Javascript must be enabled to continue!
Paul's Opponents
View through CrossRef
Beginning with some of the earliest, interpreters have sought to identify the teaching of those Paul opposed in his letters. At first, this investigation was done so that the interpreters could identify their own adversaries with those Paul opposes. In the era of critical interpretation, identifying these opponents of Paul has been seen as an important part of specifying the historical setting of the letters and thus as a part of the interpretive context. However, considerable disagreement exists about the identity of these opponents. Some argue that all of Paul’s letters address the same front of opposition, and others argue that multiple kinds of teachers opposed the work of Paul or that he told his congregations to reject. Modern critical study of Paul’s opponents begins with F. C. Baur. His foundational work has shaped the work on this issue since the late nineteenth century. He maintained that all of Paul’s letters are intended to oppose teachers who maintain that Gentile and Jewish church members must be Torah-observant, thus requiring Gentiles to receive circumcision and begin to keep the Sabbath and dietary regulations of Judaism. This single front of opposition was demanded by Baur’s Hegelian understanding of history. Even without that presupposition, some see a single type of opponent in Paul’s letters. While some continue to see those who demand Torah observance for Gentiles (often, and anachronistically, called Judaizers) as the single type of opposition, others see Gnostics as the single source of opposition. Most interpreters, however, find multiple types of ideas or practices that Paul opposes in his different letters. Part of the reason for the continuing disagreement about the identity of Paul’s opponents is that interpreters gave little attention to proper method for identifying them until the latter quarter of the twentieth century. Interpretive differences will continue to produce different hypotheses, but the attention given to method can help explain differences in hypotheses and give ways to move forward toward more agreement. Even the turn in Pauline studies toward more literary investigations has not slowed studies of opponents because they can contribute to our understanding of the Pauline mission and the shape of the earliest church.
Title: Paul's Opponents
Description:
Beginning with some of the earliest, interpreters have sought to identify the teaching of those Paul opposed in his letters.
At first, this investigation was done so that the interpreters could identify their own adversaries with those Paul opposes.
In the era of critical interpretation, identifying these opponents of Paul has been seen as an important part of specifying the historical setting of the letters and thus as a part of the interpretive context.
However, considerable disagreement exists about the identity of these opponents.
Some argue that all of Paul’s letters address the same front of opposition, and others argue that multiple kinds of teachers opposed the work of Paul or that he told his congregations to reject.
Modern critical study of Paul’s opponents begins with F.
C.
Baur.
His foundational work has shaped the work on this issue since the late nineteenth century.
He maintained that all of Paul’s letters are intended to oppose teachers who maintain that Gentile and Jewish church members must be Torah-observant, thus requiring Gentiles to receive circumcision and begin to keep the Sabbath and dietary regulations of Judaism.
This single front of opposition was demanded by Baur’s Hegelian understanding of history.
Even without that presupposition, some see a single type of opponent in Paul’s letters.
While some continue to see those who demand Torah observance for Gentiles (often, and anachronistically, called Judaizers) as the single type of opposition, others see Gnostics as the single source of opposition.
Most interpreters, however, find multiple types of ideas or practices that Paul opposes in his different letters.
Part of the reason for the continuing disagreement about the identity of Paul’s opponents is that interpreters gave little attention to proper method for identifying them until the latter quarter of the twentieth century.
Interpretive differences will continue to produce different hypotheses, but the attention given to method can help explain differences in hypotheses and give ways to move forward toward more agreement.
Even the turn in Pauline studies toward more literary investigations has not slowed studies of opponents because they can contribute to our understanding of the Pauline mission and the shape of the earliest church.
Related Results
An Open-Ended Learning Framework for Opponent Modeling
An Open-Ended Learning Framework for Opponent Modeling
Opponent Modeling (OM) aims to enhance decision-making by modeling other agents in multi-agent environments. Existing works typically learn opponent models against a pre-designated...
Emotional Memory Forever: The Cinematography of Paul Ewing
Emotional Memory Forever: The Cinematography of Paul Ewing
Over a period of ten years Paul Ewing documented the life of his family on film – initially using Super 8 film and then converting to VHS with the advent of the new technology. Thr...
Pauline Chronology
Pauline Chronology
Pauline chronology, the chronological framework in which Paul’s life and letters are situated, is a significant prolegomenon for the interpretation of his letters and the book of A...
Paul as Predecessor to Psychoanalysis
Paul as Predecessor to Psychoanalysis
Jacob Taubes is a Jewish rabbi who proclaims to have discerned the fundamentally Jewish aspects of Paul’s thought. In that way Taubes reads against the whole tradition that sees Pa...
Paul and the Image of God
Paul and the Image of God
In this book, Chris Kugler situates Paul’s imago Dei theology within the complex and contested context of second-temple Judaism and early Christianity in the Greco-Roman ...
Written for Our Instruction: The Law as Wisdom in Paul's Ethics
Written for Our Instruction: The Law as Wisdom in Paul's Ethics
The fact that Paul's letters present both negative critique of the law and positive appropriation of the law is a longstanding puzzle. If believers in Christ are not under the law,...
The Misery of Women: Liminality of Gender Roles in Stephen King’s Misery
The Misery of Women: Liminality of Gender Roles in Stephen King’s Misery
There was no Annie because Annie had not been a goddess at all, only a crazy lady who had hurt Paul for reasons of her own…The hole opened and Paul stared through at what was there...

