Please excuse me if I seem to come out of left field, but do not ancient personal letters often follow cliché norms that were considered "the way to do it?" Personal letters will tend to follow certain norms.
What do you think of David Trobisch's idea that the Pauline corpus was an aggregate of smaller collections of various types, two to to communities and one to individuals? How would Marcion have come across this letter to an individual if he otherwise had only seen letters to communities?
So, you are saying that whatever Marcion had access to, which was same as what Tertullian had access to, may not be same as the Letter to Philemon in the NT, perhaps fabricated by the early Christian forgery machine? I'm using hyperbole, yes, but thinking that the entire NT canon was somehow created in reaction to an original version of Marcion's Gospel & 10 letters. Sounds a little, mmm, conspiratorial.
I'm not suggesting that everything in these collections was genuine, but I do think that some of it is interpolated, and I'll consider some could be pseudepigrapha. This suggests a pretty complicated prehistory of collections of works marketed as Paul's, and there is the final editor's agenda to wonder about.
Are you going in the right direction? Seems you are actually making the transmission history more complicated, not simpler.
DCH
What do you think of David Trobisch's idea that the Pauline corpus was an aggregate of smaller collections of various types, two to to communities and one to individuals? How would Marcion have come across this letter to an individual if he otherwise had only seen letters to communities?
So, you are saying that whatever Marcion had access to, which was same as what Tertullian had access to, may not be same as the Letter to Philemon in the NT, perhaps fabricated by the early Christian forgery machine? I'm using hyperbole, yes, but thinking that the entire NT canon was somehow created in reaction to an original version of Marcion's Gospel & 10 letters. Sounds a little, mmm, conspiratorial.
I'm not suggesting that everything in these collections was genuine, but I do think that some of it is interpolated, and I'll consider some could be pseudepigrapha. This suggests a pretty complicated prehistory of collections of works marketed as Paul's, and there is the final editor's agenda to wonder about.
Are you going in the right direction? Seems you are actually making the transmission history more complicated, not simpler.
DCH
Statistics: Posted by DCHindley — Sat Jan 20, 2024 8:53 pm