conscience consciousness expansion ex-/inclusion


~*~Paul's Midrash~*~


NOW,
although I am
'claiming' in these myDi/LJstories
that in one major way Paul's hermeneutic stands
in opposition to midrash,
in another way he is very much
WITHIN midrashic
tradition?

-

THE fundamental
hermeneutic stance which he takes to the text is allegorical,
that is, the language and even its apparent referents are understood
as pointing to a reality beyond {!}
themselves.

-

THIS is then
an entirely different orientation to language
from midrash in which the concrete reality BOTH of the language AND
the history which it encodes is absolutely
PRIMARY?

-

PAUL, however,
seems very able indeed to make use of midrashic techniques
of manipulation of biblical language ...
IN A SENSE, THIS is exactly what we would expect of Paul
if we take his descriptions of himself
SERIOUSLY?

-

A HELLENISTIC JEW,
thoroughly trained in contemporary Palestinian biblical hermeneutics,
would perhaps predictably produce biblical interpretation
that is Hellenistic in ethos but often Pharisaic
in method!

-

The following section of GALATIANS
provides some excellent examples of Paul's use
of midrashic method?

~*~

THE FIRST example
of how important this observation is
for understanding Paul is GAL 2:16 ...
It has already been recognized that the argument of this verse is dependent on PSALM 143:2,
but I think that the full measure of the midrash
has not yet been
appreciated.

-

EVEN JD,
who has made this verse
the cornerstone of his argument, and with whose approach
I largely agree, has not fully plumbed the depths of this verse.
PAUL assumes as a given of his argument
that WORKS do not
justify.

-

This is not, then,
what he is trying to prove here.
What the commentators seem to have missed is
that Paul is not reading Psalms 143:2
ALONE but TOGETHER with its
preceding
verse.

-

The two verses are:

"LORD, HEAR MY PRAYER,
listen to my supplication in your faith.
ANSWER me in your justice.
DO NOT REPROACH your servant with statute,
for no living being will be justified [declared just]
before YOU!"

I think that Paul's
only extravagant exegetical move here
is to read 'your faith' AS
'faith in YOU."

ALL THE REST of his doctrine then follows.

NO LIVING BEING
will be justified {= acquitted} before you by 'statute';
therefore, we are dependent on our supplication in faith
in order for us to be answered by YOUR justice {= justification,
acquittal}.

THIS interpretation
accomplishes several purposes.

First of all,
I think that it definitively establishes
JD's point that justification here
is simply the Jewish doctrine of vindication by "G*D"
and not transfer terminology.

Second,
it strongly argues for JD's other main point,
that what is bothering Paul
is the ethnic exclusivity of Torah-righteousness.
The Hebrew word 'misjpat', which I have translated 'statute,'
in other contexts in Psalms itself,
refers precisely to the Jewish Law of the Torah
which explicitly marks off the Jews
from Others.

"HE has
spoken HIS WORDS
to Ya'acov,
HIS laws & statutes
to Israel!
HE has NOT done so
for any other nation, and statutes
they do not
know"

{PSALMS 147:16-17}


Accordingly
Paul's interpretation of these verses is just perfect
for his argument?

DAVID
is asking for "G*D" to acquit him
on the basis of his supplication in faith,
because if no human being can be righteous,
THEN failure to keep the statutes {which are specifically and explicitly special to Israel!} cannot be
the determining factor
of salvation.

ALL THIS
becomes a powerful argument
in favor of the replacement of 'works of the Torah,' Jewish ritual observances by faith,
and Paul's argument against PETE is
complete.

NOTE
that David's supplication to "G*D"
to "answer me in YOUR justice" is paradoxically that he comes to judge
not on the basis of "statute" but
on the basis of
faith!

verliefd
engel
13 jun 2005 - bewerkt op 03 mrt 2008 - meld ongepast verhaal
Weet je zeker dat je dit verhaal wilt rapporteren? Ja | Nee
Profielfoto van Asih
Asih, man, 81 jaar
   
Log in om een reactie te plaatsen.   vorige volgende