Comments on: Romans 1:1 (Part 2) http://www.witheringfig.com/new-testament/romans-11-part-2/ In principio erat Verbum... Wed, 14 Jul 2010 00:53:03 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 By: Bryan http://www.witheringfig.com/new-testament/romans-11-part-2/comment-page-1/#comment-129 Bryan Mon, 16 Apr 2007 21:29:40 +0000 http://www.witheringfig.com/2007/04/16/romans-11-part-2/#comment-129 While the NP plays a role in Gager's work, I would group Gager, Stowers, and Gaston together as representative of what I have rather poorly called a two gospel theory. I think this defines Gager's contribution more appropriately. I would say Dunn and Wright are more formative than Gager. But obviously many scholars have taken the NP and used it within there own projects. Cheers, While the NP plays a role in Gager’s work, I would group Gager, Stowers, and Gaston together as representative of what I have rather poorly called a two gospel theory. I think this defines Gager’s contribution more appropriately. I would say Dunn and Wright are more formative than Gager. But obviously many scholars have taken the NP and used it within there own projects.

Cheers,

]]> By: stephen http://www.witheringfig.com/new-testament/romans-11-part-2/comment-page-1/#comment-128 stephen Mon, 16 Apr 2007 21:18:12 +0000 http://www.witheringfig.com/2007/04/16/romans-11-part-2/#comment-128 Hey Bryan, Thanks for your comments. I've always felt that E. P. Sanders and John Gager sort of ushered in the "New Perspective." I would love some correction if that is false. I admit that the "New Perspective" is not my particular area of expertise...is Reinventing Paul not a representative/foundational work? Thanks again... stephen Hey Bryan,
Thanks for your comments. I’ve always felt that E. P. Sanders and John Gager sort of ushered in the “New Perspective.” I would love some correction if that is false. I admit that the “New Perspective” is not my particular area of expertise…is Reinventing Paul not a representative/foundational work?
Thanks again…
stephen

]]> By: Bryan http://www.witheringfig.com/new-testament/romans-11-part-2/comment-page-1/#comment-127 Bryan Mon, 16 Apr 2007 20:47:41 +0000 http://www.witheringfig.com/2007/04/16/romans-11-part-2/#comment-127 Your use of the phrase, 'John Gager and the so-called “New Perspective,”’ would indicate that John Gager is a good representative of what the NP 'is'. I suspect that John Gager is known more for his 'two gospel theory', namely that Paul wrote his gospel to the Gentiles, and that what he had to say to them pertained little to 1st century Jews, than a formative proponent of the NP. Good post! You got me thinking about the scholarly community’s abhorrence for introspective individualized readings of Paul, and I wonder if it is not a corrective of sorts to the way in which popular religion de-contextualizes and re-interprets the sayings of scripture in such haphazard ways? Cheers Your use of the phrase, ‘John Gager and the so-called “New Perspective,”’ would indicate that John Gager is a good representative of what the NP ‘is’. I suspect that John Gager is known more for his ‘two gospel theory’, namely that Paul wrote his gospel to the Gentiles, and that what he had to say to them pertained little to 1st century Jews, than a formative proponent of the NP.

Good post! You got me thinking about the scholarly community’s abhorrence for introspective individualized readings of Paul, and I wonder if it is not a corrective of sorts to the way in which popular religion de-contextualizes and re-interprets the sayings of scripture in such haphazard ways?

Cheers

]]>