MsN sMs M&M bVd gVd kVp aRp cHu cPn pVa vVd Sp icQ


*

WHILE
listening to
reading & writing about Exodus,
in the next days,
IF I do continue living,
the Pauline text that I mostly
will try to focus on
at the
same time
is his Letter to the Galatians
because IT represents
so to say
the other end of
The "Eternal"
myDiStory.

That which
seems to Begin in Exodus
with Moshe
seems to End in the years
of Paul and
Rome?

His Letter
to the Galatians
is in some respects the 'sport' among
the Pauline texts.

One
of the most obvious ways
in which it is different from other documents in the corpus
is that it does not speak, not even ONCE,
of the Parousia:
eschatology in Galatians
~ and there is much eschatology indeed ~
is realized eschatology,
the ways in which the world is already changed
by the coming and crucifixian and rising
of the Mashiach from
the dead.

Through the whole of Galatians
the focus of Paul's apocalyptic lies not on Christ's parousia,
but rather on his death.

Second,
in Galatians of all Paul's letters the theme
of the new humanity ~ or rather, the new Israel ~
which includes both Jews and Gentiles
is most powerfully
expressed.

Third,
Galatians includes
the stirring
~ for
US
in myDi
particularly ~

declaration that there is
'no male or female in Christ' {GAL3:28},
a gospel unknown from the rest
of the corpus.

Many
Pauline commentators
have reveled in the 'difference' of galatians
~ it was Martin Luther's favorite ~
while others have virtually ignored the early 'cyberspace'
in their construction of Pauline thought:
'Galatian embarrassment'
some even
call IT.

Anyway,
this myDi~essay, then,
is conceived as a 'reading' of galatians,
a reading in the contemporary sense of a particular putting together
of a text and a reader, such that a particular construal
of the text is
undertaken.

Especially here in myDi
we can compare criticism to a kaleidoscope:
neither mirror
nor window.

Each turn of the glass
produces a new view and constructs
the object;
the view is never true and undistorted,
but it does construct an object and nor merely
reproduce the eye of
the beholder.

Viewing Paul
through the lens of galatians,
and especially through galatians 3:28~29,
the baptismal declaration of the new humanity of no difference,
constructs a particular Pauline object,
a different paul from the one constructed by reading Paul
thru 1 Corinthians, Romans, or 1 Thessalonians.
Choice of a hermeneutic and moral center
from which to read the text
is not a defect in
but a starting point for
the reading.

THIS element of choice
is inescapable, though less often acknowledged
{even to the interpreter herself} than tacit.
Let us take a simple and dramatic
myDi~example.

Traditionally,
Philemon has been read as a support for the institution of slavery,
as a return of Onesimus to his former slave status,
taking the moment in 1 Corinthians 7 where Paul tells slaves
that they need not be free in order to be saved
as determinative.

IF, however,
we read Galatians 3:29 as our constant,
with its declaration that there is no slave and free in Christ,
THEN Philemon reads entirely differently,
not as a commitment of Onesimus back into slavery
but as a deft effort to pressure Philemon
to free Onesimus.

Though texts
are not indefinitely indeterminate,
neither do they dictate ineluctably only ONE possible interpretation,
and the interpreter must take, therefore, moral responsibility
for her readings.

Especially
in myDi we can,
every day,
recognize clearly that the choice of starting point
will to a large extent determine one's reading
of our OWN Story as 'compared' to
the individual interpretations of myDiLife by Others
with Their OWN myDiLife
Stories.

THUS,
in producing our argument
that for paul Yeshu had not changed the status of the Jews at all
but only of the gentiles,
we can cite such verses as,
"Do we then overthrow the Law
by this faith?
By no means!,"
as a starting point for our myDireading,
arguing that such texts have always been
an embarrassment to
the 'traditional' readings
of Paul?

BUT
to be embarrassed
is NOT to be
defeated!

For those
who do not simply ignore
such texts,
the solution lies in choosing
not to begin with them,
but to begin with passages that can be read
as speaking
of the demise of Israel
and the abrogation of the Torah,
for example ROM 10:4,
"For Christ is the end of the Law,
that everyone who has faith may be justified,"
and treating OTHER passages
as anomalous items which must be accounted for
within this framework.

It is apparent here
that the beginning point has determined
the final result.
The truth is a simple one and does not require elaborate exposition:
the end depends on
the beginning.

What does require explanation
is WHY particular beginning point are consistently preferred
over OTHERS.

THIS
strikes me
as ONE of the sharpest and clearest expositions
of a simple hermeneutical principle
I have ever seen in my whole life:
UNLESS
we simply abandon the attempt
to render the Pauline corpus {AND the rest
of the 'Scriptures'} more or less coherent, we will always
be choosing some starting point or other
and trying to find
how other texts
fit in with it.

{Of course,
this does not mean necessarily simply harmonizing texts
but attempting to account for their sameness
and difference.}

And to put
even a sharper point on it,
although the implication is clear already in all 'my' myDiEntries
I hope:

The choice
of starting point
is primarily a 'theological', ETHICAL, political decision,
not a 'scientific' one.

I
have found
that taking f.i. Galatians
~ particularly its stirring call for human one~ness ~
as central to Paul
treats us to a Paul who heightens
our UNDERSTANDING of
{all?} cultural
dilemmas
of BOTH the FIRST century
{AND GEN & EX!}
and our
OWN ...

Readings
of Paul
which either
blunt the force
of his critique of Judaism
or
{much worse}
render him
a slanderer of Judaism
seem to me much
less useful
in appropriating
the Pauline {or Torah~}
myDitexts
TODAY.

SO we
cannot say anymore,
as people usually do, that the Aim
justifies the Means,
but that IT IS
exactly
the other way around:
ONLY the use
of the {right} Means
CAN
determine to Outcome
of our
myDi~Quest.

@


verliefd
engel
11 okt 2004 - bewerkt op 04 feb 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