I agree with Peter here, Paul used the concept of the "new covenant" from Jeremiah for his 2 Corinthians 3:6. And Paul also alluded to Ezekiel 36:26 (LXX) for 2 Corinthians 3:2 with fleshy hearts replacing stone.I'm not fully convinced.To me, it looks like 2 Cor 3 is using Jeremiah here.
For those interested in sorting out Paul's complex use of the several passages in the Jewish scriptures in the wider passage of 2 Corinthians 3:1-4:6, Richard Hays spends 31 pages with his analysis in his Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul, 1989, pp. 122-153. I don't necessarily agree will every one of his conclusions in that section, but Hays provides a very detailed analyses with good examples of Paul's inventive use of the scriptures.
I think you are approaching Paul's creative and generative use of the scriptures from the wrong perspective. Here are just a couple of statements from Hays about Paul's use of the scriptures ---
I'm not fully convinced. But assuming Paul was influenced by Jeremiah here, what does this imply? How was Pauling using Jeremiah? Is Paul's new covenant supposed to be what is described in Jeremiah? Doesn't seem to align. Does this indicate that Paul identifies the Jewish God as God the Father? Is Paul merely reflecting concepts from Jeremiah, without the intention of directly referring to Jeremiah, or indicating that Jeremiah is a "prophecy" for his new covenant?
Jeremiah appears to be a case of God himself saying in the Jewish scriptures that he's going to initiate a new covenant that is not based on the written law, however, unlike what Paul says, God in Jeremiah does not say that he's going to abolish the law, only that he's going to write the law on the hearts of the people is Israel. Also, Jeremiah says that the new covenant apply only to the people of Israel. Obviously that is not the case for Paul.
“In Paul we encounter a first-century Jewish thinker who, while undergoing a profound disjuncture with his own religious tradition, grappled his way through to a vigorous and theologically generative reappropriation of Israel’s Scriptures.” (Hays, p. 2)
“… the issues raised by his (Paul’s) readings are fundamentally hermeneutical issues, because of the undeniable gap between the “original sense” of the Old Testament texts and Paul’s interpretation ..." (Hays, p. 6)
In most of his book, I think Hays provides a brave and steely-eyed evaluation of the evidence in terms of Paul’s very creative and generative use of the Scriptures. But in the last chapter Hays reassures his Christian readers ---
"Does Paul offer a good model of how to interpret the Bible?" (Hays, p. 179)
"The question of appropriateness of Paul’s readings of Scripture can be considered more precisely if the issue is broken into three components:
1.Are Paul’s specific interpretations of scripture materially normative?
2.Are Paul’s interpretive methods formally exemplary? …." (p. 180)
"… I would argue that the only theologically appropriate response to our study of Pauline hermeneutics is to answer “yes” to both questions 1 and 2 … His letters help us to understand both what the Old Testament means and how it should be read … Paul exhorted his readers to become imitators of him (1 Cor, 4:16, 11:1, Phil. 3:17). Surely to imitate him faithfully we must learn from him the art of reading and proclaiming Scripture" (p. 183).
"The question of appropriateness of Paul’s readings of Scripture can be considered more precisely if the issue is broken into three components:
1.Are Paul’s specific interpretations of scripture materially normative?
2.Are Paul’s interpretive methods formally exemplary? …." (p. 180)
"… I would argue that the only theologically appropriate response to our study of Pauline hermeneutics is to answer “yes” to both questions 1 and 2 … His letters help us to understand both what the Old Testament means and how it should be read … Paul exhorted his readers to become imitators of him (1 Cor, 4:16, 11:1, Phil. 3:17). Surely to imitate him faithfully we must learn from him the art of reading and proclaiming Scripture" (p. 183).
I certainly part ways with Hays here.
From a Jewish perspective, Paul's use of the scriptures can be seen as rather outlandish, even as "howlers". From Reinventing Paul, by John G. Gager, Oxford Univ. Press, 2000, page 149 ---
"Paul’s mode of argumentation was consistently biblical … At virtually every turn he cites a biblical text, often several. Many have seen his interpretations of these texts as willful, even perverse. The literary critic Harold Bloom is beside himself. “Paul is so careless, hasty, and inattentive a reader of the Hebrew Bible that he rarely gets any text right.” He speaks of Paul’s “will to power over a text”, of “weird exegesis” and of “plain howlers.” **
[** Gager’s citation of Bloom is from, Bloom, Poetics of Influence, New Haven, 1988.]
[** Gager’s citation of Bloom is from, Bloom, Poetics of Influence, New Haven, 1988.]
But I certainly disagree with Bloom's claims that Paul's use of the scriptures were "careless, hasty, and inattentive." Far from it.
A "New Covenant" Passage in the Preaching of Peter
"Peter says in his Preaching ... For we have found in the Scriptures, how the Lord said, 'Behold, I make with you a new covenant, not as the covenant with your fathers in mount Horeb”
Clement of Alexandria, Stromata, 6.5
Clement of Alexandria, Stromata, 6.5
Statistics: Posted by robert j — Thu Apr 04, 2024 12:50 pm