Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Rick Sumner · 11-22-2004, 06:30 PM

While perusing a local bookstore, I saw Crossan's latest (appearing once again with Reed), _In Search of Paul_, and subsequently broke my commitment not to buy any more books until I read the many already on my bookshelf demanding my attention. Given the seeming paradox of my delight in Crossan's work and my adamant disagreement with virtually every major conclusion he's reached, it promptly got bumped up to the top of the reading list, pre-empting even the book I'm presently reading.

The major thesis, as described by the authors, is that Paul's mission was not to just any Gentiles, but to the "God Fearers"--Gentiles already sympathetic to Judaism. While the thesis itself shows promise, the first evidence provided (Romans) seems to be lacking. While the church in Rome may--perhaps even probably--have consisted of "God fearers" (who else would be Gentile, yet still familiar enough with scripture to understand what Paul is saying?), Paul didn't found the church in Rome, so it's difficult to get from that to Paul's own proselytic tendencies.

At any rate, having only read the first hundred pages or so, I can't offer much more than that. Perhaps someone else can offer more.

Regards,
Rick Sumner

Toto · 11-22-2004, 07:02 PM

Amazon link:In Search of Paul : How Jesus' Apostle Opposed Rome's Empire with God's Kingdom

Quote:

Using archaeological and textual evidence, and taking advantage of recent major discoveries in Italy, Greece, Turkey, and Syria, John Dominic Crossan and Jonathan L. Reed show that Paul was a fallible but dedicated successor to Jesus, carrying on Jesus's mission of inaugurating the Kingdom of God on earth in opposition to the reign of Rome.

Archeological?

Recent major discoveries?

Magdlyn · 11-22-2004, 07:27 PM

Successor?

Rick Sumner · 11-22-2004, 07:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Archeological?

That would be where Reed comes in. Thus far there's been substantial discussion on epigraphic testimony to "God fearers," as well as the relationship between religion and state, and how iconographic and epigraphic evidence helps define that. They paint Paul as an opponent of this traditional relationship.

Quote:

Recent major discoveries?

None that I've seen yet.

Regards,
Rick Sumner

Magdlyn · 11-23-2004, 05:31 AM

OK, just ignore me.

Rick Sumner · 11-23-2004, 05:45 AM

I'm not ignoring you, I'm just not sure what you're asking. I'd presume that by "successor," Crossan means one that succeeded Jesus in promoting the Christian message.

Regards,
Rick Sumner

Magdlyn · 11-23-2004, 06:22 AM

Just pointing out a large assumption. Crossan takes as given that Paul succeeded Jesus, instead of revealing a vision of a Christ he never met, nor ever met one who had met him.

Crossan is telling us Paul, a human, succeeded Jesus, a human, who walked the earth and spread a message. (But perhaps when Toto quotes the word "successor" he quotes an editor or publicist, not a word Crossan uses himself.) Paul never says he is Jesus' successor. Paul said God revealed Christ in him (Paul) directly. Not to him, through previous teachings he received from an earthly Jesus or from other apostles.

Vorkosigan · 11-23-2004, 06:34 AM

Thanks for a great OP, Rick. I feel the same way you do about Crossan. I had a prof in college who remarked about Chalmers Johnson once that he'd had a completely productive career as a academic, wrong about almost everything, but in extremely fruitful ways. I think Crossan is the same way. Perhaps more than any other NT scholar, Crossan's success depends on his way with words.

Quote:

The major thesis, as described by the authors, is that Paul's mission was not to just any Gentiles, but to the "God Fearers"--Gentiles already sympathetic to Judaism. While the thesis itself shows promise,

...but isn't this the thesis of many exegetes already?

Magdlyn · 11-23-2004, 06:45 AM

from amazon:

Quote:

"With dusty, tired, much-traveled Paul came Rome's most dangerous opponent,not legions but ideas, not an alternative force but an alternative faith. Paul too proclaimed one who was Lord, Savior, Redeemer, and Liberator. He announced one who was Divine, Son of God, God, and God from God. But Paul's new divinity was Christ, not Caesar. His was a radically divergent but equally global theology." -- from the Prologue

Many theories exist about who Paul was, what he believed, and what role he played in the origins of Christianity. Using archaeological and textual evidence,...John Dominic Crossan and Jonathan L. Reed show that Paul was a fallible but dedicated successor to Jesus, carrying on Jesus's mission of inaugurating the Kingdom of God on earth.

My idea that the publicist has misread and/or misrepresented Crossan is elucidated above.

Crossan says, Paul "proclaims Christ." The publicist says, Paul "succeeds Jesus." :rolleyes

Toto · 11-23-2004, 11:16 AM

Crossan and Reed appear to be in the middle of a book tour. They will be in San Francisco Dec 2 and then in Oregon and Seattle.

There is a further quotation from the book here:

Quote:

Paul's essential challenge is how to embody communally that radical vision of a new creation in a way far beyond even our present best hopes for freedom, democracy, and human rights. The Roman Empire was based on the common principle of peace through victory or, more fully, on a faith in the sequence of piety, war, victory, and peace. Paul was a Jewish visionary following in Jesus' footsteps, and they claimed that the Kingdom of God was already present and operative in this world. He opposed the mantras of Roman normalcy with a vision of peace through justice or , more fully, with a faith in the sequence of covenant, nonviolence, justice, and peace. A subtext of In Search of Paul is, therefore: To what extent can America be Christian? We are now the greatest postindustrial civilization as Rome was then the greatest preindustrial one. This is precisely what makes Paul's cahllenge equally forceful for now as for then, for here as for there, for Senatus Populusque Romanus as for Senatus Populusque Americanus.

Crossan assumes a historical Jesus, although he has admitted that the evidence is possibly unreliable. I don't think that the term "successor" is incompatible with his thinking.

11-22-2004, 06:30 PM	#1
Rick Sumner Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Calgary, Alberta Canada Posts: 2,612	Preliminary Comments on Crossan's Latest While perusing a local bookstore, I saw Crossan's latest (appearing once again with Reed), _In Search of Paul_, and subsequently broke my commitment not to buy any more books until I read the many already on my bookshelf demanding my attention. Given the seeming paradox of my delight in Crossan's work and my adamant disagreement with virtually every major conclusion he's reached, it promptly got bumped up to the top of the reading list, pre-empting even the book I'm presently reading. The major thesis, as described by the authors, is that Paul's mission was not to just any Gentiles, but to the "God Fearers"--Gentiles already sympathetic to Judaism. While the thesis itself shows promise, the first evidence provided (Romans) seems to be lacking. While the church in Rome may--perhaps even probably--have consisted of "God fearers" (who else would be Gentile, yet still familiar enough with scripture to understand what Paul is saying?), Paul didn't found the church in Rome, so it's difficult to get from that to Paul's own proselytic tendencies. At any rate, having only read the first hundred pages or so, I can't offer much more than that. Perhaps someone else can offer more. Regards, Rick Sumner

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

11-22-2004, 07:27 PM	#3
Magdlyn Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Massachusetts Posts: 2,230	Successor?

11-23-2004, 05:31 AM	#5
Magdlyn Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Massachusetts Posts: 2,230	OK, just ignore me.

11-23-2004, 05:45 AM	#6
Rick Sumner Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Calgary, Alberta Canada Posts: 2,612	I'm not ignoring you, I'm just not sure what you're asking. I'd presume that by "successor," Crossan means one that succeeded Jesus in promoting the Christian message. Regards, Rick Sumner

11-23-2004, 06:22 AM	#7
Magdlyn Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Massachusetts Posts: 2,230	Just pointing out a large assumption. Crossan takes as given that Paul succeeded Jesus, instead of revealing a vision of a Christ he never met, nor ever met one who had met him. Crossan is telling us Paul, a human, succeeded Jesus, a human, who walked the earth and spread a message. (But perhaps when Toto quotes the word "successor" he quotes an editor or publicist, not a word Crossan uses himself.) Paul never says he is Jesus' successor. Paul said God revealed Christ in him (Paul) directly. Not to him, through previous teachings he received from an earthly Jesus or from other apostles.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.