The problem of reconstructing the process of creation of the Pauline Corpus is ignored by commentators of Zuntz's work. Everyone is afraid to touch it??? Is it too boring???
What is more, subsequent publishers do not publish his famous hand-drawn diagram.
In 1946/1953, Zuntz did not yet know that there is no other early Christian literature in the first century. The same 50-year gap concerns the history of all of Christianity, not just Paul's letters. Only Paul is a testimony of the church in the first century. The question is whether the testimony is true.
It took the work of Pervo, Mason, the reconstruction of the primitive and short gospel of Marcion, the dependence of Luke on Josephus to shift the literary activity of the first Christians to a later period.
We have two options to choose from. A story in the style of a fairy tale about churches in the first century and about an apostle traveling writing for 20 years. Then he dies and his recipients die and the congregations he founded or visited disappear. Then someone miraculously digs up some copies of copies of letters that have been unread and uncommented for 40 years.
The second story is about a group of writers who create a legend of the church in the first century in the form of an epistolary novel.
Without Paul, there is no church in the first century.
What you choose depends on you because biblical scholars are not helpful in this regard. Besides, no one is competent to help you. There is no blue pill and no red pill. Both are the same - true and fictional tradition are indistinguishable without external evidence. And these appear late. For Paul's readers in the second century, he was exactly the same enigma as he is for us.
What is more, subsequent publishers do not publish his famous hand-drawn diagram.
In 1946/1953, Zuntz did not yet know that there is no other early Christian literature in the first century. The same 50-year gap concerns the history of all of Christianity, not just Paul's letters. Only Paul is a testimony of the church in the first century. The question is whether the testimony is true.
It took the work of Pervo, Mason, the reconstruction of the primitive and short gospel of Marcion, the dependence of Luke on Josephus to shift the literary activity of the first Christians to a later period.
We have two options to choose from. A story in the style of a fairy tale about churches in the first century and about an apostle traveling writing for 20 years. Then he dies and his recipients die and the congregations he founded or visited disappear. Then someone miraculously digs up some copies of copies of letters that have been unread and uncommented for 40 years.
The second story is about a group of writers who create a legend of the church in the first century in the form of an epistolary novel.
Without Paul, there is no church in the first century.
What you choose depends on you because biblical scholars are not helpful in this regard. Besides, no one is competent to help you. There is no blue pill and no red pill. Both are the same - true and fictional tradition are indistinguishable without external evidence. And these appear late. For Paul's readers in the second century, he was exactly the same enigma as he is for us.
Statistics: Posted by JarekS — Sun Oct 27, 2024 8:40 pm