gryan wrote: ↑Thu May 25, 2023 5:56 am
Dear Dr. Bilby,
According to you, 30 percent of the writings attributed to Paul are authentic. Do I understand you correctly? Could you please elaborate on this. Are there specific characteristics of this 30% authentic Paul?
I tend to think the 30% still preserves the
ipsissima verba of the historical Paul and (like BeDuhn, see "Myth of Marcion as Redactor", and like Klinghardt also) see Marcion as more a passive compiler rather than a heavy-handed editor, as is also the case with the Evangelion. Vinzent leans more on the side of Marcion taking a much more active role in filtering and re-writing earlier texts from a "stock" of Paul's letters in circulation. It will be interesting to see where the data science leads us.
Vinzent's forthcoming Greek critical reconstruction of the Apostolos (or Apostolikon) with Narr Francke Attempto Verlag is, according to the latest news, slated for December of 2023 or thereabouts. I've now completed a full English translation of that Greek text, side by side with the canonical Paul text. Jack Bull, Vinzent's PhD student, is editing the volume as we speak.
In the meantime, BeDuhn's Apostolikon is the best text available. A close comparison of its features with those of the canonical 10 letters of Paul can and will reveal the divergences.
Here's a list of some of the post prominent that jumped out to me as I translated both texts:
1. minimal concern with fundraising in Apostolos -> enormous concern with fundraising in canonical Paul (esp 2 Cor)
2. minimal self-referential comments in Apostolos -> frequent and repeated quasi-biographical details in canonical Paul, including repeated concerns about Paul imposters and letter authorship authentication
3. minimal colleagues in Apostolos -> a massive entourage of fellow apostles and diplomatic representatives in canonical Paul
4. direct heavenly apostolic authority in Apostolos -> heavenly calling synced up with and aligned with Jerusalem/pillars in canonical Paul
5. minimal travel/itinerary details in Apostolos (and Evangelion) -> extensive travel details that synchronize the text with canonical Acts and the travel obsession in the canonical Luke redaction as well
6. occasional, poignant references to Judean scripture in Apostolos -> extensive LXX scripture catenae in canonical Paul
7. newness and radical character of the "good message" in Apostolos -> retrospective salvation-history perspective in canonical Paul (esp Rom 9-11, almost entirely missing from Apostolos)
8. clear valorization of celibacy -> making celibacy more of an option
There are many more. To me, it's crystal clear that the Apostolos reflects a significantly earlier time in the development of the Jesus movement, and that the canonical portions of Paul missing from Apostolos align significantly with the proto-orthodox program in the Pastorals and Acts.