blind alleys in the controversy在争议的死胡同

《blind alleys in the controversy在争议的死胡同》由会员上传分享，免费在线阅读，更多相关内容在应用文档-天天文库。

1、SEIFRID:BlindAlleys95BLINDALLEYSINTHECONTROVERSYOVERTHEPAULOFHISTORYMarkA.SeifridSummaryE.P.Sanders’readingofPaulagainstthebackdropof‘covenantalnomism’isbadlyflawed,sinceitobscuresPaul’scomingtounderstandthecrossasworkingthejustificationoftheungodly.Twoimportan

2、textensionsofSanders’paradigmalsofailtoilluminePaulinhiscontext.‘WorksoftheLaw’arenotsimplyethnicboundaries,asJ.D.G.Dunnclaims,butmarksofpietyaswell.N.T.Wright’sproposalthatChristprovidedthesolutiontoPaul’sexperienceofexilereversesthemannerinwhichexiliclanguage

3、appearsinPaul’sletters.Contrarytothecommonassumption,Luther’stheologyofthecrossandjustificationisnotbarrenorirrelevant,andmorecloselyaccordswithPaulthanrecentattemptstounderstandhim.IfErnstKäsemannweretore-enterthecurrentdebateoverPaul’sJewishbackgroundandtheol

4、ogy,IimaginethathemightchooseatitlealongthelinesoftheoneIhavegiventhisessay.SeeN.T.Wright’sAuseinandersetzungwithKäsemann,‘ThePaulofHistoryandtheApostleofFaith’,TynB29(1978)61-88.ThetitleisdrawnfromKäsemann’sessay‘SackgassenimStreitumdenhistorischenJesus’inExeg

5、etischeVersucheundBesinnungen(Göttingen:Vandenhoeck&Ruprecht,1964)2:31-68.Hisstentorianvoicemightdosomegood.Othervoiceswhichhavedissentedfromthe‘newperspective’onPaulinitsvariousformssincetheusheringinofthe‘post-Sandersera’havenotbeenheardsufficiently,drownedou

6、tperhapsbyachorusofaffirmation.Thatisnottosuggestthatthe‘newperspective’hasbeenentirelydeleteriousinitseffects.ItshouldbeviewedaspartofarecentimpulseacrossthedisciplineoftheologytocometotermswiththeReformers’articleofjustificationinthisgeneration,anecessarytask

7、.AndithascalledattentiontothesocialSEIFRID:BlindAlleys95dimensionofjustificationbyfaith,acentralfacetofPaul’sargumentswhichmustnotlieneglected.Yetwhileprovidingfreshimpulses,manyadvocatesofthenewerreadingofPaulhavefailedtowrestlewiththecharacteroftheReformation

8、debate.Aso-called‘Lutheran’readingofPaulhasbeendismissed,evenbyexegeteswithintheLutherantradition,withoutanadequateacknowledgement—orperhapsinsomecasesknowledge—ofwhatmovedL