalem again for the visit of Paul and Barnabas in 46 (Gal. 2:1-10) and for the Apostolic Council of 49 (Acts 15:1-21). He visited Antioch (Gal. 2:11) and had associations with the churches in Asia Minor (1 Pet. 1:1). In 54 Paul can speak of Peter 'leading around a wife', presumably moving from place to place in missionary work (1 Cor. 9:5). This shows that Peter was not a resident ἐπίσκοπος in Rome for twenty-five years. But before its appropriation by the developing Christian church ἐπίσκοπος was no a technical ecclesiastical term and it would have been a suitable description, for instance, of Paul as a non-residential overseer of the churches which he had founded."
So as we look at the evidence, the idea of Peter being mostly based in Rome from about 42 until his death in 67 makes a great deal of sense.
p. 171 "Rome's claim to Petrine foundation was unchallenged throughout the church."
pp. 171-172 "The argument is cumulative. Paul seems to have regarded this large and world-famous church as having a founder. An immensely strong tradition, accepted by the most learned men in the early church, says that its foundation was laid by Pter in the second year of the reign of Claudius. This is indirectly and independently confirmed by the traditions concerning the apostles' twelve-year stay in Jerusalem and concerning Peter's confrontation with Simon Magus in Rome. The movements of Peter and Mark as seen in the rest of the New Testament readily fit in. The tradition was unchallenged throughout the church."
This chapter was of great interest to me. I had always wondered where the tradition came from that Peter was in Rome, as there seems to be no mention of it in the Scripture. Wenham lays the ideas out in very clear terms.
p. 146 "For many centuries the church of Rome held that Peter in fact arrived there after his escape from prison in 42 (when it is said that he 'went to another place', Acts 12:17) and that he was in some sense the overseer of that church for twenty-five years."
This idea, paired with Mark's being informed by Peter's preaching to write his gospel, gives us insight into the possible dating of the gospel. p. 147 "The substantial truth of the patristic tradition about Mark could be maintained without necessitating a date somewhere after the mid-60s, and a date as early as the mid-40s becomes possible."
So how are we going to argue for Peter's presence in Rome, when (largely Protestant) recent scholarship tends to deny it?
p. 149 "There was a large and world-famous church in Rome in 57 with which Paul had been in contact for some years. . . When Paul arrived in Italy in 60 he found brethren at the great port of Puteoli with whom he stayed for seven days." Judging from the many greetings to the churches (plural) in Rome found in Paul's epistle to the Romans, written from Corinth in 57, this was a well-established church. This can explain the fact that Priscilla and Aquila, whom Paul meets in Acts 18, coming from Italy. There had been an expulsion of Jews from Rome under Claudius, possibly because of dissension among Jews over the question of Christ. This occurred about the year 50.
p. 154 "According to a well-grounded tradition the foundation of the church in Rome was laid by Peter in the second year of Claudius." It is possible that Paul is hinting at this by his intention only to stop briefly in Rome to visit. p. 155 "It was his policy not to preach the gospel where Christ had already been named, lest he 'build on another man's foundation' (Rom. 1520-24). While the idea of the powerful church at Rome does not require a powerful founder, (p. 155) "it gains force if (as missionary experience in general confirms) the church of Rome did not arise merely through the chance movements of Christian converts, but was in large measure the result of one man's vision and work."
Early tradition, though there are some discrepancies, seems to point toward Peter serving as a leader of the church in Rome either from Claudius' second year to Nero's last year (42-67) or else from the ascension of the Lord to the year 55. Wenham discusses this on p. 157. He then cites Edmundson's analysis of Ignatius, Dionysius of Corinth, and Irenaeus. The conclusion that Irenaeus makes as quoted by Edmundson is cited on p. 159 of Wenham. "The Blessed Apostles, having founded and established the Church, entrusted the office of the episcopate to Linus. Paul speaks of this Linus in his epistles to Timothy, Anencletus succeeded him, and after Anencletus, in the third place from the Apostles, Clement received the episcopate." It seems no mistake, then, that early Roman tradition places the church in Rome on the foundation of Peter and Paul, not Paul or Peter individually.
p. 165 "This tradition fits without difficulty into the account of Peter in Acts. Direct evidence for Peter's movements after the death of Stephen is scanty: we find him at Samaria (Acts 8:14), and moving about among all the growing churches of Judea, Galilee and Samaria (9:31ff); we find him nitiating the first Gentile misson at Caesarea (10:1-11:18). During Agrippa's reign (41-44) he escaped from Jerusalem and fled Agrippa's territory (12:1-17). e was in Jerusalem again for the visit of Paul and Barnabas in 46 (Gal. 2:1-10) and for the Apostolic Council of 49 (Acts 15:1-21). He visited Antioch (Gal. 2:11) and had associations with the churches in Asia Minor (1 Pet. 1:1). In 54 Paul can speak of Peter 'leading around a wife', presumably moving from place to place in missionary work (1 Cor. 9:5). This shows that Peter was not a resident ἐπίσκοπος in Rome for twenty-five years. But before its appropriation by the developing Christian church ἐπίσκοπος was no a technical ecclesiastical term and it would have been a suitable description, for instance, of Paul as a non-residential overseer of the churches which he had founded."
So as we look at the evidence, the idea of Peter being mostly based in Rome from about 42 until his death in 67 makes a great deal of sense.
p. 171 "Rome's claim to Petrine foundation was unchallenged throughout the church."
pp. 171-172 "The argument is cumulative. Paul seems to have regarded this large and world-famous church as having a founder. An immensely strong tradition, accepted by the most learned men in the early church, says that its foundation was laid by Pter in the second year of the reign of Claudius. This is indirectly and independently confirmed by the traditions concerning the apostles' twelve-year stay in Jerusalem and concerning Peter's confrontation with Simon Magus in Rome. The movements of Peter and Mark as seen in the rest of the New Testament readily fit in. The tradition was unchallenged throughout the church."
Wednesday, February 1, 2012
Bible Reading Challenge - Week 5 Day 3 Exodus 22-26
Our reading challenge for the day is Exodus 22-26. I'll hit a few highlights. You make comments too and fill in the gaps. What strikes you as specially significant?
Exodus 22-24 - See how God continues to give commands for a just and gentle society, certainly very gentle in terms of the neighboring societies. Yet in a just society there are penalties. Notice that the greatest penalties are related to denying others of life or engaging in activities that pervert the image of God as revealed to the people. The ultimate cause of shame is denial of God's gracious revelation of his own person. As God's people receive the covenant of the law and affirm that they will keep it, sacrifices are made, consecrating the decision. As God has bound himself to his word to be the God of Israel, the people are binding themselves with their promise to obey their Lord.
Exodus 25-26 God gives a design for the tabernacle to serve as the center of the life of worship for Israel. Notice the precious materials to be used, which the people are commanded to supply gladly. Reflect on the use of costly furnishings in places of worship. What messages may they give to people who come to participate in worship? What message can be given by use of cost-cutting measures?
Exodus 22-24 - See how God continues to give commands for a just and gentle society, certainly very gentle in terms of the neighboring societies. Yet in a just society there are penalties. Notice that the greatest penalties are related to denying others of life or engaging in activities that pervert the image of God as revealed to the people. The ultimate cause of shame is denial of God's gracious revelation of his own person. As God's people receive the covenant of the law and affirm that they will keep it, sacrifices are made, consecrating the decision. As God has bound himself to his word to be the God of Israel, the people are binding themselves with their promise to obey their Lord.
Exodus 25-26 God gives a design for the tabernacle to serve as the center of the life of worship for Israel. Notice the precious materials to be used, which the people are commanded to supply gladly. Reflect on the use of costly furnishings in places of worship. What messages may they give to people who come to participate in worship? What message can be given by use of cost-cutting measures?
"Paul: Apostle and Theologian"
"Paul: Apostle and Theologian" Carson & Moo pp. 354-390
Paul himself is a significant figure in the New Testament. He therefore has his own chapter in Carson & Moo before they move on to discuss his books in order. As I usually do, I'll put section headers in the book in capitals then include my notes or quotations from the chapter in order.
PAUL'S BACKGROUND
"BORN IN TARSUS OF CILICIA" (ACTS 22:3)
Tarsus was a very important city, a place of learning and culture. As a Roman citizen from Tarsus Paul would be expected to be well educated. A significant note is that his name "Paulos" would have been his Roman cognomen. It is not, counter to much preaching that is popular today, a new name given to him by the Lord.
"BROUGHT UP IN THIS CITY" (ACTS 22:3)
It is unclear if Paul was raised in Jerusalem or if he moved to Jerusalem for the more advanced rabbinical education. Regardless we see that Paul had backgrounds in both the Hellenistic and Jewish worlds.
"THOROUGHLY TRAINED IN THE LAW OF OUR ANCESTORS . . . ZEALOUS FOR GOD" (ACTS 22:3)
Paul actually seems to have been more polarized in his Pharisaism than his teacher, Gamaliel, who was known as a moderate. Paul was very forceful in his zeal.
"AS I CAME NEAR DAMASCUS" (ACTS 22:6)
Paul received permission to arrest and bring Christians to trial. On his way to Damascus to do just this he had an encounter with Jesus, described in Acts 9, 22, and 26, as well as in Galatians 1. Paul's conversion and call were tied together as he saw that he was to defend the gospel in every way he could.
PAUL'S MISSIONARY CAREER AND ITS CHRONOLOGY
THE PROBLEM OF SOURCES
Paul's letters never give a comprehensive history. The data given by Luke in Acts likewise seems to be selective at points. We have to consider all the sources in order to try harmonizing them.
AN OUTLINE OF PAUL'S MISSIONARY CAREER
FROM PAUL'S CONVERSION TO THE FIRST MISSIONARY JOURNEY
Much of this chronology comes from Galatians 1:13-2:10. Paul visits Jerusalem three years after his conversion, then again "after fourteen years." The first visit seems clearly to be the one mentioned in Acts 9:26-30. The reference to "after fourteen years" seems to fit better with fourteen years after his conversion than fourteen years after the first visit. p. 362 "First, the prominence of Paul's conversion in Galatians 1 suggests that this event is the base for all his chronological notices in this context. Second, this sequence fits better with other chronological indications that we will note below. The visit may be "in the third year" and "in the fourteenth year" inclusively, counting partial years on both ends of the time period as well. p. 363 "the inclusive method seems to have been more typical in the ancient world, so we may prefer it in interpreting Galatians 1-2." What do we make of the three years in Arabia? p. 363 "Paul's later difficulties with the king of the Nabataeans, Aertas, suggests strongly that he was engaged in active ministry during this time (2 Cor. 11:32)."
FROM PAUL'S FIRST MISSIONARY JOURNEY TO HIS DEATH
p. 364 "Luke introduces the first missionary journey in Acts 13:1-3 with no indication about its relationship in time to the other events he has been narrating." p. 364 "This journey took Barnabas, Paul, and - for part of the way - John Mark to Barnabas's home, the island of Cyprus, and several cities in southern Galatia, namely, Pisidian antioch, Iconium, Lystra, and Derbe (Acts 13:4-14:26). Estimates of the time necessary for this trip of about 1,400 miles vary from one year to five years. The best guess is about eighteen months, but we simply have no way of knowing for sure."
p. 365 "Paul's second missionary journey took him to southern Galatia, quickly through Asia Minor, and on to Macedonia - in particular, the cities of Philippi (see 1 Thess. 2:2), thessalonica (see 1 thess. 2:2; Phil. 4:15-16), and berea (Acts 17:10-15) - and then Achaia, including Athens (see 1 Thess. 3:1) and Corinth (see 2 Cor. 11:7-9)."
p. 365 Later, "he graveled 'from place to place throughout the region of Galatia and Phrygia' (18:23; the reference is probably to the Phrygian part of Galatia) before arriving in Ephesus (19:1; see 1 Cor. 16:8). How long Paul spent here is not clear. In Acts 20:31, Paul tells the elders of the Ephesian church that he had spent 'three years' with them. But this could be a rounding off (counting inclusively) of the period of two years and three months specified in Acts 19:8, 10. Luke, however, may not intend these two verses to summarize the entire stay in ephesus. It is safest to conclude that Paul spent anywhere from two years and three months to three years in ephesus. From Ephesus Paul moved north into Macedonia, where he met Titus returning from Corinth (Acts 20:1; cf. 2 Cor. 2:12-13). Some scholars speculate that it may have been at this time that Paul ministered in Illyricum (modern Albania and yugoslavia; see Rom. 15:19), although neither Acts nor Paul's letters describe such a trip. Paul probably wintered in Corinth (his three-month stay in Greece [Acts 20:2-3; cf. 2 Cor. 9:4]), before retracing his steps to Caesarea and Jerusalem (20:3-21:16). This journey, of approximately 2,700 miles, must have taken at least three and a half years, and probably four or five."
The text of Acts ends with Paul under house arrest in Rome. p. 366 "Many think that Paul's life ended at this point, but two considerations point decisively to a longer interval before his death. First, apparently reliable early church accounts associate Paul's death with nero's persecution of Christians in A.D. 64-65. But it is unlikely that Paul's two-year stay in Rome brings us to this late a date. . . Second, the evidence of the Pastoral Epistles points to a period of further ministry in the eastern Mediterranean after the Roman imprisonment of Acts 28:30-31. . . Almost certainly, then, Paul was released from this first Roman imprisonment for a period of further ministry. Whether this ministry took Paul to Spain, as he had originally planned (see Rom. 15:24), is uncertain."
THE CHRONOLOGY OF PAUL'S MISSIONARY CAREER
The materials we have in the bible give us a fair relative chronology. When does this fit into the first century? The most important evidence we have is that Paul left Corinth shortly after an encounter with Gallio, a proconsul. p. 366 "Gallio was proconsul of Achaia from July of 51 to July of 52." This allows us to work backward and forward to place the second missionary journey beginning in 48. The apostolic council is probably earlier in 48. The visit to Jerusalem for famine relief probably then fits in 45 or 46. This dates Paul's conversion in the period of 32 to 35. Considering the probably date of the crucifixion as about 33, the conversion is probably closer to 35. We then can look toward the end of Paul's career and see the second missionary journey probably ending in 51, with the third beginning quickly afterward, probably spring of 52. This brings Paul back to Palestine sometime about 57, allowing him to be imprisoned in Caesarea for two years and arrive in Rome in the spring of 60. There are suggestions that Paul was released from prison briefly but then re-arrested in the Neronian persecution, then was executed about 64 or 65.
PAUL'S AUTHORITY AND THE SOURCES FOR HIS THOUGHT
PAUL'S AUTHORITY
Paul was clearly self-conscious of being an apostle, on par with all the other apostles. He does not specifically claim that his writings are inspired Scripture.
THE SOURCES OF PAUL'S TEACHING
REVELATION VERSUS TRADITION
Paul does claim that his teaching comes by the revelation of Jesus. However he also has elements which he claims as tradition, that which has been passed on from Jesus through other people.
EARLY CHRISTIAN TRADITION
There are some hints in Paul's letters that he uses early Christian tradition. For instance, there are passages of doxology which appear to be quotations from some unknown source and which tend to fall into rhythmic or poetic patterns which appear to be non-Pauline. These have been examined a great deal. Yet the examinations of them must be treated with caution. p. 372 "First, we must be careful not to overemphasize our ability to identify such passages. The line between quotation of a preexisting tradition and the use of traditional language in one's own composition is difficult, and often impossible, to draw. Second, we must be careful not to use inevitably speculative data about these traditions, such as the place of origin or theological tendency, to draw exegetical and theological conclusions. We simply do not know enough to justify such procedures."
THE EARTHLY JESUS
Of course, the person of Jesus himself was behind early Christian tradition. We do not know how much information Paul had about the specific details of Jesus' life, outside of what he may have gathered from interviews with the other apostles.
THE OLD TESTAMENT
Paul quotes extensively from the Old Testament. He also fills his writings with allusions to it. Paul seems to look consistently to the Old Testament through the filter of Jesus' fulfillment of God's promises.
THE GREEK WORLD
Paul, educated at least in part in Tarsus, would have been familiar with much of the Hellenistic world. It seems unlikely that he borrowed from a knowledge of Greek philosophy to build his theology, but he clearly knew how to use current cultural and rhetorical norms to clothe his teaching.
JUDAISM
There is a serious debate about how the world of Judaism at the time of Paul influenced him. We are advised to realize that there were many different flavors of Judaism at the time of Paul and that, while his thought world was strongly influenced by his Jewish upbringing, he governed those influences by rigorous dependence on the Christian teaching about Jesus.
PAUL AND JUDAISM
THE "NEW PERSPECTIVE"
The "new perspective" on Paul suggests that Paul was misunderstood by the Reformers. The theory first arises in a book by E.P. Sanders (1977), Paul and Palestinian Judaism. p. 376 "essentially, Sanders claims that the traditional view of first-century Judaism as a legalistic religion is wrong. After a study of Jewish sources likely to give us evidence about first-century Jewish beliefs, Sanders concludes that these sources almost unanimously portray a view of soteriology that he dubs 'covenantal nomism.' foundational to the Jewish view of salvation is the covenant that God entered into with the people Israel. God has chosen Israel, and Jews in Paul's day believed that that original gracious choice was the basis for their salvation. Viewed from this perspective, Jews did not have to do the law to be saved; they were already saved. They obeyed the law, rather, to maintain their covenantal status. As Sanders put it, Jews did not do the law to 'get in' (which would be legalism) but to 'stay in' ('nomism')." p. 377 James D.G. "Dunn was the first to use the language of 'new perspective' to describe the impact of Sanders' view of Judaism on Pauline studies, and the name has stuck as a way of describing the movement as a whole . . . Essentially, Dunn claims that what Paul opposes is the tendency of the Jews to confine salvation to their own nation. It is ethnic exclusivism, not personal legalism, that Paul finds wrong with Judaism." This is an interesting stream of scholarship. Yet it has some weaknesses. p. 378 "Several tendencies mark the 'new perspective on Paul.' First, Paul's theology is read against the background of the 'story' of salvation history. Richard Hays and N.T. Wright are two of the foremost advocates of this new way of reading Paul. The effect is to take many of the theological categories that have traditionally been interpreted in terms of individual experience and restrict them to the corporate experience of Israel and the people of God. Second, and partly as a result of the first overarching approach, the foundational Reformation contrast between 'faith' and 'works' as two opposed means of being saved is reduced or, in some more radical proposals, eliminated."
RESPONSE TO THE NEW PERSPECTIVE
p. 380 "As a comprehensive explanation of first-century Judaism, sanders' 'covenantal nomism' requires qualification. First, the claim that covenantal nomism was the only soteriological paradigm within first-century Judaism must be questioned.
p. 381 "Another reason for thinking that, alongside covenant nomism, there existed in first-century Judaism a strand of legalism is the evidence from an important set of primary documents about first-century Judaism: the New Testament."
p. 382 "our second general qualification of covenant nomism has to do with the first term in this description: the covenant. Sanders and those who have followed him base their interpretation of first-century Jewish soteriology on the assumption that God's covenant with Israel was the starting point for Jewish obedience to the law. This assumption runs into problems, however, when we begin to consider the many Jewish sectarian groups that flourished at this time."
p. 383 "Third, and perhaps most important, is the increasingly widespread recognition that, on any reading of the data, first-century Judaism was synergistic. Few scholars would deny that first-century Judaism believed that the grace of God was basic to salvation. But on Sanders' own showing, it also believed that, if one 'got in' by grace, on 'stayed in' by obedience."
In this summary of recent developments in Pauline studies, I think Carson and Moo have shown that the new perspective in Paul has some intriguing possibilities but falls short in its understanding of the nuances which are present behind the scenes in first century Judaism. Taking an entire religion and treating it as one snapshot will never catch the distinctives of different branches.
Paul himself is a significant figure in the New Testament. He therefore has his own chapter in Carson & Moo before they move on to discuss his books in order. As I usually do, I'll put section headers in the book in capitals then include my notes or quotations from the chapter in order.
PAUL'S BACKGROUND
"BORN IN TARSUS OF CILICIA" (ACTS 22:3)
Tarsus was a very important city, a place of learning and culture. As a Roman citizen from Tarsus Paul would be expected to be well educated. A significant note is that his name "Paulos" would have been his Roman cognomen. It is not, counter to much preaching that is popular today, a new name given to him by the Lord.
"BROUGHT UP IN THIS CITY" (ACTS 22:3)
It is unclear if Paul was raised in Jerusalem or if he moved to Jerusalem for the more advanced rabbinical education. Regardless we see that Paul had backgrounds in both the Hellenistic and Jewish worlds.
"THOROUGHLY TRAINED IN THE LAW OF OUR ANCESTORS . . . ZEALOUS FOR GOD" (ACTS 22:3)
Paul actually seems to have been more polarized in his Pharisaism than his teacher, Gamaliel, who was known as a moderate. Paul was very forceful in his zeal.
"AS I CAME NEAR DAMASCUS" (ACTS 22:6)
Paul received permission to arrest and bring Christians to trial. On his way to Damascus to do just this he had an encounter with Jesus, described in Acts 9, 22, and 26, as well as in Galatians 1. Paul's conversion and call were tied together as he saw that he was to defend the gospel in every way he could.
PAUL'S MISSIONARY CAREER AND ITS CHRONOLOGY
THE PROBLEM OF SOURCES
Paul's letters never give a comprehensive history. The data given by Luke in Acts likewise seems to be selective at points. We have to consider all the sources in order to try harmonizing them.
AN OUTLINE OF PAUL'S MISSIONARY CAREER
FROM PAUL'S CONVERSION TO THE FIRST MISSIONARY JOURNEY
Much of this chronology comes from Galatians 1:13-2:10. Paul visits Jerusalem three years after his conversion, then again "after fourteen years." The first visit seems clearly to be the one mentioned in Acts 9:26-30. The reference to "after fourteen years" seems to fit better with fourteen years after his conversion than fourteen years after the first visit. p. 362 "First, the prominence of Paul's conversion in Galatians 1 suggests that this event is the base for all his chronological notices in this context. Second, this sequence fits better with other chronological indications that we will note below. The visit may be "in the third year" and "in the fourteenth year" inclusively, counting partial years on both ends of the time period as well. p. 363 "the inclusive method seems to have been more typical in the ancient world, so we may prefer it in interpreting Galatians 1-2." What do we make of the three years in Arabia? p. 363 "Paul's later difficulties with the king of the Nabataeans, Aertas, suggests strongly that he was engaged in active ministry during this time (2 Cor. 11:32)."
FROM PAUL'S FIRST MISSIONARY JOURNEY TO HIS DEATH
p. 364 "Luke introduces the first missionary journey in Acts 13:1-3 with no indication about its relationship in time to the other events he has been narrating." p. 364 "This journey took Barnabas, Paul, and - for part of the way - John Mark to Barnabas's home, the island of Cyprus, and several cities in southern Galatia, namely, Pisidian antioch, Iconium, Lystra, and Derbe (Acts 13:4-14:26). Estimates of the time necessary for this trip of about 1,400 miles vary from one year to five years. The best guess is about eighteen months, but we simply have no way of knowing for sure."
p. 365 "Paul's second missionary journey took him to southern Galatia, quickly through Asia Minor, and on to Macedonia - in particular, the cities of Philippi (see 1 Thess. 2:2), thessalonica (see 1 thess. 2:2; Phil. 4:15-16), and berea (Acts 17:10-15) - and then Achaia, including Athens (see 1 Thess. 3:1) and Corinth (see 2 Cor. 11:7-9)."
p. 365 Later, "he graveled 'from place to place throughout the region of Galatia and Phrygia' (18:23; the reference is probably to the Phrygian part of Galatia) before arriving in Ephesus (19:1; see 1 Cor. 16:8). How long Paul spent here is not clear. In Acts 20:31, Paul tells the elders of the Ephesian church that he had spent 'three years' with them. But this could be a rounding off (counting inclusively) of the period of two years and three months specified in Acts 19:8, 10. Luke, however, may not intend these two verses to summarize the entire stay in ephesus. It is safest to conclude that Paul spent anywhere from two years and three months to three years in ephesus. From Ephesus Paul moved north into Macedonia, where he met Titus returning from Corinth (Acts 20:1; cf. 2 Cor. 2:12-13). Some scholars speculate that it may have been at this time that Paul ministered in Illyricum (modern Albania and yugoslavia; see Rom. 15:19), although neither Acts nor Paul's letters describe such a trip. Paul probably wintered in Corinth (his three-month stay in Greece [Acts 20:2-3; cf. 2 Cor. 9:4]), before retracing his steps to Caesarea and Jerusalem (20:3-21:16). This journey, of approximately 2,700 miles, must have taken at least three and a half years, and probably four or five."
The text of Acts ends with Paul under house arrest in Rome. p. 366 "Many think that Paul's life ended at this point, but two considerations point decisively to a longer interval before his death. First, apparently reliable early church accounts associate Paul's death with nero's persecution of Christians in A.D. 64-65. But it is unlikely that Paul's two-year stay in Rome brings us to this late a date. . . Second, the evidence of the Pastoral Epistles points to a period of further ministry in the eastern Mediterranean after the Roman imprisonment of Acts 28:30-31. . . Almost certainly, then, Paul was released from this first Roman imprisonment for a period of further ministry. Whether this ministry took Paul to Spain, as he had originally planned (see Rom. 15:24), is uncertain."
THE CHRONOLOGY OF PAUL'S MISSIONARY CAREER
The materials we have in the bible give us a fair relative chronology. When does this fit into the first century? The most important evidence we have is that Paul left Corinth shortly after an encounter with Gallio, a proconsul. p. 366 "Gallio was proconsul of Achaia from July of 51 to July of 52." This allows us to work backward and forward to place the second missionary journey beginning in 48. The apostolic council is probably earlier in 48. The visit to Jerusalem for famine relief probably then fits in 45 or 46. This dates Paul's conversion in the period of 32 to 35. Considering the probably date of the crucifixion as about 33, the conversion is probably closer to 35. We then can look toward the end of Paul's career and see the second missionary journey probably ending in 51, with the third beginning quickly afterward, probably spring of 52. This brings Paul back to Palestine sometime about 57, allowing him to be imprisoned in Caesarea for two years and arrive in Rome in the spring of 60. There are suggestions that Paul was released from prison briefly but then re-arrested in the Neronian persecution, then was executed about 64 or 65.
PAUL'S AUTHORITY AND THE SOURCES FOR HIS THOUGHT
PAUL'S AUTHORITY
Paul was clearly self-conscious of being an apostle, on par with all the other apostles. He does not specifically claim that his writings are inspired Scripture.
THE SOURCES OF PAUL'S TEACHING
REVELATION VERSUS TRADITION
Paul does claim that his teaching comes by the revelation of Jesus. However he also has elements which he claims as tradition, that which has been passed on from Jesus through other people.
EARLY CHRISTIAN TRADITION
There are some hints in Paul's letters that he uses early Christian tradition. For instance, there are passages of doxology which appear to be quotations from some unknown source and which tend to fall into rhythmic or poetic patterns which appear to be non-Pauline. These have been examined a great deal. Yet the examinations of them must be treated with caution. p. 372 "First, we must be careful not to overemphasize our ability to identify such passages. The line between quotation of a preexisting tradition and the use of traditional language in one's own composition is difficult, and often impossible, to draw. Second, we must be careful not to use inevitably speculative data about these traditions, such as the place of origin or theological tendency, to draw exegetical and theological conclusions. We simply do not know enough to justify such procedures."
THE EARTHLY JESUS
Of course, the person of Jesus himself was behind early Christian tradition. We do not know how much information Paul had about the specific details of Jesus' life, outside of what he may have gathered from interviews with the other apostles.
THE OLD TESTAMENT
Paul quotes extensively from the Old Testament. He also fills his writings with allusions to it. Paul seems to look consistently to the Old Testament through the filter of Jesus' fulfillment of God's promises.
THE GREEK WORLD
Paul, educated at least in part in Tarsus, would have been familiar with much of the Hellenistic world. It seems unlikely that he borrowed from a knowledge of Greek philosophy to build his theology, but he clearly knew how to use current cultural and rhetorical norms to clothe his teaching.
JUDAISM
There is a serious debate about how the world of Judaism at the time of Paul influenced him. We are advised to realize that there were many different flavors of Judaism at the time of Paul and that, while his thought world was strongly influenced by his Jewish upbringing, he governed those influences by rigorous dependence on the Christian teaching about Jesus.
PAUL AND JUDAISM
THE "NEW PERSPECTIVE"
The "new perspective" on Paul suggests that Paul was misunderstood by the Reformers. The theory first arises in a book by E.P. Sanders (1977), Paul and Palestinian Judaism. p. 376 "essentially, Sanders claims that the traditional view of first-century Judaism as a legalistic religion is wrong. After a study of Jewish sources likely to give us evidence about first-century Jewish beliefs, Sanders concludes that these sources almost unanimously portray a view of soteriology that he dubs 'covenantal nomism.' foundational to the Jewish view of salvation is the covenant that God entered into with the people Israel. God has chosen Israel, and Jews in Paul's day believed that that original gracious choice was the basis for their salvation. Viewed from this perspective, Jews did not have to do the law to be saved; they were already saved. They obeyed the law, rather, to maintain their covenantal status. As Sanders put it, Jews did not do the law to 'get in' (which would be legalism) but to 'stay in' ('nomism')." p. 377 James D.G. "Dunn was the first to use the language of 'new perspective' to describe the impact of Sanders' view of Judaism on Pauline studies, and the name has stuck as a way of describing the movement as a whole . . . Essentially, Dunn claims that what Paul opposes is the tendency of the Jews to confine salvation to their own nation. It is ethnic exclusivism, not personal legalism, that Paul finds wrong with Judaism." This is an interesting stream of scholarship. Yet it has some weaknesses. p. 378 "Several tendencies mark the 'new perspective on Paul.' First, Paul's theology is read against the background of the 'story' of salvation history. Richard Hays and N.T. Wright are two of the foremost advocates of this new way of reading Paul. The effect is to take many of the theological categories that have traditionally been interpreted in terms of individual experience and restrict them to the corporate experience of Israel and the people of God. Second, and partly as a result of the first overarching approach, the foundational Reformation contrast between 'faith' and 'works' as two opposed means of being saved is reduced or, in some more radical proposals, eliminated."
RESPONSE TO THE NEW PERSPECTIVE
p. 380 "As a comprehensive explanation of first-century Judaism, sanders' 'covenantal nomism' requires qualification. First, the claim that covenantal nomism was the only soteriological paradigm within first-century Judaism must be questioned.
p. 381 "Another reason for thinking that, alongside covenant nomism, there existed in first-century Judaism a strand of legalism is the evidence from an important set of primary documents about first-century Judaism: the New Testament."
p. 382 "our second general qualification of covenant nomism has to do with the first term in this description: the covenant. Sanders and those who have followed him base their interpretation of first-century Jewish soteriology on the assumption that God's covenant with Israel was the starting point for Jewish obedience to the law. This assumption runs into problems, however, when we begin to consider the many Jewish sectarian groups that flourished at this time."
p. 383 "Third, and perhaps most important, is the increasingly widespread recognition that, on any reading of the data, first-century Judaism was synergistic. Few scholars would deny that first-century Judaism believed that the grace of God was basic to salvation. But on Sanders' own showing, it also believed that, if one 'got in' by grace, on 'stayed in' by obedience."
In this summary of recent developments in Pauline studies, I think Carson and Moo have shown that the new perspective in Paul has some intriguing possibilities but falls short in its understanding of the nuances which are present behind the scenes in first century Judaism. Taking an entire religion and treating it as one snapshot will never catch the distinctives of different branches.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)