What Paul Wrote

In his Paul: In Fresh Perspective (19), NT Wright notes that even scholars who have largely abandoned old methods and approaches to Paul cling to old conclusions about Paul. This is evident in their assumptions about the Pauline canon:

“The extremely marked stylistic difference between 1 Corinthians and 2 Corinthians is far greater than that between, say, Romans and Ephesians, but nobody supposes for that reason that one of them is not by Paul. In particular, the assumption that a high Christology must be later, and non-Pauline, authorship has been brought to the material, not discovered within it. And the argument recently advanced (in North America particularly) that Ephesians and Colossians are secondary because they move away from confrontation with the Empire to collaboration with it is frankly absurd. Much of the ‘new perspective’ writing on Paul has simply assumed and carried on the critical decisions reached by the old perspective, without noticing that the new perspective itself calls several of them into question.”

Wright thinks the time has come to put back the chess pieces on the board “so that the game may restart.”

Next
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE

History’s Pro Tips on Iran

Francis X. Maier

Nothing in human experience compares to the wars of the last 120 years. Their scope has grown…

Paul Ehrlich, False Prophet

Scott Yenor

Paul Ehrlich, noted author of The Population Bomb, died last week. Few people have been so consequentially…

Restoring Man at Notre Dame

Carl R. Trueman

It is fascinating to be an outsider on the inside of an institution going through times of…