Freethought & Rationalism Archive

creature · 10-19-2010, 01:11 PM

I recently read the book
Authority in Paul and Peter: The Identification of a Pastoral Stratum in the Pauline Corpus and 1 Peter (or via: amazon.co.uk) by Munro.

It seems to me that the author is making a good case that even the genuine letters of Paul have had some significant interpolations added, at least so far as concerns I Cor 11:2-16 and I Cor 14:33-35 and perhaps even Romans 13:1-7.

The author also claims that romans 1:19-2:1 is an interpolation, but it seems that that claim is wrong, because some of the rest of Rom 2 refers back to certain sins of the Gentiles . . .

My 2 major questions would be:
1) Is it possible that I Cor 5 and some of 6 and Gal 5 are interpolations, given the following:
1a) I Cor 5:9 speaks of a letter, presumably earlier than I cor, in which "Paul" says not to associate with fornicators, but there is no such known letter, but lets suppose that munro is right and there was a chief Pauline interpolator, who interpolated passages into Paul's genuine letters; the earlier letter referred to might simply be obviously II Thess and II Thess 3:14, in which "Paul" says not to eat with those who don't follow his instructions;

1b) we find in I Cor 6:9 and Gal 5:19-21 the 2 and only 2 passages (I think!) in which Paul gives a list of sins and says that those who do such things won't inherit the kingdom of God. However, the usual understanding of Paul as I hear him explained in churches I visit is that all people, even Christians, are guilty in varying degrees of sin in general, and they would cite romans 7 to substantiate that Christians themselves sin in various ways. Even "good" Christians at times get angry or perhaps lust or argue. Some of them even lie in some ways at times. Paul says,
For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.
15For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I.

So, is it possible that the same fellow who has inserted the "obey the authorities" passages and "women keep silent" passages into the genuine letters of Paul, has also put in the 2 which say, "Those who do these various sins are going to go to hell," and given that the genuine Paul seems to say, Even those who do these things, which is all of us, who yet also believe in and call on Jesus, shall be saved. ?

stephan huller · 10-19-2010, 01:43 PM

Quote:

It seems to me that the author is making a good case that even the genuine letters of Paul have had some significant interpolations

Understatement of the year. Seven letter word M-A-R-C-I-O-N

Toto · 10-19-2010, 01:49 PM

Quite possible.

Winsom Munroe's monograph can be previewd on google books.

You will also be interested in William O. Walker's work, Interpolations in the Pauline Letters (or via: amazon.co.uk), also on google books

creature · 10-19-2010, 02:08 PM

for those of you who wish, you can usually get a copy of Munro's book by some form of interlibrary loan, as I did, and I will soon request the Walker book.

As for the reference to marcion, I am not sure why you make it . . .
Marcion seems to have inherited from his sources a 10-letter collection of Paul
(Paul's letters, including ephesians, and without the pastorals). If we believe Munro, even at this point, the letters had been tampered with, but Marcion doesn't alter them, so far as I know, with respect to the major areas of alleged alteration:
1) women keeping silence;
2) submitting to authorities;

I think all we really know from Marcion is that there was, prior to him, in circulation a 10-letter collection of paul missing the pastorals. If you know of something else his life demonstrates, you could inform me!

stephan huller · 10-19-2010, 02:20 PM

Quote:

I think all we really know from Marcion is that there was, prior to him, in circulation a 10-letter collection of paul missing the pastorals. If you know of something else his life demonstrates, you could inform me!

Well I would agree with none of these statements but who am I to argue with lazy taking-at-face-value the statements of the Church Fathers? That would mean I'd have to argue against most of the things promoted by lazy ass, getting paid to fuck the dog scholarship over the last hundred years. 'Fucking the dog' is a Canadian working class expression. I don't know if it translates into American English. It means doing nothing.

Anyway, NO, none of this can be assumed. If you look at the fragments of information from the Church Fathers whole sections were missing in Romans. Names of documents were different. Many, many individuals sentences/words not present.

The Catholic canon is a whole scale revision of the Marcionite original. And comparisons are misleading.

Tertullian for instance is drawing from an older source in Books Four and Five of Against Marcion. The comparison isn't between our canon and Marcion's canon but the canon of the Syrian tradition of Ephrem and Marcion's canon with occassional editorial editions by a third century Latin writer.

It's complicated. That is why lazy ass, fuck the dog scholarship avoids taking it seriously. You're not going to write your PhD thesis on Marcion (unless your Ulrich Schmid and then your a genius but if you were a genius you wouldn't be listening to me).

Ulrich Schmid wrote his dissertation on Marcion. It is available only in German to my knowledge. http://books.google.com/books?id=hne...page&q&f=false Even though he comes to very different conclusions than I do. I can't help reccommending him because he's a rock star.

maryhelena · 10-19-2010, 02:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

Quote:

I think all we really know from Marcion is that there was, prior to him, in circulation a 10-letter collection of paul missing the pastorals. If you know of something else his life demonstrates, you could inform me!

Well I would agree with none of these statements but who am I to argue with lazy taking-at-face-value the statements of the Church Fathers? That would mean I'd have to argue against most of the things promoted by lazy ass, getting paid to fuck the dog scholarship over the last hundred years. 'Fucking the dog' is a Canadian working class expression. I don't know if it translates into American English. It means doing nothing.

Anyway, NO, none of this can be assumed. If you look at the fragments of information from the Church Fathers whole sections were missing in Romans. Names of documents were different. Many, many individuals sentences/words not present.

The Catholic canon is a whole scale revision of the Marcionite original. And comparisons are misleading.

Tertullian for instance is drawing from an older source in Books Four and Five of Against Marcion. The comparison isn't between our canon and Marcion's canon but the canon of the Syrian tradition of Ephrem and Marcion's canon with occassional editorial editions by a third century Latin writer.

It's complicated. That is why lazy ass, fuck the dog scholarship avoids taking it seriously. You're not going to write your PhD thesis on Marcion (unless your Ulrich Schmid and then your a genius but if you were a genius you wouldn't be listening to me).

Ulrich Schmid wrote his dissertation on Marcion. It is available only in German to my knowledge. http://books.google.com/books?id=hne...page&q&f=false Even though he comes to very different conclusions than I do. I can't help reccommending him because he's a rock star.

R. Joseph Hoffmann

Quote:

Marcion

Hoffmann's 1982 doctoral thesis, Marcion: On the Restitution of Christianity, was published in 1984. His theory was that Marcion must be dated substantially before the dates assigned on the basis of patristic testimony. According to Hoffmann, Marcion possessed the earliest version of Luke and preserved the primitive version of Paul's letters. He also attempted to discredit much of the early patristic evidence for Marcion's life and thought as being apologetically driven.

Reviews of the Marcion reflected the controversial nature of the work. Writing in Revue Biblique, Jerome Murphy-O'Connor called attention to the radical nature of Hoffmann's theory while asserting that it was "unlikely that a book of equal importance will appear in this generation."[24] J. L. Houlden commended Hoffmann's skill in "reading between the lines" of Marcion's ancient critics and called the book "a model of how doctrinal history should now be written",[25] while George E. Saint-Laurent concluded, "[H]ereafter Marcion's positive contribution to the mainstream tradition of Catholic-Orthodox Christianity so far as the decisive role of Paul is concerned will have to be acknowledged."[26] Other reviewers thought that Hoffmann's examination of the evidence was valuable but that his conclusions could only be regarded as speculative.[27][28] The book received a very negative assessment from C. P. Bammel, who accused the author of numerous historical errors and misinterpretations of patristic texts.[29] In a book published in 1993, Bart D. Ehrman noted that Hoffmann's Marcion had "not been well received".[30].

Hoffmann responded to critics of the Marcion in a special issue of The Second Century.[31] His thesis has since been revisited by New Testament scholars including David Trobisch, Joseph Tyson and Robert M. Price.[32][33] [34]

creature · 10-19-2010, 02:30 PM

what sections are missing in Romans in certain quotations provided by the church fathers?

and, are they the same ones that Munro alleges were the interpolations or ?

if we believe munro, we would regard some of Romans 12 and then 13:1-7 as interpolation, and also Romans 1:19-2:1.

stephan huller · 10-19-2010, 02:30 PM

Hoffman's work on Celsus is so pathetic that I can't take him seriously about anything else. Not a real scholar (not that there is anything wrong with being not a real scholar). I am often so identified.

Quote:

Bart D. Ehrman noted that Hoffmann's Marcion had "not been well received"

Il n'y a rien de mal à être inférieure à un savant. Cela signifie simplement que vos arguments ne sont pas assez fort pour être pris au sérieux par toute personne qui est.

No worse or better than me. That's the bottom line. I like to strive for something better.

stephan huller · 10-19-2010, 02:36 PM

Quote:

what sections are missing in Romans in certain quotations provided by the church fathers?

and, are they the same ones that Munro alleges were the interpolations or ?

if we believe munro, we would regard some of Romans 12 and then 13:1-7 as interpolation, and also Romans 1:19-2:1.

I don't know buddy. Why don't you just look up Tertullian Against Marcion Book Five. There's a like a chapter or two devoted to Romans. I had to do it. Why are you so special that you have to have someone to hold your hand? When I was studying these things we had to go out in the cold snow to the library and turn the pages of these old smelly books.

All you have to do is google "Tertullian Against Marcion Book Five." What's the matter with you?

stephan huller · 10-19-2010, 02:44 PM

Comparing Schmid to this guy. Sheesh. Was soll das? Ist es, dass die Menschen nicht kennen den Unterschied zwischen feines Gewebe und Tuch verwendet werden, um Kartoffelsäcke zu machen? Kann man nicht vergleichen die gekünstelt Polemik von Hoffmann, die Erhabenheit der Schmid. Es ist wie Megan Fox vergleicht mit Roseanne Barr.

10-19-2010, 01:11 PM	#1
creature Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Seattle Posts: 30	interpolations in Paul's letters? I recently read the book Authority in Paul and Peter: The Identification of a Pastoral Stratum in the Pauline Corpus and 1 Peter (or via: amazon.co.uk) by Munro. It seems to me that the author is making a good case that even the genuine letters of Paul have had some significant interpolations added, at least so far as concerns I Cor 11:2-16 and I Cor 14:33-35 and perhaps even Romans 13:1-7. The author also claims that romans 1:19-2:1 is an interpolation, but it seems that that claim is wrong, because some of the rest of Rom 2 refers back to certain sins of the Gentiles . . . My 2 major questions would be: 1) Is it possible that I Cor 5 and some of 6 and Gal 5 are interpolations, given the following: 1a) I Cor 5:9 speaks of a letter, presumably earlier than I cor, in which "Paul" says not to associate with fornicators, but there is no such known letter, but lets suppose that munro is right and there was a chief Pauline interpolator, who interpolated passages into Paul's genuine letters; the earlier letter referred to might simply be obviously II Thess and II Thess 3:14, in which "Paul" says not to eat with those who don't follow his instructions; 1b) we find in I Cor 6:9 and Gal 5:19-21 the 2 and only 2 passages (I think!) in which Paul gives a list of sins and says that those who do such things won't inherit the kingdom of God. However, the usual understanding of Paul as I hear him explained in churches I visit is that all people, even Christians, are guilty in varying degrees of sin in general, and they would cite romans 7 to substantiate that Christians themselves sin in various ways. Even "good" Christians at times get angry or perhaps lust or argue. Some of them even lie in some ways at times. Paul says, For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin. 15For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I. So, is it possible that the same fellow who has inserted the "obey the authorities" passages and "women keep silent" passages into the genuine letters of Paul, has also put in the 2 which say, "Those who do these various sins are going to go to hell," and given that the genuine Paul seems to say, Even those who do these things, which is all of us, who yet also believe in and call on Jesus, shall be saved. ?

10-19-2010, 02:08 PM	#4
creature Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Seattle Posts: 30	re Munro for those of you who wish, you can usually get a copy of Munro's book by some form of interlibrary loan, as I did, and I will soon request the Walker book. As for the reference to marcion, I am not sure why you make it . . . Marcion seems to have inherited from his sources a 10-letter collection of Paul (Paul's letters, including ephesians, and without the pastorals). If we believe Munro, even at this point, the letters had been tampered with, but Marcion doesn't alter them, so far as I know, with respect to the major areas of alleged alteration: 1) women keeping silence; 2) submitting to authorities; I think all we really know from Marcion is that there was, prior to him, in circulation a 10-letter collection of paul missing the pastorals. If you know of something else his life demonstrates, you could inform me!

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

10-19-2010, 01:49 PM	#3
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	Quite possible. Winsom Munroe's monograph can be previewd on google books. You will also be interested in William O. Walker's work, Interpolations in the Pauline Letters (or via: amazon.co.uk), also on google books

10-19-2010, 02:30 PM	#7
creature Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Seattle Posts: 30	what sections are missing in Romans in certain quotations provided by the church fathers? and, are they the same ones that Munro alleges were the interpolations or ? if we believe munro, we would regard some of Romans 12 and then 13:1-7 as interpolation, and also Romans 1:19-2:1.

10-19-2010, 02:44 PM	#10
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	Comparing Schmid to this guy. Sheesh. Was soll das? Ist es, dass die Menschen nicht kennen den Unterschied zwischen feines Gewebe und Tuch verwendet werden, um Kartoffelsäcke zu machen? Kann man nicht vergleichen die gekünstelt Polemik von Hoffmann, die Erhabenheit der Schmid. Es ist wie Megan Fox vergleicht mit Roseanne Barr.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.