Chair: Dr Barry Matlock and Dr Eddie Adams
Session 1:
'A New Perspective on the New Perspective'
'The Crucible of Christian Identity: Paul Between Synagogue and State'
When we read Paul¹s letters as direct address to diverse communities, we might forget that Paul's options are limited, both by the Roman imperial power and by relations between his communities and the local gentile and Jewish communities. There was no clear homogenous pattern between Christians, Jews and civic authorities. In each letter Paul seeks to build up a distinctive body of believers. This involves boundary construction and reinforcement. Paul's concern is not to produce sectarian groups alienated from the world and from Judaism but to build a strong and distinct, though not unique group. Paul's mission is only one part of Early Christianity, alongside the mission to the circumcision, so we must not universalise his statements as if he were addressing the whole church.
The situation Paul addresses in Romans differs from all his other letters in that here Paul has to relate to Christians many of whom are not his converts. He does not advocate one common form of Christian identity, but allows for abiding diversity in identity within the house churches at Rome. Here his concern is not to build barriers that would eventually lead to separation from the synagogue (contra M Tellbe, Paul Between Synagogue and State, Stockholm 2001) but rather to encourage differing sub-group identities to continue to exist side by side in mutual acceptance and respect despite difference. Paul's silence on the Temple tax in Romans need not imply that Paul affirmed the autonomous religious identity of the Roman Christians vis-à-vis the Roman Jews. Rather it affirms an abiding sub-group identity for differing groups of believers in Rome. The collection for Jerusalem demonstrates Paul's concern to maintain positive links between Jerusalem believers and those in the Pauline communities.
Paul could not know the outcome and effects of the Jewish-Roman war or other future events, so we should not claim that he foresaw the eventual separation of Christianity and Judaism and began to prepare his communities for this. Paul's power and options were limited; his primary concern is not to oppose Judaism or even the Roman empire, but rather to seek what makes for peace in a diverse Christian movement so that the power of the gospel is not hindered. He sought unity or oneness in Christ but not sameness. He is not responsible for the eventual outcome of the gentile Christianity he helped to establish - he deserves neither all the credit nor all the blame for the triumph of one branch of the early Christian movement in which a Pauline appreciation of diversity is lacking.
Session 2:
Panelists: Simon Gathercole, Stephen Chester, Bruce Longenecker, and Barry Matlock
Session 3:
‘Scriptural Reasoning, the Dynamic that informed Paul's theologizing’
Since postmodern approaches have made us aware of the danger inherent in the 'Grand Narratives', and the 'New Perspective' has made us aware of the dogmatic presuppositions of the traditional image of Paul, it has become difficult to speak of 'the' theology of Paul, or its centre and core. But despite the wide-spread scholarly recognition of the particularity of Paul's letters, the search for coherence, for some overarching theme or compact story throughout the letters has continued (e.g. M. Gorman, Cruciformity; B. Longenecker, ed. Narrative Dynamics).
It has been noted that Paul frequently, whether explicitly or implicitly, refers to the Scriptures or to earlier Christ traditions as part of the arguments in his letters. Echoes of Scriptures (R B Hays) were found or his Use of the Old Testament or of parts of it elaborated (EE Ellis), his (citation) Technique and Theology (AT Hanson), were analysed in the past. What has chiefly been investigated has been the more or less 'technical' application of scriptural citations to support Paul's argument in the respective context or the adequacy of Paul's use of Scriptures in the light of their original context (S. L. Shum). I regard Paul's relation to the Scriptures as well as to earlier Christ traditions as crucial for our understanding of his way of theologizing. But rather than merely attributing to him good knowledge of the Scriptures, or an adequate citation technique, I want to look at Paul's relation to the Scriptures and to earlier Christ traditions as that which actually decisively shapes his thought processes.
Recently the term 'Scriptural Reasoning' has come to prominence in postcritical theologies as expressed in the series Radical Traditions. What is being proposed is a return to the Scriptures, and even new paradigms of reason a thinking and rationality that is more associative and responsive than discursive and originative. Granted that Paul lived in and out of the scriptural tradition of the Judaism of his time, as 'a Hebrew of Hebrews' he therefore would have had this whole biblical symbolic universe at his disposal. This allowed him to associate scriptural allusions freely in his argumentation on specific topics. Scripture then, for Paul, was not a relic from a remote past but a reality to live with in an ongoing interaction with contemporary life. 'Scriptural Reasoning' might not have been new to him at all but rather his genuine way of thinking and arguing.
My proposal is that Paul's theologizing consists not so much in the recovery of a theological core or the uncovering of some underlying essential story but rather in an interactive process of associative thinking and contemporary events, viewed in the light of the Christ event. From these presuppositions I will elaborate in this paper on Paul's relation to the Scriptures (in an analysis of texts from Romans such as 9:6ff), on Paul¹s relation to earlier Christ traditions (in an analysis of Gal 3:28) and thus consider how reasoning and Scripture/earlier tradition are intertwined in the argument of his letters and how these can thus be seen as examples of the dynamics of Paul¹s theologizing.
‘Scriptural Reasoning, the Dynamic that informed Paul's theologizing’
The Scriptures heavily influence Paul's thought in 2 Corinthians 2:14-7:4. In fact, it could be stated that Paul "lives in the Bible" in this literary unit (Young and Ford). More specifically, in 2 Corinthians 5:14-6:10 Paul's theological thought is rooted in Isaiah 40-66. This influencing is indicated by a number of allusions in 2 Cor 5:14-21 to the Servant of Isaiah 40-55 as well as by Paul's quotation of Isa 49:8 in 2 Cor 6:2. On the basis of Paul's quotation, Lambrecht has emphasized the eschatological now of Paul's thought, whereas, Beale and Webb have argued for Paul's identfication of himself with the Servant. This paper will affirm many of the conclusions of Lambrecht, that is, Paul is emphasizing the eschatological now and will also seek to correct the attenuation in the argument of Beale and Webb -- i.e., Paul is not the Servant per se but a servant to the Servant. The concluding argument will emphasize the eschatological now of Paul's thought, so Lambrecht, and will also argue that Paul is using 2 Cor 6:2 as a hermeneutical invitation into the larger dramatic narrative of Isaiah 40-66--a narrative that focuses on the movement from Servant to servants.