in the grove
ROM 11:
16-24
{see also: 15-08-'05/16:08}
~*~
~*~
Paul's
second metaphor
in this mydichapter
makes it even
clearer?
The
metaphor
is based on the practice
of the grafting of
fruit trees!
Branches
of different sub-species
and indeed even different species
can be attached to root-stock such that they form
effectively ONE
plant ...
To perform
this mydioperation,
however. existing branches often have to be pruned
in order to make room for the new ones
and also to give them a fair chance
at the vitality and nutrients
of the root.
]
THIS is
Paul's metaphor, then,
for his New [Christian]
Formation.
THE ROOT
remains Israel,
and just as in the case of a graft,
the root-stock defines what the plant, in some sense, is'and gives it nutriment, SO also the new plant of Christians remain remain
defined as Israel!
Branches, however,
have been lopped off to make room for the new grafted ones.
The branches that have been removed are, of course,
those Jews who "refuse" to believe in Christ;
that is, those Jews who constituted what used to be called
Israel.
It follows
that the grafted Israel
- including BOTH Jewish & gentile believers in Christ -
in NOW the TRUE, LIVING Israel, and the rejected branches are at best
vestiges, at worst
simply dead?
The Old Israel
has been superseded and replaced with the New Israel,
precisely, as claimed, because Israel itself has not been
superseded.
The claim of some scholars,
therefore, that the notion of the Church
as a New Israel that superseded the old first appears in Justin Martyr
seems to me falsified
by this passage.
PAUL
holds out to the Jews
the possibility of reinclusion
in the community of faith by renouncing their "difference"
and becoming the same and ONE with the grafted Israel of gentile
AND Jewish believers in Christ, but if they do not,
they can only be figured as the dead and discarded branches
of the original olive tree.
There is,
on the one hand,
what I take to be a genuine,
sincere passion for human [re]-unification
and certainly a valid critique of "Jewish particularism."
but on the other hand,
since the unification of humankind
is predicated on sameness through faith in Christ,
those humans who choose difference end up
effectively
non-human?!
~*~
Let me
put this another way.
I think that it is here that the moment
of a "cultural reading" of the text comes in, that is,
a reading informed by a different culturally
defined subject position
from the one that normally and normatively
has read this text,
and I am reading NOW from the point of view
of a member of that Jewish group
that refuses to believe in Jesus and abandon our ancestral
practices & commitments.
~*~
On
the one hand,
Paul is clearly arguing against a certain kind of
anti-Judaic
boasting:
"IF
some
of the branches
have been broken off, and you,
though a wild olive shoot,
have been grafted in among the others
and now share in the
nourishing sap from the olive root,
do not boast over
those branches!
IF you do, consider this:
YOU do not support the root,
but THE Root supports
you!"
But
on the other hand,
imagine reading this from the perspective
of a broken-off branch,
and you will see why it is
cold comfort
indeed?
I think that
the very utilization of the sign "Israel"
for Paul's discourse both enables AND constrains it
to be forever caught
in a paradox of identity
and difference.
"Israel" is,
almost by definition,
a sign of difference, even though some
substantially make the same claim
but draw almost the
exact opposite
conclusion.
THE
mydistory
of Israel in the Hebrew Bible
is essentially a myth of tribal identity,
not entirely unlike other tribal myths
of origin and
identity?
The appropriation
of The Story of a particular
tribe, with all that marks it as such,
as The Story of All Humanity would inevitably lead to paradox
and even contradiction!
If ONE olive tree
among all the others
has come to be the all-in-all,
THEN any others become necessarily only so much
dead wood?
IT IS IN
this ambivalent symbol,
then, that there begins a certain logic of exclusion by inclusion, or "particular universalism" that would characterize Christian discourse
historically ...
Later on
I will probably suggest
that rabbinic Judaism, particularly its strategy
of self-deterritorialization,
constitutes an attempt to retain
the discourse of the tribal myth as such,
i.e., without universalizing it,
even in drastically changed historical situations,
and constitutes therefore
the exact antithesis
to PAUL!
To be sure,
it is only the story of one olive tree,
and to be sure as well,
it is convinced of itself that it is the only "cultivated" one
and all the others are mere wild olives,
but it does leave room for those wild olives
TO CONTINUE LIVING ALONGSIDE IT
in the grove:
they do NOT have to be
grafted in.
~
~
16-24
{see also: 15-08-'05/16:08}
~*~
~*~
Paul's
second metaphor
in this mydichapter
makes it even
clearer?
The
metaphor
is based on the practice
of the grafting of
fruit trees!
Branches
of different sub-species
and indeed even different species
can be attached to root-stock such that they form
effectively ONE
plant ...
To perform
this mydioperation,
however. existing branches often have to be pruned
in order to make room for the new ones
and also to give them a fair chance
at the vitality and nutrients
of the root.
]
THIS is
Paul's metaphor, then,
for his New [Christian]
Formation.
THE ROOT
remains Israel,
and just as in the case of a graft,
the root-stock defines what the plant, in some sense, is'and gives it nutriment, SO also the new plant of Christians remain remain
defined as Israel!
Branches, however,
have been lopped off to make room for the new grafted ones.
The branches that have been removed are, of course,
those Jews who "refuse" to believe in Christ;
that is, those Jews who constituted what used to be called
Israel.
It follows
that the grafted Israel
- including BOTH Jewish & gentile believers in Christ -
in NOW the TRUE, LIVING Israel, and the rejected branches are at best
vestiges, at worst
simply dead?
The Old Israel
has been superseded and replaced with the New Israel,
precisely, as claimed, because Israel itself has not been
superseded.
The claim of some scholars,
therefore, that the notion of the Church
as a New Israel that superseded the old first appears in Justin Martyr
seems to me falsified
by this passage.
PAUL
holds out to the Jews
the possibility of reinclusion
in the community of faith by renouncing their "difference"
and becoming the same and ONE with the grafted Israel of gentile
AND Jewish believers in Christ, but if they do not,
they can only be figured as the dead and discarded branches
of the original olive tree.
There is,
on the one hand,
what I take to be a genuine,
sincere passion for human [re]-unification
and certainly a valid critique of "Jewish particularism."
but on the other hand,
since the unification of humankind
is predicated on sameness through faith in Christ,
those humans who choose difference end up
effectively
non-human?!
~*~
Let me
put this another way.
I think that it is here that the moment
of a "cultural reading" of the text comes in, that is,
a reading informed by a different culturally
defined subject position
from the one that normally and normatively
has read this text,
and I am reading NOW from the point of view
of a member of that Jewish group
that refuses to believe in Jesus and abandon our ancestral
practices & commitments.
~*~
On
the one hand,
Paul is clearly arguing against a certain kind of
anti-Judaic
boasting:
"IF
some
of the branches
have been broken off, and you,
though a wild olive shoot,
have been grafted in among the others
and now share in the
nourishing sap from the olive root,
do not boast over
those branches!
IF you do, consider this:
YOU do not support the root,
but THE Root supports
you!"
But
on the other hand,
imagine reading this from the perspective
of a broken-off branch,
and you will see why it is
cold comfort
indeed?
I think that
the very utilization of the sign "Israel"
for Paul's discourse both enables AND constrains it
to be forever caught
in a paradox of identity
and difference.
"Israel" is,
almost by definition,
a sign of difference, even though some
substantially make the same claim
but draw almost the
exact opposite
conclusion.
THE
mydistory
of Israel in the Hebrew Bible
is essentially a myth of tribal identity,
not entirely unlike other tribal myths
of origin and
identity?
The appropriation
of The Story of a particular
tribe, with all that marks it as such,
as The Story of All Humanity would inevitably lead to paradox
and even contradiction!
If ONE olive tree
among all the others
has come to be the all-in-all,
THEN any others become necessarily only so much
dead wood?
IT IS IN
this ambivalent symbol,
then, that there begins a certain logic of exclusion by inclusion, or "particular universalism" that would characterize Christian discourse
historically ...
Later on
I will probably suggest
that rabbinic Judaism, particularly its strategy
of self-deterritorialization,
constitutes an attempt to retain
the discourse of the tribal myth as such,
i.e., without universalizing it,
even in drastically changed historical situations,
and constitutes therefore
the exact antithesis
to PAUL!
To be sure,
it is only the story of one olive tree,
and to be sure as well,
it is convinced of itself that it is the only "cultivated" one
and all the others are mere wild olives,
but it does leave room for those wild olives
TO CONTINUE LIVING ALONGSIDE IT
in the grove:
they do NOT have to be
grafted in.
~
~
16 aug 2005 - bewerkt op 20 mrt 2008
- meld ongepast verhaal
Log in om een reactie te plaatsen.
- O 22 jun 2026 21 Dezelfde reacties werden opgeroepen door de Gay
- O 20 jun 2026 20 In dit ozo diverse land is zelfs het
- O 18 jun 2026 18/19 Als 21ste eeuws centrum kent Yeroesjalayiem
- O 18 jun 2026 Al die andere oude myDiverhalen hebben veel weg nu
- O 18 jun 2026 18 Toen was alleen de amper 4-jarige Franz nogmaar
- O 17 jun 2026 17 Zo’n universeel dagboek als myDiary is
- O 15 jun 2026 15 Want wie kon toen nog beter weten hoe schrikba-
- O 15 jun 2026 19/84 ‘t Klinkt misschien allemaal als een gemeen-
- O 14 jun 2026 18/83 Ook Yeroesjalayiem kent aldus een zeer lange
- O 13 jun 2026 63 Hier bouwde koning SJLOMO ZIJN EIGEN TEMPEL EN
- O 13 jun 2026 62 SCHETSEN VAN HEILIGE LANDEN DOOR DE EEUWEN HEEN
- O 12 jun 2026 61 Vervolg bewustzijn geheugen inzicht actualiteit
- O 11 jun 2026 Islam: ISLAMISMEISLAMISTISCHISLAMYSTIEK MEKKA MOH?
- O 10 jun 2026 60 De WERELDBRAND? De grootste bedreiging voor die
- O 10 jun 2026 GROTE AANTALLEN OOST-EUROPESE JODEN woonden nu al