mg01

Is the idea that, before his epifinany, Paul was responsible for persecuting Christians found in the epistles or Acts?

John Kesler

Read Acts from Chapter 7 on. Also see 1 Corinthians 15:9; Galatians 1:13; Phil 3:6. Plus, 1 Timothy 1:13, though not written by Paul, mentions it.

Toto

The epistles contain off-hand references to "persecuting the Church of God."

Acts has a more vivid and specific description of Paul watching the cloaks of those who stoned Stephen, then journeying to Damascus to arrest Christians with authority from the High Priest.

Jeffrey Gibson

"off-hand"??

Jeffrey

Toto

Off hand - lacking specific detail? How would you describe them?

Jeffrey Gibson

Since "off hand" means "without premeditation or preparation", and since Paul's remarks about his having been a persecutor of "the church" are anything but, certainly not with the adjective you used.

Jeffrey

Solitary Man

Yeah, seriously, use a dictionary.

Toto

I don't claim to be able to read Paul's mind, but those references had the feel to me of an off hand comment, since the were just dropped in there without much explanation or elaboration, as if Paul were not really prepared to talk about it. We don't know who Paul persecuted, nor when, nor where, nor under what authority.

Can we even show that those references were not later insertions by an editor who wanted to bring the epistles somewhat in line with the storyline in Acts?

But perhaps I just should have just said that Paul's references to persecuting the "church of God" lack specificity, in contrast to the details in Acts. Does that make you happy?

Jeffrey Gibson

I suggest you read them again. They are hardly casual remarks or something that the text in which we find them would still be coherent if they were not there. They are elements integral to the arguments that Paul is making at those points where he mentions his history as a persecutor.

I think you need to read the texts again, since this claim seems to be along the same lines as the one you made about how in the "temptation" stories, the Devil shows Jesus the "four corners of the earth" (remember that one?). Working from memory again, are you?

Do they do this? That is to say, arethey in line with what we find in Acts? Have you looked to see? And could they be excised from the places in which we find them without doing damage to the argument Paul is making at those points or undermining the rhetorical strategy he is pursuing?

Perhaps you should have. But what details did you have in mind?

My happiness is not at issue. The accuracy of your claims about matters NT is.

Jeffrey

Toto

Yes, I work from memory, and sometimes need to go back and correct things. If I were your student, you could complain. But I don't hold myself out as an expert. And I don't see your problem here.

No, it doesn't say four corners, but it is still inconsistent with a spherical world, so my point still stands.

Robert Price thinks this section is an interpolation. This particular verse doesn't ring true in any case - Paul is proud of his status as an apostle. Jesus himself visited Paul. Why is Paul groveling here, or is this some sort of dramatic false modesty? Is it part of the core of the argument? I don't think so. Paul has already called himself an ektrwma, an abortion.

Take out the bolded sentence. The argument still flows. Nothing much is lost.

In each case, the comment about persecuting the church could be cut with no great loss.

In Acts 8, in contrast, Saul (later identified as Paul), approves the stoning of the martyr Stephen, and then "began to destroy the church. Going from house to house, he dragged off men and women and put them in prison." (Not the usual conduct of a Pharisee, is it?) and in Acts 9 "Meanwhile, Saul was still breathing out murderous threats against the Lord's disciples. He went to the high priest 2 and asked him for letters to the synagogues in Damascus, so that if he found any there who belonged to the Way, whether men or women, he might take them as prisoners to Jerusalem."

Now, that's persecution.